in retrospect, the american obsession and mental sensitivity to gas prices is very curious. The average national gas price in 2008 was about $3.50 which is almost what it is now in 2026. And being a commodity product sold per gallon, there's obviously no shrinkflation or enshittification going on. It's actually remarkably stable in the face of almost 20 years of steady broader inflation.
Well it's not just recent price increases. Any time gasoline goes above $4, congress is at risk of being flipped (completely independent of the current party in control).
I understand that the impact to Americans is that for every penny increase in the price of a gallon of gas, averaged over a year, is about $1 billion in consumer spending . So if the average price goes from $2.99 to $3.49 , that’s 50 billion dollars.
I like how Pete Hegseth was gloating how the world's most powerful military managed to sink Iran's navy's shoddy boats sitting in the harbors, like it was some some crazy achievement.
> Iran's navy's shoddy boats sitting in the harbors
A win isn’t diminished because the enemy fucked up. Neutralizing a massive national investment is a military win. Why Tehran didn’t scatter its boats is a chapter for a future manual.
That is not a war crime. First, there is no way to know that a naval vessel is unarmed. Second, even if unarmed, it does not mean it has safe passage. Once it gets back to its base, it can load with munitions and then come and fight. Put it differently: if instead of a naval ship, you see an enemy tank, should you not shoot at it because it is unarmed?
That ship was involved in naval exercises at the invitation of the host navy, India.
That ship was unarmed. Nothing unusual there - that was the original plan for the joint navy drills. A large complement of the crew was A BRASS BAND!
The Indian's (and this has been formally confirmed since) communicated to the Americans that this was an UNARMED ship which was about to leave Indian territorial waters on its way home.
So the Americans KNEW where the ship was (they were told) and KNEW it was completely unarmed.
And they sunk it anyway, and refused to pick up any survivors.
Thats a crystal clear WAR CRIME. The kind which is writ large in western history books for 80 years, condemning the conduct of the Nazi Germany submarine units.
As someone who disdains hyperbolic, motivated framings of everything in the news cycle, I normally don't like to use words like that. But, it was interesting to see the news discuss the "first time since world war two" component of this event, that by WWII standards, would have been seen as a cowardly violation of the rules of war.
The were in allied water, on a regularly scheduled drill, unarmed.
Surely started because of Israel. Maybe there was more back and forth but it really seems like the clique around trump are specifically in Bibi's pocket
Being in his pocket means they owe him something. They don't. They make their own decisions, meant to be representative of the constiutents that did and did not vote for them. If they go against their consitutents wishes, that was their own decision to make. They are to blame.
Problem I have with that is it starts crossing the line into the "rich Israeli people control the U.S." which for anti-semites communicates "Jewish people are the problem."
No, Trump and the Republicans currently in power in the U.S. wanted this themselves and acted on their own moral depravity. Letting them scapegoat the decision to Israel/Bibi solves nothing to address the decision making made here (without Congressional approval) in the U.S.
Trump and his Cabinet have agency, and any suggestion otherwise is problematic.
High oil prices hurt the US economy much more than China anyway. We're vastly more dependent on shipping and transport and even more vastly less elastic with our fuel demand. The only US interests who would want this are domestic oil producers, who are a small fraction even of the Republican funding base.
Can you point to any good plots or schemes they’ve pulled off in the past? We’re starting our sixth year with this guy at the helm and so far it’s nothing but a cavalcade of stupid.
It is notable that the worlds major available oil reserves are now[0] in Venezuela, Canada, the US and Russia. Democracies are capable of playing 4D chess even if none of the people involved are up to the challenge. There are a lot of power centres that could stop Trump if they saw it as a problem for their interests; like Congress, some people in the administration or even a few people in CENTCOM (although they'd be more delaying the inevitable).
That being said, unleashing this blow on Asia is insanely risky whether it is intentional or no. The Trump administration has a well-earned reputation for not being direct in their warmaking and the Asian's might decide not to go down without a fight. And the US is likely to get nothing but ill-will from the continent for the next generation. And I doubt Trump will politically survive the blows the US economy will take in the process of shredding the global oil market.
$147 in July 2008 had the purchasing power of ~$218 today [1].
[1] https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm
Goldman Sachs has been sandbagging their crude forecasts so hilariously that I'm convinced they're frontrunning their customers.
$147 was ~€95 in July 2008, which corresponds to ~€140 today. Which would be ~$160. And if you choose a third currency, you will get a third price.
Long-term measurements of value are kind of weird, as your unit of measurement can gain and lose value relative to the units other people are using.
Also adding: the spike in 2008 was transient and partially juiced by a weak dollar. Unfortunately, we will probably get no respite this time around.
At the current geopolitical trajectory, I also doubt $147 is anywhere near the limit of where oil is going.
in retrospect, the american obsession and mental sensitivity to gas prices is very curious. The average national gas price in 2008 was about $3.50 which is almost what it is now in 2026. And being a commodity product sold per gallon, there's obviously no shrinkflation or enshittification going on. It's actually remarkably stable in the face of almost 20 years of steady broader inflation.
> the american obsession and mental sensitivity to gas prices is very curious
It strikes me as sensible. DRAM being cheaper over decades doesn’t negate the impact of recent price hikes.
Well it's not just recent price increases. Any time gasoline goes above $4, congress is at risk of being flipped (completely independent of the current party in control).
> Any time gasoline goes above $4, congress is at risk of being flipped
Inflation is a bitch. It’s also been the ruin of republics since at least the Romans, possibly sooner.
I understand that the impact to Americans is that for every penny increase in the price of a gallon of gas, averaged over a year, is about $1 billion in consumer spending . So if the average price goes from $2.99 to $3.49 , that’s 50 billion dollars.
Iran is doing this without a navy
> Iran is doing this without a navy
They never needed a navy. And to the degree a navy was helpful, it was in the form of fast-attack craft. We don't seem to have hit those much yet [1].
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_equipment_of_the_Islam...
I like how Pete Hegseth was gloating how the world's most powerful military managed to sink Iran's navy's shoddy boats sitting in the harbors, like it was some some crazy achievement.
> Iran's navy's shoddy boats sitting in the harbors
A win isn’t diminished because the enemy fucked up. Neutralizing a massive national investment is a military win. Why Tehran didn’t scatter its boats is a chapter for a future manual.
Or the one coming back from manoeuvres that wasn’t carrying any munitions.
War crimes every day.
https://asiatimes.com/2026/03/trump-us-navy-sank-unarmed-ira...
That is not a war crime. First, there is no way to know that a naval vessel is unarmed. Second, even if unarmed, it does not mean it has safe passage. Once it gets back to its base, it can load with munitions and then come and fight. Put it differently: if instead of a naval ship, you see an enemy tank, should you not shoot at it because it is unarmed?
Completely false.
That ship was involved in naval exercises at the invitation of the host navy, India.
That ship was unarmed. Nothing unusual there - that was the original plan for the joint navy drills. A large complement of the crew was A BRASS BAND!
The Indian's (and this has been formally confirmed since) communicated to the Americans that this was an UNARMED ship which was about to leave Indian territorial waters on its way home.
So the Americans KNEW where the ship was (they were told) and KNEW it was completely unarmed.
And they sunk it anyway, and refused to pick up any survivors.
Thats a crystal clear WAR CRIME. The kind which is writ large in western history books for 80 years, condemning the conduct of the Nazi Germany submarine units.
It’s, by definition, not a war crime. Military brass bands are eligible targets as are unarmed naval ships.
In what world is sinking a warship in international waters a war crime? Because it isn't this one.
As someone who disdains hyperbolic, motivated framings of everything in the news cycle, I normally don't like to use words like that. But, it was interesting to see the news discuss the "first time since world war two" component of this event, that by WWII standards, would have been seen as a cowardly violation of the rules of war.
The were in allied water, on a regularly scheduled drill, unarmed.
> that by WWII standards, would have been seen as a cowardly violation of the rules of war
Source? Torpedoing anything with the enemy flag, down to civilian boats and merchant marines, was normalized by centuries of precedent by WWII.
It was the first time for the US since WWII. Other countries have used them in combat over the years since WWII. He couldn't even get that right.
I don’t estimates of these investments firms seriously! They talk like today’s scenarios will stay put forever - whether good or bad.
https://archive.ph/ZwEdU
There is one thing to say here, USA wants the price to be high so it can throttle china.
China is rapidly electrifying and gets a lot of energy from non-US coal. China also sells renewables to other countries.
The US will be harmed far more than China by consistently high oil prices.
Trump started the Iran war, apparently on a whim. There's no 4D chess going on here.
Surely started because of Israel. Maybe there was more back and forth but it really seems like the clique around trump are specifically in Bibi's pocket
Since the downvote, let me clarify
> are specifically in Bibi's pocket
Being in his pocket means they owe him something. They don't. They make their own decisions, meant to be representative of the constiutents that did and did not vote for them. If they go against their consitutents wishes, that was their own decision to make. They are to blame.
Problem I have with that is it starts crossing the line into the "rich Israeli people control the U.S." which for anti-semites communicates "Jewish people are the problem."
No, Trump and the Republicans currently in power in the U.S. wanted this themselves and acted on their own moral depravity. Letting them scapegoat the decision to Israel/Bibi solves nothing to address the decision making made here (without Congressional approval) in the U.S.
Trump and his Cabinet have agency, and any suggestion otherwise is problematic.
High oil prices hurt the US economy much more than China anyway. We're vastly more dependent on shipping and transport and even more vastly less elastic with our fuel demand. The only US interests who would want this are domestic oil producers, who are a small fraction even of the Republican funding base.
The folks controlling Trump are far more adept plotters and schemers than you give them credit for.
Can you point to any good plots or schemes they’ve pulled off in the past? We’re starting our sixth year with this guy at the helm and so far it’s nothing but a cavalcade of stupid.
Trump is not controlled. He wanted this.
[citation needed]
It is notable that the worlds major available oil reserves are now[0] in Venezuela, Canada, the US and Russia. Democracies are capable of playing 4D chess even if none of the people involved are up to the challenge. There are a lot of power centres that could stop Trump if they saw it as a problem for their interests; like Congress, some people in the administration or even a few people in CENTCOM (although they'd be more delaying the inevitable).
That being said, unleashing this blow on Asia is insanely risky whether it is intentional or no. The Trump administration has a well-earned reputation for not being direct in their warmaking and the Asian's might decide not to go down without a fight. And the US is likely to get nothing but ill-will from the continent for the next generation. And I doubt Trump will politically survive the blows the US economy will take in the process of shredding the global oil market.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_proven_oi...