US voters chose to reduce their taxes by a margin they won't notice in exchange for increasing their energy prices by an amount they will absolutely notice.
The wild thing is that this is an extremely predictable thing that has happened every time this political party is given control of the military. The chutzpah of claiming to be anti-war is breathtaking, and it's stunning that voters fell for it.
bix6 [3 hidden]5 mins ago
Worst administration ever. Worst business leaders ever. I hope something can change.
tty456 [3 hidden]5 mins ago
Most corrupt administration. Hope all these guys do hard time.
tartoran [3 hidden]5 mins ago
I doubt they'll do any time at all.
notyourwork [3 hidden]5 mins ago
America is not on the path for greatness? Consider me surprised.
downrightmike [3 hidden]5 mins ago
Worked better when that was Clinton's slogan
api [3 hidden]5 mins ago
They're doing great if you're on the beneficiary side: oil companies, defense contractors, the Trump family, Israel, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, etc.
All that is at the expense of the rest of the economy. The sectors that are hit the hardest tend to be, with the exception of those above, the ones who voted (disproportionately) for these people.
... which is what you get with a narcissist. The people hurt the most by a narcissist tend to be those closest or those that support them.
vkou [3 hidden]5 mins ago
I'm pretty sure that Qatar and the Saudis are not exactly pleased with having their stuff blown up.
petre [3 hidden]5 mins ago
Quatar is pretty much screwed as they can't get the gas out of the Gulf. The Saudis will have to eventually do something about Yemen, because Bab Al-Mandab tanker traffic is also under threat and Asia id paying good money for fossil fuels right now.
patwolf [3 hidden]5 mins ago
> Combined, the three companies raked in, on average, some $404 million in profits every day for the last three months.
Just for perspective, Nvidia's daily profits for the past quarter are $641 million. For Apple it's $327 million.
BatFastard [3 hidden]5 mins ago
Why don't I hear anyone mentioning "Windfall profits tax"
Are oil companies immune from legislation under the current administration?
throw1234567891 [3 hidden]5 mins ago
The whole point of this war is to make money on oil.
pstuart [3 hidden]5 mins ago
In the past, yes.
Because this admin has only one person who calls the shots, it was started because he wanted it. Reports indicate that Bibi played on his ego, and recent "success" in Venezuela gave the illusion that "regime change" was easy, as well as an apparent long time hatred for Iran were the drivers here.
It is mind boggling that tens of millions of people continue to say "This is fine."
ghastmaster [3 hidden]5 mins ago
In Trump's past:
> In 1987, when Donald Trump was first flirting with running for president, he told an audience in New Hampshire that the United States should attack the "horrible, horrible country" of Iran, "and take over some of their oil." In the years since, Trump talked about grabbing control of the natural resources of Venezuela, Iraq, Syria, Kuwait, and Libya, too.
> “To be honest with you, my favourite thing is to take the oil in Iran, but some stupid people back in the US say: ‘Why are you doing that?’ But they’re stupid people,” Trump told the British newspaper.
If you buy now, you are buying high. The time to buy was before the war was announced publicly. That's what insider trading is for.
throw1234567891 [3 hidden]5 mins ago
“It’s just business”.
SR2Z [3 hidden]5 mins ago
Obviously not, and a little part of me dies every time someone boils a complex issue down to an obviously wrong statement like this.
The war with Iran right now is the culmination of the war in Gaza. These are two battlefields in a larger conflict - the belligerents are Iran and its proxies (Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis) versus everyone else in the region.
Iran escalated the conflict (which previously was only simmering and involved occasional missile attacks on Israel) with the 10/7 attacks in response to Saudi Arabia and other regional powers normalizing relations with Israel. They did not properly account for Israel being led by warmongering right-wingers, nor did they account for the US being led by a geriatric man who seems like he might have dementia. They assumed, incorrectly, that the US would continue to be led by reasonable people who weighed the risks of closing the Strait of Hormuz (earthshattering) against the risks of continued Iranian-funded terrorism in the region (Israel gets more bad press and has to keep spending money on missile defense).
The goals of this war, in a geopolitical sense, are to force Iran to abandon its proxies and to lead to regime change in Iran. The fact that the current US administration is made up of morons who should never been placed in power doesn't change that. The goals of any war are best explained by geopolitical factors and not whoever is in charge, because geopolitical factors are real and enduring while presidents and kings change often.
If anything, Trump's only pressing need at the moment is to get oil prices down so that the GOP isn't completely blown out in the midterms by $6/gal gas prices. Oil companies making money is not the cornerstone of US foreign policy, no matter how often people like citing it.
This isn't going to happen because Hormuz is likely to be closed for years to come. Eventually domestic economic pressure will force Iran to the negotiating table; the regime needs to sell oil almost as bad as Trump needs low gas prices. God willing all of the parties involved will have better leadership by then.
mwkaufma [3 hidden]5 mins ago
This very article mentions windfall profits tax multiple times.
And it would be worse if China didn't take extraordinary actions to cut its oil consumption by 40% yoy - back to the level of consumption from 19 years ago:
If they can't sustain that level, or decide to stop taking action, the level of pain is going to be immense.
seydor [3 hidden]5 mins ago
They can go even higher if we make more war
toomuchtodo [3 hidden]5 mins ago
Hopefully oil prices stay high or go higher, helps clean tech and electrification accelerate. We are too lazy otherwise to transition off of fossil fuels faster.
otterley [3 hidden]5 mins ago
Hooray for their investors, I guess.
LightBug1 [3 hidden]5 mins ago
Grotesque, but unsurprising
java-man [3 hidden]5 mins ago
Someone I know bought two electric cars earlier this year and is very, very happy.
dyauspitr [3 hidden]5 mins ago
Yeah I drive about 40 miles a day and pay about $20 per month. I would have had to pay $350/month or so with an equivalent gas vehicle.
pudgywalsh [3 hidden]5 mins ago
Ignoring that your math doesn't add up at all, whenever someone tells me how much money they are saving per month by switching to EV, they always conveniently leave out the $35k-$80k cost of the car plus new tires every $often miles, while my fuel-efficient ICE car is paid off.
dominotw [3 hidden]5 mins ago
350 how? my subaru gives me 30 mpg in the city.
dyauspitr [3 hidden]5 mins ago
Equivalent gas Ford F-150, I have a lightning
kube-system [3 hidden]5 mins ago
SUV and California gas prices?
dominotw [3 hidden]5 mins ago
suv? crostrek is an suv and all suvs in that class seeem to have even better milage than my old crostrk.
kube-system [3 hidden]5 mins ago
And most SUVs aren’t a crosstrek. There are valid point of comparison that aren’t your car.
throw1234567891 [3 hidden]5 mins ago
WTF do you drive, a RAM 2500? If the gallon is $4, the $350 is 90 gallons.
kube-system [3 hidden]5 mins ago
A RAM 2500 gets 12 city. 40 miles city per day over a month would be 100 gallons, which at today’s average price in California is $565.20/mo
They’re doing a bit better than that.
throw1234567891 [3 hidden]5 mins ago
$5/gallon, cheap af.
delecti [3 hidden]5 mins ago
Gas is around $5.50 here in Seattle. Lots of unknowns to consider.
estearum [3 hidden]5 mins ago
Hilariously, Trump will go down as the most significant POTUS in history for the transition away from oil.
Everyone in the world (except our very own kakistocracy) is scrambling to decouple from this energy source.
gib444 [3 hidden]5 mins ago
You were brave, but nothing can stop the inevitable downvotes lol
ReptileMan [3 hidden]5 mins ago
Before 2008 oil was above 100$ per barrel, and dollar was worth a lot more back then.
nharada [3 hidden]5 mins ago
Is your point that such historical prices only occur when the shit is hitting the fan? Because the first time oil ever went above $100 was at the start of the 2008 financial crisis...
Their point is that $100 in 2008 adjusted for inflation is around $155 today
ghastmaster [3 hidden]5 mins ago
I often wonder how people so quickly forget this. That said, the inflation we have seen since could be such that $100/barrel today is equally or more burdonsome.
The wild thing is that this is an extremely predictable thing that has happened every time this political party is given control of the military. The chutzpah of claiming to be anti-war is breathtaking, and it's stunning that voters fell for it.
All that is at the expense of the rest of the economy. The sectors that are hit the hardest tend to be, with the exception of those above, the ones who voted (disproportionately) for these people.
... which is what you get with a narcissist. The people hurt the most by a narcissist tend to be those closest or those that support them.
Just for perspective, Nvidia's daily profits for the past quarter are $641 million. For Apple it's $327 million.
Because this admin has only one person who calls the shots, it was started because he wanted it. Reports indicate that Bibi played on his ego, and recent "success" in Venezuela gave the illusion that "regime change" was easy, as well as an apparent long time hatred for Iran were the drivers here.
It is mind boggling that tens of millions of people continue to say "This is fine."
> In 1987, when Donald Trump was first flirting with running for president, he told an audience in New Hampshire that the United States should attack the "horrible, horrible country" of Iran, "and take over some of their oil." In the years since, Trump talked about grabbing control of the natural resources of Venezuela, Iraq, Syria, Kuwait, and Libya, too.
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-energy-dominance-oil-i...
In his recent past:
> “To be honest with you, my favourite thing is to take the oil in Iran, but some stupid people back in the US say: ‘Why are you doing that?’ But they’re stupid people,” Trump told the British newspaper.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/3/30/trump-wants-to-inva...
The war with Iran right now is the culmination of the war in Gaza. These are two battlefields in a larger conflict - the belligerents are Iran and its proxies (Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis) versus everyone else in the region.
Iran escalated the conflict (which previously was only simmering and involved occasional missile attacks on Israel) with the 10/7 attacks in response to Saudi Arabia and other regional powers normalizing relations with Israel. They did not properly account for Israel being led by warmongering right-wingers, nor did they account for the US being led by a geriatric man who seems like he might have dementia. They assumed, incorrectly, that the US would continue to be led by reasonable people who weighed the risks of closing the Strait of Hormuz (earthshattering) against the risks of continued Iranian-funded terrorism in the region (Israel gets more bad press and has to keep spending money on missile defense).
The goals of this war, in a geopolitical sense, are to force Iran to abandon its proxies and to lead to regime change in Iran. The fact that the current US administration is made up of morons who should never been placed in power doesn't change that. The goals of any war are best explained by geopolitical factors and not whoever is in charge, because geopolitical factors are real and enduring while presidents and kings change often.
If anything, Trump's only pressing need at the moment is to get oil prices down so that the GOP isn't completely blown out in the midterms by $6/gal gas prices. Oil companies making money is not the cornerstone of US foreign policy, no matter how often people like citing it.
This isn't going to happen because Hormuz is likely to be closed for years to come. Eventually domestic economic pressure will force Iran to the negotiating table; the regime needs to sell oil almost as bad as Trump needs low gas prices. God willing all of the parties involved will have better leadership by then.
doesnt seem like a very profitable company
https://www.axios.com/2026/07/30/china-oil-price-iran-power
If they can't sustain that level, or decide to stop taking action, the level of pain is going to be immense.
They’re doing a bit better than that.
Everyone in the world (except our very own kakistocracy) is scrambling to decouple from this energy source.
[1] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/oil-prices-top-100-for-first-ti...