Demand destruction happens gasoline is more expensive than your income will allow. Let's take someone making minimum wage that has a long commute (60 miles each way). With an average car (22 mpg) they are burning (60x2x20)/22=109 gallons per month which cost $327. Earning $1120 - rent (500) - food (300) - taxes (200) leaves $120 per month. Once we cross into negative territory, you will see people reacting. The next question will be to figure out the commute distance of low wage workers. That will determine how many people will move to save on gas money. According to my calculations, that would be $4.10 per gallon (Crude $140). With a 40 mile commute it increases to $6.20 per gallon (Crude $230).

Hang on everyone, we are in for a very wild ride.

My primitive numbers are based on $1 crude = 2c gasoline.

You forgot car insurance and beer.

Having lived poor you tend to have the 10 bucks or so for a cheap 12 pack once a week no matter what. Plus incidental expenses. On the plus side a bit of overtime or double shifts or another part-time job helps a lot. You want to drive some on the weekends also.

I think your looking at much over 3 bucks a gallon becoming a real issue even if you have a 40 mile commute.
40*2*20/22 = 72

but lets assume you only get 15mgp say own a truck.

40*2*20/15 = 106

Or lets add a common expense say a small car payment.

You can see that these people are right on the edge much above 2 dollars a gallon which is right now.

Next your making a mistake that how much you earn determines your disposable income a lot of people make more than minimum wage but have the extra money eaten up in home/care expenses.

So say you earned a take home of 2000 a month or 24000 a year take home or 30k or so before taxes. Your rent/house payment is probably closer to 800 or 1000 and you would have and additional car payment say 100-150 a month.

You can see that on the disposable income side your not really insulated against higher gas prices until your income moves into the 40-60k range if your reasonable with your expenses.

Next of course your not factoring increased secondary costs for food etc as they pass on higher transportation costs.

Of course a lot of people in the above ranges will continue to buy gasoline they will just cut out expenses say eating out for lunch which causes some guy making minimum wage lose his job.

As you can see owing and operating a car is a tenuous capability for most people below 30k a year.
My own experience being poor was that this was the case you sacrificed quite a bit to get a car and more to drive it any distance. This was well before sky high gas prices.

This means of course that consumption of other goods and services outside of the basics will drop of fairly quickly for the population below the 30k mark as gasoline prices increase.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Economy/wm1186.cfm

This give 5% of the population making the minimum wage.
I found a stat of 15% of the population below poverty.
Lets guess that its 30% are twice the poverty level you can find the exact stats.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States

You can see from this graph 40-50% of the population falls into this at risk category of people who can barely afford a home car and additional expenses. The reason is people will tend to expend extra money on both cars and housing so they stay fairly close to the edge in the US.

Even if this group can afford higher gasoline costs it seems obvious that it will eliminate a lot of their disposable income cutting their additional purchasing power close to zero. The American consumer at the low end is close to extinction. I'd simply watch Wal-Mart earnings.

Less than 30% of the population in the US can absorb high fuel costs and obviously this percentage would drop if the lower half stops spending.

I don't think the US can really even handle 2+ a gallon long term. We are probably already above the gas price level needed to cause a consumer led recession. The housing bubble and easy consumer credit is probably the only thing that kept us going.

Interesting stats. Lets take someone earning $15k and drives 30 miles each way. The average one way commute is 25 minutes. I'm guessing that it represents 10% of the population based on the graph. Take home pay is $1062 - rent(500) - insurance (75) - food (300) leaving $187 to pay for gas. If he uses an average car (25mpg) that means 48 gallons. The pain threshold is $187/48=$3.90 per gallon (crude $130).

Not far from my original estimate of $4.10, except that now we are talking about 10% of the population instead of a worst case.

If this person moves closer and commutes 10 miles each way (without paying a higher rent), they will save $130 per month with $3.90 gas. If they need to pay a higher rent, we may see more car campers or uninsured drivers.

Interesting analysis.

However, I believe the pain threshold is even lower. Car maintenance, for example, is a real cost and expensive. So even ignoring the likelihood of a monthly payment on a vehicle loan, a monthly value for maintenance would lower the pain threshold. If the maintenance is cheap, say $25/mo, then the PT is knocked down to $162/48, or $3.38 per gallon.

Sixty miles a day seems high. I believe it's more like 45 miles for the average commuter (DOE stats). This would put the PT back up to 3.38/(45/60) = $4.50/gal. However other costs are likely higher. Shows how sensitive this calculation is to a myriad variables. It would be interesting to see a more detailed accounting.

-best,

graywulffe in CVO, OR

Congrats, you're on the right lines.

Its not the absolute levels, its the disposable income and the change that create pain and thus demand destruction. I'd suggest that many of the poor in the US are actually closer to the edge than you calculate, something closer to the $20 left level.

The other factors are:
- taxation level on petrol
- government subsidies
- average vehicle mileage
- average miles driven
- speed of change in price
- total country consumption number

If you put these together and make some assumptions for the values in countries worldwide then you can can rank groups and countries by who will feel pain in what order. You can also say at what oil price that pain kicks in.

This is why I've previously suggested that the US is going to be an early victim of oil prices:
- its low tax level means in percentage terms the hit will be larger than high tax level countries
- no subsidies or caps
- low fuel economy of vehicles
- high mileages of vehicles
- high country percentage use
- and add to that a currency that's going steadily down.

When you rank the countries and those that have already suffered demand destruction, that makes the US the next 'plateau' level. Prices will rise until sizable numbers of the US poor start getting hit. It will then stagnate as the demand destruction gradually eats through the large consumption numbers of the US poor. That will have a sizable impact on the way of life in the US, even if the poor there are generally ignored.

At rough calcs that happens around the $110 level, although the very strange crack spread numbers is putting that off at the moment.

I think it was Norman Tebbit (UK Right Wing Politician) who in the 1980s said regarding looking for work:

"GET ON YOUR BIKE!!"

-the advantage of this is two fold:

1. No gas to pay
2. It makes you fitter (something a lot of Americans should seriously consider regardless)

The thought that civilisation will collapse if Joe 6 pack cannot afford to fill his 15mpg 1980s gas hog is nonsense. Get over it.

Nick.

Riight. Let's all go bike 40 miles per day in the cold and in the rain so that we get all good fitness for work and take care of our children with the time spared in the process...

Sorry, realist. 60 mile one way commute distance for a min wage job? I think that is an unreasonable assumption. The only way people will keep a job under those conditions is if they REALLY love the work...(they would also have to REALLY love the location they live in.) Please give me an example of a minimum wage job that people love so much they are willing to commute two hours each day, in concert with a location that demands a 60 mile commute.

For example: Living on the beach in Cocoa Beach and commuting 60 miles to Disney World to walk around as Goofy....hey wait a minute, that was too good of an example. Except your rent is now 3000 a month.

The first thing that will happen, under those assumptions, is a switch in jobs within walking distance.

Let your views be known: www.cafepress.com/crashdummy

I was going for worst case, since those will be the first to cut demand. Moving closer is not always so easy if the rents are higher or your partner has a short commute, kids, etc.

Don't get me wrong. I like where you are going with this thread. Thanks for starting it. I just think that even for worst case, minimum wage is not a good assumption. Min wage jobs are too easy to come by to support the need for a 60 mile commute. In your response you addressed one side of my comment (moving closer to the job you love), but what about the other half (taking a job closer to where you live)?

Show me a person 60 miles from an available min wage job, and I'll show you a farmer. :)

Let your views be known: www.cafepress.com/crashdummy

I don't disagree about the distance but 20 mile commutes are very common. This is the distance from a small town to the rural areas and is a common commute for someone that lives in a trailer on a rural plot.

I lived a lot of my life poor and was born and raised in a poor state you don't have the sort of cash reserves people are considering. An 10-15 dollars a hour is still consider very good pay in a lot of the country.

As you get off the costs the demographics I posted change quite a bit and you get closer to 50% of the population in the 40k and below income level. No one has even considered that these people have children.

Two dollars a gallon is enough to cause some pain this is why WalMart has already had problems. I've personally had to save for a few months to purchase a cheap dvd player at WalMart thats the type of income level your talking about.

How to explain it.

Their exists a sort of base living standard that people strive for this is:
1.) A reasonable Apartement/House/Trailer.
2.) A decent car if your luck new.
3.) Health care
4.) Clothes School supplies etc for the kids.
5.) Some toys for the kids and electronics for the adults.
6.) Enough money to cover heat/water/electricity etc.

This is not in any real order but what happens is as you earn more money a lot of it goes into a better house and car and more toys. So your disposable income does not increase till your past about the 50k mark. Its only when you cross about 50k these days in income that your actually earning money that can be saved and thus is really disposable and also living a reasonable life.

Higher oil prices have already taken a bite out of consumer spending and we would expect to see even more pain as it increases. Understand a lot of these people now work in retail/sales oriented businesses so they are susceptible to a slowing economy. And understand that many are totally dependent on getting overtime or extra shifts to make ends meet. Overall their income is very susceptible to increasing costs.

Now higher gasoline costs are just part of the price increase and many have noticed we are seeing increased transportation costs for all goods passed down to the consumer so your not just dealing with direct costs but also indirect costs such as higher food prices. When your talking about people that are happy when they have 150 dollars left over at the end of the month the price point at which they pull back significantly from purchasing luxury items has already in the past.

Also consider we are seeing the dollar fall in value leading eventually to higher costs for cheap imports.

Some of these people did get involved in the housing bubble but in general most don't own their own homes or if they do the got them through government loans that have stricter standards the economic slowdown from this group is pretty much purely related to increased costs and despite the government stats we are seeing signs of a slowdown in spending in the lower tier income levels. Also of course construction and other housing related business is a big employer in this income range.

Remember we are in a growth based economy. High oil prices need only cause a retraction or stagnation in the economy to start a cycle of job loss/lowering incomes. The reality is that if these people start losing regualar overtime second shift work they are toast. This process has already started higher oil prices will only serve to aggravate the situation. The crazy housing boom managed to hide the truth for a bit at the cost of deeper pain post boom.

Think about the materials used to build a road, a school, an office building, a supermarket or a home.

Cement, steel aluminum, copper, asphalt, plastics etc. are all highly energy intensive. Either they come right out of a barrel of oil,1.e. asphalt, or are heated to well over 2000 degrees F
during their manufacture.

So these materials have been rising with the cost of oil and gas.

But folks average income have been rising at a much slower rate, not even keeping up withe general (non-energy) rate of inflation. Now government comes along and says the only way to build a new school,widen a road, build a wastewater treatment plant, etc. is to raise your taxes. It's sticker shock time when a new high school is needed.

Guess what happens.

As a side note. Well marbled beef is extremely energy intensive. Chicken much less so. Anyone know what is actually happening to their consumption.