Gas Just Hit Below $2.99 in Sacramento

Why does one chart have data for two very expensive cities, while the other shows a national average?

1) because I'm lazy.
2) because I wanted to show a chart built by someone who was trying to deceive.

So, Bush finally got gas down to an awesome level and Obama IMMEDIATELY began screwing it up after his inauguration.

There's a gas station around here that if yesterday had regular for $3.57 while a station a quarter mile down the road had it for $2.89. And two three days earlier someone was filling up at the more expensive station when the cheaper one had gas for $2.99.

I think they're talking about average prices, Ed.

I realize that, this is the only station around that I've seen that still has gas above $3.09 around here. And the $3.09 is in Atlanta, all the stations in the local area have gas in between $2.84 and $2.89. But passing it just a few minutes ago ($3.57) I saw two cars filling up there. If they want to pay $0.68 more per gallon, which on even a small tank would be $7-8 then that's their choice.

This station always has gas at 10-15 cents higher anyway.

Gas here is $2.68 today in Downtown Middletown.

It's cuz of gay marriage.

No.

Thanks for playing.

Maybe the sign hasn't been updated and unbeknownst to you, the gas price is really $2.50.

@Faceman, not sure where it was....I'm originally from a town further south of Sac and they were passing through.

Still, gas in San Diego for high octane is about $3.40, so y'all should be at least 20 cents lower than us.

San Diego is at the end of the line wrt gas so it is always higher there. Hell, even this desert shit hole is cheaper.

I have to point this out because I see it all the time and drives me nuts ... to attribute this to Forbes Magazine as if it were a news account by one of the magazine's reporters is wildly inaccurate. Forbes has a large number of contributors who write blogs on their site, much like the columnists on a newspaper's opinion page, and this quote is from one of them. In fact, the quote isn't even from the blogger; it's from an author he interviewed. So this is like George Will talking to the author of some book and quoting him in a column, the column being printed on the Washington Post op-ed page, and somebody attributing the book author's words to "The Washington Post."

The information may well be correct, but the description of its source is definitely not.

A guy on my ship that recently separated and moved to a city near the San Fran bay area just posted a photo of low-grade gas at $2.57

Quick, someone tell @Paladin and @Chuck to get to Willitis!

If it causes gas to go down, I'm all for it.

Just stop.

Stop what?

YOU know. You know.

Disputing your laughable assertions instead of just allowing you to leave them in a thread and then slink off without defending them?

You were under the impression that I was being serious in Post #63, apparently. That's what Anna did wrong too. That's why I said, "Just stop". It irritates me to no end when people treat obvious ironic comments as if they were serious.

I used to work in Willits for a week every three months and the town sucks. It used to have a fair amount of industry for its size; mostly machinist shops and lumber mills/pressure treatment facilities for lumber. It is all gone now and nothing ever replaced it so the town has been in deep decay for at least the last 20 years but probably longer.

Unemployment is sky high and under employment is worse. Everyone there is either retired, on disability, or works for near minimum wage. Drug use is wide spread and tons of people grow weed or cook meth because that at leasts makes some money.

These problems are pretty wide apread in the far northern part of the state. It has a lot of poor white rural ghettos.

So, kinda like what Santee was 30 years ago, or Stockton?

Isn't willits south of Sacramento?

North of SF

While my wallet certainly enjoys this, I'm afraid it'll send all those very good plans to get us off the gas teat back to some dusty filing cabinets. Why bother with hard, cheap and job creating when we can have easy and dirty?

$2.83 off the freeway today.

Easy and dirty. That's how I like my women.

I can agree with Stockton as it also used to have some industry and population but was always poor with a largely uneducated blue collar population (which is why it has had such a hard time reinventing itself). Santee 30 years ago was a haven for poor white trash and consisted mostly of mobile home parks, true enough, but the population was also less than 5k and that is being generous. We used to go hiking there in the boy scouts because there was exactly fuck all there. How you found there was largely the poorest of the poorest, it is either this or homelessness, type population which was rather transcient in nature so I can see why you brought it up.

That said, everything changed when the 52 was extended east as that opened the area up to massive track home development so most of the old time white trash got priced out and have now moved to even more remote locations.

It is still made fun of for being less well off than the coastal communities which are on the "right" side of the hills but they're no longer called "klantee" nor do they find people cooking meth out there any more because it just isn't rural like it used to be.

Tract homes, not "track."

I'm picturing some sort of mobile home on tank treads.