A recent Nielsen study revealed that almost two-thirds of consumers in the United States, many more than those surveyed just one year ago, have cut back their expenses, specifically due to escalating gas prices.

According to the study, which queried about 50,000 consumers during the first week of June, when regular gas averaged $3.98 per gallon, 78% of consumers are combining shopping trips, 52% are eating out less and 51% are staying at home more. Consumers are also clipping more coupons, doing more shopping at supercenters and buying less expensive brands, the survey found.

Over the past eight years, eerily coinciding with the time that those in the White House were individuals with very strong ties to oil companies and the energy industry, I’ve seen prices at the pump climb 300%. But unlike the majority surveyed, I can’t say that I’ve changed my spending pattern due to this incredible increase in price. I have changed a few habits to save money, like switching to generic brands for certain items, but I find I am spending significantly more in just about every category compared to my expenses in 2000.

I’ve never been much a coupon clipper. If a coupon happens to find its way to my line of sight, and it’s something I might need in the foreseeable future, I will clip it to my refrigerator door and I may remember to bring it with me on my next shopping trip. This hasn’t been changed by gas prices. I am not traveling less, either.

Have you changed any of your habits due to the increase in gas prices?

Gas prices have consumers cutting back – study, Associated Press, July 17, 2008.

Here is the third part of the list of gas stations in New Jersey that are ripping off customers. For more information, see this first part and the second part.

The first part also contains a map of every gas station fined for violation of a variety of regulations.

This list begins with Morris County. Read the rest of this article »

Here is the second part of the list of gas stations in New Jersey that are ripping off customers. For more information, see this first part. The first part also contains a map of every gas station fined for violation of a variety of regulations.

This list begins with Essex County. Read the rest of this article »

If you buy gasoline in New Jersey, you may want to avoid the gas stations listed in this article. The New Jersey Division of Consumer Affairs has fined 350 stations out of 1,025 total inspected during a recent three-day operation across the entire state. Most of the stations fined were guilty of innacurate pump calibration, providing customers with less gasoline (fewer gallons) than appear on the pump’s display.

Other violations include inaccurate octane ratings, missing registration, prices posted incorrectly and multiple price changes in a 24-hour period.

Here is a map of the stations cited and fined, and you can find out the violations for which each station on the map is guilty by zooming in and clicking on the marker. For a list of all stations in violation, read this full post.

If you believe you see a violation in New Jersey, call the Division of Consumer Affairs at (732) 815-4840.

Continue reading for the full list of gas stations in violation, grouped by county. Read the rest of this article »

The presidential candidates are fighting hard for your vote, and the economy seems to be one of the top issues. To soothe jitters over an economically turbulent near future, Senator Barack Obama proposed a second economic stimulus payment, similar to the one proposed and passed by President Bush and Nancy Pelosi earlier this year.

It’s dubious whether these payments have a direct effect on the economy. They may make some people feel better about the economy—depending on whether they receive a check or they subsidize the benefit for others—which may be a self-fulfilling prophecy. It’s more likely that these proposals designed to boost the economy, which have a nasty habit of showing up in election years or when approval ratings are low (is it just coincidence?), are created more for their public relations benefit.

Similarly, Senator John McCain is calling for a federal gas tax “holiday.” The 18.4 cent national gas tax and the 24.4 cent diesel tax, under this plan, would be suspended between over the summer. Originally planned for the time between Memorial Day and Labor Day, McCain’s campaign website hasn’t updated this issue now that we have passed the first summer holiday.

Someone who believes that gas prices at the pump are determined by supply and demand would argue that lifting a gas tax would simply allow prices to rise up the chain.

Neither a second economic stimulus check nor a gas tax holiday will on its own affect the economy much. It would be great to see some real economic proposals presented by our presidential candidates—ideas whose implementation would provide jobs, manage real inflation, and encourage business innovation while this country learns how to deal with globalization of the economy—rather than gimmicks designed to attract potential voters.

Let’s face it, though, it makes no sense to choose a candidate based on their economic policy, something the Office of the President has little control over thanks to the numerous people involved with setting policy and economic cycles. I can’t imagine that anyone in this country is undecided between McCain and Obama, but the final decision should be based more on who you want appointing Supreme Court justices and who you want initiating military actions (something that used to be left up to the Congress). These are the modern major powers of the Presidency with lasting effects.

McCain resurrects call for gas tax holiday, CNN Politics, June 9, 2008

Last June, I noticed that a few gas stations in my area were charging different prices for gas depending on whether your method of payment was cash or credit. My biggest problem was that this wasn’t advertised on the large signs attracting drivers to the station. The station later changed its signs, though the cash price appears in the spot where one would normally see the “regular unleaded” price, and the credit price appears where one would expect the “plus unleaded” price. The labels “cash” and “credit” are only legible up close.

This “cash discount” is a joke. The cash price is the competitive price relative to other local stations and the credit price has increased more significantly. This is just a sneaky way of getting around Visa’s and MasterCard’s requirements for merchants not to charge more for customers who use credit cards. I am aware the credit card companies charge transaction fees that can cripple gas station owners who make very thin profits on gasoline, but this is not the answer, particularly if they must run misleading advertising to compete with other stations.

The price discrimination first occurred shortly before I moved to a new town, so I didn’t have to deal with it at that time. Once I moved, I found a local, low-price gas station on my daily route that did not offer a “cash discount.”

Last night, I pulled into my low-cost station on the way home from the office, just like I have been doing several times a week for the past 11 months. As pumping our own gasoline is against the law in New Jersey, I asked the attended to fill up the tank. It wasn’t until the tank was almost full that I glanced at the sign on top of the pump to see how high the prices increased over the weekend. I noticed there were two sets of prices, one for cash and one for credit.

Curses, foiled again. Some time in the past few days the owners of this Raceway gas station decided to offer a “cash discount” as well, just like the Valero station near my old apartment. The large sign attracting drivers to the station had been changed to list cash price first, followed by credit price in the “plus unleaded” location, with small labels reading “cash” and “credit.”

The price difference between cash and credit was ten cents. I’m considering opening up a CitiBank Driver’s Edge credit card, like this one for students, currently offering a 6% cash back rebate on gasoline purchases. That rebate would make up the ten cent difference and more, but I’d rather not open more credit cards.

I’d also rather not carry around cash for fueling my car, considering it cost almost $40 to fill up last night. I would save $2.00 to $3.00 a week by paying with cash. All other gas stations are either more expensive or out of the way. Perhaps I’ll try cash for a while, but I’ll have to get used to withdrawing about $100 more than I usually do each week. If I adapt, I’ll have perhaps an extra $150 saved after one year.

Lately I’ve noticed commercials for a special car buying incentive offered by Chrysler: a gas credit card that guarantees that you will pay no more than $2.99 for a gallon of gas for three years. The offer, good between now and June 2 on most Chrysler, Jeep and Dodge vehicles preys on our fear and anticipation of higher gas costs this coming summer.

But the numbers don’t work out all that well. First, in order to qualify for the $2.99 gas card, which is good for regular unleaded gasoline, diesel, or E85, you must relinquish your option to take advantage of any other purchasing incentive. Assuming the average gas price over the next three years is $3.99, and it could be lower once the political environment changes, one might save a couple hundred dollars a year. But how is this worthwhile if you have to give up a $2,000 (or more) cash back deal to qualify? A quick search of Chrysler incentives shows that dealers are offering up to $3,000 cash back. In other locations offering you can find incentives offering $5,000 cash back.

Additionally, according to the rules of this “Let’s Refuel America” incentive, your gas savings would be limited to 12,000 miles a year. After that limit, you would have to pay full price.

It makes no sense to give up a $5,000 discount in return for the possibility of saving a few hundred dollars a year. Keep in mind that three years from now, the price of gas may be much less than $2.99. You would have given up a significant incentive for very little benefit.

The perceived savings on the cost of gas is higher than the numbers reveal. Chrysler is simply seizing the opportunity to present a deal that looks nice to customers concerned about rising gas costs, but this deal is much better for the dealer than for the buyer.

If you’re concerned about gas savings and you’re in the market for a new car, opting for a vehicle with just a little more fuel efficiency compared to the Chrysler cars and trucks will be a better option for saving money on gas. Just a 3 mpg improvement will save $3,000 in the first three years, and then would continue saving money long beyond the expiration of the terms of this deal.

Photo credit: joebeone

To help Americans pay for the increasing price of a gallon of gas, Hillary Clinton is suggesting a suspension of the 18.4 cent per gallon tax on gasoline and 24.4 cent per gallon tax on diesel from Memorial Day through Labor Day while enacting a “windfall profits” tax on the oil companies which have been making money hand over fist through out 21st century so far. John McCain is also in favor of a gas tax “holiday,” but Barack Obama calls this strategy pointless and possibly more harmful for the economy.

Obama figures that the gas tax holiday would save American consumers about 30 cents a day while underfunding the federal fund that pays for road improvements. And while we’re in an election year, Obama points out that Clinton and McCain’s positions are political posturing moves rather than good economic solutions.

Ignoring the fact that when a tax holiday is in practice, gas prices might simply rise to negate the savings and match what consumers are willing and able to pay, the 18.4 cent theoretical reduction in a gallon of gas will be almost invisible. With a gallon of gasoline around $3.60 for me here in New Jersey, this 5% discount doesn’t even bring the price down to its level from a few months ago.

Clinton suggests paying for the loss of government income by increasing windfall profits taxes for the oil industry. If there is a gas tax holiday, should oil companies pay for the loss of government income through taxes assessed for earning significant profits in this economy? I feel no pity for the large corporations, and I wouldn’t mind if their taxes increase. However, I don’t think this solution would improve the economy.

As a country, we seem to be willing to continue spending on gasoline no matter what the price, but perhaps that is only because we have little choice. If we stop driving, we stop going to work, earning money, and feeding our families. We’re ready to spend as much on gasoline as necessary to continue our lives, giving oil companies the freedom to keep pushing prices upwards.

The oil industry obviously is not happy about the idea that their profits could be taxed, claiming that taxes would eat into available capital for new production, but their profits are mostly used for buying back stock rather than research and development.

Rather than Clinton’s plan to tax oil companies, McCain wants to freeze or cut spending to pay for the gas tax holiday. Obama thinks these suggestions sound nice to voters but would have little real effect. What do you think?

Photo credit: x-eyedblonde
Obama attacks Clinton’s gas tax plan [AP]
McCain calls for a summer ‘gas-tax holiday’ [AP]
Taxing oil profits: Proceed with caution [CNN Money]