Discussion: Gas Prices

[Matt]

Sorry for stealing your thread theme, Themarx :cwink:

The national average reached a record high today. Do you believe our government has an obligation to step in? If so, how? Should they cap costs? Should they open the reserve? Should they allow drilling in Alaska?

Is it disconcerning to anyone else that no politican seems to give a damn about this when prices at the pumps are severely hurting the middle class families?

Politicans say they want to help, but do nothing. Some will argue that it is beyond their control, but I personally think the answer is simple: LOSE THE TARIFF Right now the government is taxing 54 cents per gallon on imported ethanol. That directly effects the cost at the pump. The new national average is 3.22. The highest in our nations history. If you take away the 54 cent tariff, suddenly we are only paying 2.68 a gallon. Pricey? Yes. Still a huge relief. It is the difference between paying 26.80 for 10 gallons of gas and 32.20. Thats nearly 6 extra dollars when you fill up. May not seem like much, but it adds up.

What are your thoughts?

[hippie_hunter]

I think we should be investigating into the oil companies because it's blatantly obvious that price gouging is going on here.

[Matt]

I think we should be investigating into the oil companies because it's blatantly obvious that price gouging is going on here.

Amen to that, but the politicans are too deep in the pockets of the oil companies. What are your thoughts on the tariff?

[The Senator]

Weren't they talking about capping gas prices at $3 a gallon after Hurricane Katrina hit? Apparently that never happened...

[bell110]

Like I said before, the only way the American people are going to demand change is if you hit them in the wallet. Getting rid of the tariff would only be a small and probably temporary change.

[SuBe]

I'll give you my thoughts, as unpopular as it may be:

1. Oil companies should not be "Investigated". They already were investigated in 2003 I believe, and no foul was found. That would be a waste of Tax Dollars.

2. All Oil Corporate Tax Rates should be lifted, as Oil is a necessity. Corporate Taxes are not paid by the Corporation, ALL Corporate Taxes are passed down to the Consumer. So, it is inflating the prices of the Gas.

3. The reason for High gas prices are the weak dollar, if the dollar was stronger, it would cost less dollars to purchase the same items. Strenghen the Dollar equals lower gas prices.

4. Our Tax Code is to blame, as is our lack of real education in economics. What is the Corporate Profit Margin? The Same as it was 10 years ago. About 20%. But, since we hear about Profit and not Profit Margin, it looks high. But, since the Dollar is weaker, the prices are higher.

It will take the Government to fix this, but the only way to fix it is to alleviate the Tax Burden effectively reducing the prices.

[hippie_hunter]

Amen to that, but the politicans are too deep in the pockets of the oil companies. What are your thoughts on the tariff?

On something like oil and gas, I don't think there should be a tariff. I also think that we need to remove the tariff on Brazilian sugar ethanol. We need to do a lot to drop the prices in gas. Lowering or even getting rid of taxes like SupermanBeyond says would bring a lot of help.

[Matt]

On something like oil and gas, I don't think there should be a tariff. I also think that we need to remove the tariff on Brazilian sugar ethanol. We need to do a lot to drop the prices in gas. Lowering or even getting rid of taxes like SupermanBeyond says would bring a lot of help.

I think we would need to set a cap though as well as lowering or ending the taxes on oil companies. Otherwise, we have no way to ensure that they will not just pocket the extra profit and keep charging the consumers an arm and a leg.

[Excel]

its about 2.90 where i live, its not bad.

[SuBe]

Capping prices is also a bad Idea:

Here is the Scenerio:

You have a hotel with only 100 rooms. The City is hit by a hurricane. Do you cap the Cost? Let's see.

You have a family of 5 plus a grandmother. The family hears about the hurricane, yet can't fortify their home. They have to go to the Hotel. If there is a cap so it is affordable, they can rent a room for the Parents, the Kids and the Grandmother. That's 3 rooms. Now the next family comes in guess what, they are all out of rooms, because the government mandated it to remain affordable.

In a Market Driven Economy: The Family plus the Grandmother would be forced to rent only one room, effectively leaving the other rooms to other people. Even though it would be more expensive, more people can enjoy it.

It is the same thing for Gas Prices. If the Government Capped Prices to an affordable amount, that would leave it open for everyone to fill up, and the Gas Station would run out of Gas. But, if the Market decides: Everyone can get a little gas, but at least it is SOME gas.

[hippie_hunter]

I think we would need to set a cap though as well as lowering or ending the taxes on oil companies. Otherwise, we have no way to ensure that they will not just pocket the extra profit and keep charging the consumers an arm and a leg.

Price caps tend to hurt the economy more than help it. Personally I think constant investigations, threatening to tax the companies even more, and fining them severely for price gouging unless they lowered prices would be the route to take.

It's downright absurd that Exxon can make a $100 billion profit in one quarter. If the government "persuaded" them to lower the prices, they'd still make billions of dollars and a hell of a lot more than most businesses.

[SuBe]

I think we would need to set a cap though as well as lowering or ending the taxes on oil companies. Otherwise, we have no way to ensure that they will not just pocket the extra profit and keep charging the consumers an arm and a leg.
Again, the Market will decide through Competition. All it would take is one company to lower their prices, and the others would be forced to do the same thing to maintain Market Share.

[sinewave]

let's invent a car that runs on the blood of rich oil men.

[Marx]

Sorry for stealing your thread theme, Themarx :cwink:


You're forgiven man :yay:

I think we should be investigating into the oil companies because it's blatantly obvious that price gouging is going on here.

I couldn't agree with you more Hippie!

Amen to that, but the politicans are too deep in the pockets of the oil companies. What are your thoughts on the tariff?

And therein lies the problem. When the people who can potentially do something are the ones benefitting, nothing will be done.

[Morg]

its about 2.90 where i live, its not bad.

3.50 here :csad:

[Marx]

3.50 here :csad:

It jumped from 3.07 to 3.45 in a matter of 6 hours here. Completely ridiculous!

[Zen]

the price of oil is getting extremely high...

i also see record profits from oil companies and wonder... WTH??! :huh:

i wonder if we do eventually decide to get out of Iraq, if that can be shrewdly parlied to get some of those mideast countries to friggin drop the prices.

that and we need to crack down on these oil companies somehow, im just not sure exactly how.

[redfirebird2008]

Price gouging is not going on. It's supply and demand, plain and simple.

[Marx]

Price gouging is not going on. It's supply and demand, plain and simple.

When all the major oil companies are making record profits, your argument doesn't really hold up Firebird. It's not simply supply and demand.

[redfirebird2008]

When all the major oil companies are making record profits, your argument doesn't really hold up Firebird. It's not simply supply and demand.

You know where a vast majority of those profits go? R&D. They're not just sitting on their cash like Microsoft or something. They pump it back into exploration and production to find more. Blame the American public for its addiction to it, don't blame the companies. Or hell, blame Massachusetts, Florida, California, et al who refuse to have off-shore drilling because it'll ruin their "scenery."

[SuBe]

Wow, I guess no one pays attention to my posts. It's not Price Gouging. It is a Weak Dollar! If the Dollar is worth less, it takes more Dollars to pay for stuff. It's not difficult to understand.

[EdRyder]

Its called bottlenecking plain and simple.And yes,it should be a criminally prosecuted practice.Exxon Mobile is in fact currently bottlenecking as it was proved to have done in 2006.Bottlenecking is when you decrease refinery production to inflate your profits.In 06 EM turned a profit of $39.5 billion (off of sales of over $365 billion)
The thing thats hard to grasp is that it isnt a crime.When in fact the only other industry I can think of for a fair comparison is drug trafficking.

[EdRyder]

You know where a vast majority of those profits go? R&D. They're not just sitting on their cash like Microsoft or something. They pump it back into exploration and production to find more. Blame the American public for its addiction to it, don't blame the companies. Or hell, blame Massachusetts, Florida, California, et al who refuse to have off-shore drilling because it'll ruin their "scenery."

Exxon Mobil spends over $20 billion a year in trying to find new Oil.The thing is,there isnt any more big fields out there.They've spent that $20 billion anually since the early 90's,..back when it was $10 dollars per bbl.

[SuBe]

The Refineries haven't been built due to High Costs associtated with EPA Rules and Regulations. A new refinery hasn't been built since the 70's.

[redfirebird2008]

They definitely are not spending anywhere near enough on R&D for alternatives, no matter what BP tries to claim in their marketing. The auto industry is an even bigger problem though. As long as they keep selling vehicles with crappy gas mileage, consumers will take a hit at the pump.

[Zen]

Wow, I guess no one pays attention to my posts. It's not Price Gouging. It is a Weak Dollar! If the Dollar is worth less, it takes more Dollars to pay for stuff. It's not difficult to understand.


i havn't seen anything on the dollar parralleling gas prices... i think the price of gas has risen on a steeper curve than the dollar has fallen. though the weak dollar is somthing to consider

[Matt]

I think you are too generous to corporations SupermanBeyond. Just because they ought not do something, doesn't mean they won't. If you think for a second that market regulation would keep oil companies from screwing people at the tanks, you are nuts.

[SuBe]

Well, Matthew, they already are one of the most Regulated Industries in this country, yet it seems the consenus around here is we already are being screwed.

[Matt]

And I blame the government for it. A 54 cent per gallon tax is pretty damn steep. Eliminate taxes on the oil companies, but then the government should ensure that they pass those saving onto the consumer, be it through fines, capping, or whatever means necessary. I do not want to rely on the chance that one oil company will do the right thing and force the others to

[Zen]

every economic forcast out there right now is grossly negative...

why is it so hard for us to admit we are in a serious recession?

[SuBe]

every economic forcast out there right now is grossly negative...

why is it so hard for us to admit we are in a serious recession?
Because we are not in a Recession. The Defination of Recession is Negative Economic Growth in 2 Consecitive Quarters. We haven't had 2 Negative Economic Growth in 2 Consecitive Quarters, we've consistantly had Positive Growth, yet that growth isn't large, only 1% or so. Again, it is the Media using the Populaces Lack of Education of Economics to insite panic and Make the Current Adminstration look bad. The Stock Market is still at an all time high and the unemployment rate is still low, only 4.9%, which is still much lower than the Average of Bill Clinton's Adminstration.


It's not a Recession unless we change the Defination of Recession.

[Zen]

Because we are not in a Recession. The Defination of Recession is Negative Economic Growth in 2 Consecitive Quarters. We haven't had 2 Negative Economic Growth in 2 Consecitive Quarters, we've consistantly had Positive Growth, yet that growth isn't large, only 1% or so. Again, it is the Media using the Populaces Lack of Education of Economics to insite panic and Make the Current Adminstration look bad. The Stock Market is still at an all time high and the unemployment rate is still low, only 4.9%, which is still much lower than the Average of Bill Clinton's Adminstration.


It's not a Recession unless we change the Defination of Recession.

well i think your being a bit generalizing about the populace... perhaps you should just refer to me and my ilk, as the general populace does not believe we are in a recession, or headed for one... just that gas prices are high.

[SuBe]

well i think your being a bit generalizing about the populace... perhaps you should just refer to me and my ilk, as the general populace does not believe we are in a recession, or headed for one... just that gas prices are high.
But that is it! The General Populace does believe we are in a recession or even in a depression, which is ridiculous BTW. They are being constantly told by the Media that we are in a Recession, every day there is news program after news programs calling for the coming recession. If you tell a lie often enough, it becomes the truth.

[SuBe]

i havn't seen anything on the dollar parralleling gas prices... i think the price of gas has risen on a steeper curve than the dollar has fallen. though the weak dollar is somthing to consider

Gasoline Prices in Perspective

by Jerry Taylor and Peter Van Doren

This article appeared in Investor's Business Daily, May 17, 2006.

America appears to be in a state of wild-eyed panic about the rising price of gasoline. Talk radio hosts and T.V. populists apparently think that mass riots are imminent and that whole cities will burn unless politicians do something to save America from the long, dark economic night that is descending upon us.
In truth, gasoline prices today are taking less of a bite from our pocketbooks than has been the norm since World War II.
Jerry Taylor (http://www.cato.org/people/taylor.html) and Peter Van Doren (http://www.cato.org/people/vandoren.html) are senior fellows. Peter Van Doren is also editor of Regulation magazine.

More by Jerry Taylor (http://www.cato.org/people/taylor.html)More by Peter Van Doren (http://www.cato.org/people/vandoren.html)


http://www.cato.org/images/pubs/pub6440thumb.jpg (http://www.cato.org/images/pubs/pub6440.jpg) For instance, let's look at 1955, a year most of us associate with big cars, big engines, and cheap fuel – automotive glory days, as it were. Gasoline sold for 29 cents per gallon. But one dollar in 1955 was worth more than one dollar today. If we were using today's dollars, gasoline would have cost $1.76 per gallon in 1955.
Gasoline now costs around $3.00, so we are worse off than in 1955, right? No. Because we were poorer in 1955 than we are today, $1.76 then had a bigger impact on the pocketbook (that is, it represented a larger fraction of income) than $1.76 today. If we adjust gasoline prices not only for inflation but also changes in disposable per capita income (defined as income minus taxes), gasoline today would have to cost $5.17 per gallon to have the same impact as 29 cents in 1955.
Let's pick another year we associate with low gasoline prices – 1972, the year before the Arab oil embargo. Gasoline was selling at 36 cents per gallon. Adjusted for inflation, however, the price was actually $1.36 in today's currency. Adjust again for changes in disposable per capita income and the price would have to be $2.66 per gallon to have equivalent impact today.
Were we better off then when we rolled into the filling station in 1972 than we are today? No, because our cars get 60 to 70 percent better mileage today than in 1972 (22.4 miles per gallon versus 13.5 miles per gallon). That more than offsets the 10.5 percent increase in gas prices adjusted for change in inflation and income from then to now.
Now let's look at 1981, the year Ronald Reagan took office. Gasoline sold for $1.38 that year, the equivalent of $2.74 in today's currency. Adjusting for the change in disposable per capita income, prices would have to be $4.30 today to have an equivalent impact.
There are probably three reasons that gasoline prices appear so high to us today. First, many don't fully appreciate the long run effect that inflation has on prices. Second, many don't appreciate how much our incomes have increased relative to prices. Finally, we still remember 1998 very well, the year in which we encountered the lowest gasoline prices since 1949. Gasoline in 1998 sold for $1.03 per gallon, the equivalent of $1.21 in today's currency. Adjusting for growth in per capita income yields a price of $1.35 per gallon in today's terms. Today's price is more than double that and people resent the increase over the last several years, in part, because they think that 1998 prices were normal. But they were not.
Now let's put the recent price increase in terms of real outlays. The average household is spending $136 more on gasoline every month than it was in 1998 and $114 per month more than it were spending in 2002. But, believe it or not, real (inflation-adjusted) disposable income per household has increased even faster than have pump prices; by $800 a month since 1998 and $279 a month since 2002.
Accordingly, Americans are still, on average, economically ahead of the game.
No one likes high gasoline prices. But they are not as bad as most people think. Keep that in mind the next time some politician or media populist starts handing out the pitchforks. http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6440

[zenile]

You know where a vast majority of those profits go? R&D. They're not just sitting on their cash like Microsoft or something. They pump it back into exploration and production to find more. Blame the American public for its addiction to it, don't blame the companies. Or hell, blame Massachusetts, Florida, California, et al who refuse to have off-shore drilling because it'll ruin their "scenery."

This is absolutely not true! Exxon spent $814MM on R&D in FY2007, or .21% (not even 1%) of total revenues of $390,328MM.

Source:
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/34088/000119312508041781/d10k.htm

Microsoft spent $7,121MM on R&D last FY, or 13.93% of total revenues of $51,122MM.

Source:
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/789019/000119312507170817/d10k.htm

[Zen]

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6440

look bro we can cite articles all day long against each other...

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5365439


The cost of crude oil on the futures market has risen about 33 percent (dollar dropped 33%? no...) in the last year. This reflects supply problems in such places as Nigeria, Iraq and the Gulf of Mexico, as well as the threat of supply problems in Iran.

Refining costs add another 64 cents or so to a gallon of gasoline. Refining margins have increased from a few years ago, and are especially high this spring, because many refineries are currently shut down for seasonal maintenance. Refineries are still recovering from the effects of last year's hurricanes. And they are adjusting to more stringent low-sulfur fuel requirements and the phase-out of the gasoline additive MTBE.

The balance of the price is taxes -- about 55 cents -- and distribution and marketing costs, which account for about 11 cents per gallon.

OK. So the rising cost of crude oil and of refining help account for the spike in gas prices. But at the same time, oil companies are reporting record net profits. They're being accused of price gouging. What's their response?

Big oil companies are making most of their money by producing crude oil. They invested in oil fields when prices were much lower, with the expectation that they could break even at, say, $25 per barrel. Since the market price is now more than $70 a barrel, the extra money is gravy. It's like a farmer who can raise corn for $1.50 a bushel. If the market price is $1.75, he makes a quarter per bushel. If the market price jumps to $2.25, his profits jump as well. (If the market crashes to $1 per bushel, the farmer loses money. That can happen to oil companies as well.) Oil companies, like the farmer, are the beneficiaries of high market prices, but they can no more control those prices than a farmer can dictate what he gets for a bushel of corn.

Critics would say the oil industry is far less competitive than the corn market, which is certainly true. But if oil companies could control the price of crude oil, they would not have allowed the price to fall to $10 a barrel as it did in 1998.

the dollar at the time of that article had not fallen as far as it had today... yet prices in san fran were 3.40

[redfirebird2008]

This is absolutely not true! Exxon spent $814MM on R&D in FY2007, or .21% (not even 1%) of total revenues of $390,328MM.

Source:
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/34088/000119312508041781/d10k.htm

Microsoft spent $7,121MM on R&D last FY, or 13.93% of total revenues of $51,122MM.

Source:
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/789019/000119312507170817/d10k.htm

OK, so not R&D. Operating costs. You do realize that it costs a hell of a lot more than $817 million for exploration and production of oil and natural gas by a large company, right? It's around $2 million per well. And that was a very active year for Microsoft due to the Zune and Windows Vista.

[Zen]

OK, so not R&D. Operating costs. You do realize that it costs a hell of a lot more than $817 million for exploration and production of oil and natural gas by a large company, right? It's around $2 million per well.

oil company executive payrolls are reaching record amounts along with those record profits.

[zenile]

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6440

Is this article still relevant? It's about 2 years old when we had a much stronger dollar (pre-housing market bubble, collapse in financial markets, global liquidity crisis). I think the amounts in the article would need to be updated in 2008 $ to make sense.

[redfirebird2008]

http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/exxonmobil/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20080201005420&newsLang=en

$6.2 billion in exploration and production costs for the 4th quarter of 2007. $11 billion net income. LOL.

[Zen]

http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/exxonmobil/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20080201005420&newsLang=en

$6.2 billion in exploration and production costs for the 4th quarter of 2007. $11 billion net income. LOL.

1. Gross

The term gross refers to the total amount made as a result of some activity. It can refer to things such as total profit or total sales. Gross represents the "whole part". No deductions have been made from the gross value.


2. ---Research, development....and everything else is in between these two termss---


3. Net

Net refers to the amount left over after all deductions are made. Once the net value is attained, nothing further is subtracted. The net value is not allowed to be made lower.

[redfirebird2008]

1. Gross

The term gross refers to the total amount made as a result of some activity. It can refer to things such as total profit or total sales. Gross represents the "whole part". No deductions have been made from the gross value.


2. ---Research, development....and everything else is in between these two termss---


3. Net

Net refers to the amount left over after all deductions are made. Once the net value is attained, nothing further is subtracted. The net value is not allowed to be made lower.

I understand that. They made $11 billion after taxes and all costs were subtracted. That's why I put LOL because it's hilarious.

[Zen]

I understand that. They made $11 billion after taxes and all costs were subtracted. That's why I put LOL because it's hilarious.


my bad,

i award you triple word score,

Free parking with Jackpot homerules,

the shorttrack to the next brain,

5 cannons, 2 horses, and 3 infantry men for turning your cards in *and not using your wild card*

a triple jump, after which you are kinged,

a 10 on the spinner, and you land on the spin again... *and you have a rediculous amount of children as you careen into millionare mansions, 1st*

a royal flush in strip poker with a gob of your favorite sexy celebrities,

and you sank my friggin battleship.

:cmad:

[redfirebird2008]

haha

[amazingfantasy15]

Why is it that whenever I hear on the news that the government is going to look into gas prices, the immediately drop? Seems a little fishy if you ask me. I also blame the media, the media keeps telling people gas is gonna reach $4 a gallon this summer, of course oil companies are gonna up the price because the media has basically told them it's ok, the public is expecting it.

[Marx]

Why is it that whenever I hear on the news that the government is going to look into gas prices, the immediately drop? Seems a little fishy if you ask me. I also blame the media, the media keeps telling people gas is gonna reach $4 a gallon this summer, of course oil companies are gonna up the price because the media has basically told them it's ok, the public is expecting it.

All seems to be a little odd, doesn't it?

[PemLam]

I've just accepted the fact that I'll pay whatever I need to in an effort to maintain the lifestyle my wife, kids and I have come to enjoy. If that means cutting back on niceties in order to pay $3.50 a gallon, so be it.

If I had the opportunity to make billions every quarter for my shareholders and to keep countless thousands employed, I'd do it to.

***That being said...I'm a big fan of the Fairtax. :o

[Handsome Rob]

Why is it that whenever I hear on the news that the government is going to look into gas prices, the immediately drop? Seems a little fishy if you ask me. I also blame the media, the media keeps telling people gas is gonna reach $4 a gallon this summer, of course oil companies are gonna up the price because the media has basically told them it's ok, the public is expecting it.

Part (I'm not sure how much) of the price increase is expected because of the switch to "summer blend" gasolines. Refineries have to shut down production to make the different types of gasoline that are used during the summer, along with other costs associated with making the switch. California is one of the main states that requires these "boutique" gasolines. When production has to shut down while switching to different types of gasoline, this increases the cost of gas at the pump. How much? I don't know . . . but it is a factor.

[Handsome Rob]

How much an oil company makes in profit (including "record" profits) really doesn't give you an accurate picture as to whether it is "sticking it" to the consumer. The only market in which it would is a market where a fixed number of individuals buy a fixed amount of gas that costs a fixed amount to get to market in a given period of time.

The best measure of profit for "are they sticking it to us?" purposes is looking at profit per unit of good sold. Here's a basic scenario that lays out what I'm talking about:

ABC makes a widget that they sell for $110. The total cost of producing this item is $100. In Year 1, they sell 1,000 items. Their profit for the year would be $10,000. In Year 2, they sell 1,010 items. The cost to produce remains the same, and so does the sales price. Their profit for Year 2 is $10,100. So, while keeping sales price and cost the same, they STILL manage to make a RECORD PROFIT. They made a record profit on $10 a unit simply by selling more than last year.

In Year 3, they decide to drop the price $1. In doing so, they sell 1200 units. Their profit for the year then becomes $10,800. When they reduced the price by $1 while keeping costs the same, they sold more and made a RECORD PROFIT over Year 2. So, by dropping their selling price to $109 and their per unit profit to $9, they still managed to set a record . . . but the consumer was better off for it (so was the company).

The reason I'm saying this is because "record profit" really doesn't mean anything in and of itself in determining if we're being charged too much. Selling more items, period, and even selling more items at a reduced price and per-unit profit level can still result in record profits. Sometime, I'm going to look over the income statements of different oil companies and see if I can determine their per/unit profit. I'll get back on here with what I find.

[SuBe]

How much an oil company makes in profit (including "record" profits) really doesn't give you an accurate picture as to whether it is "sticking it" to the consumer. The only market in which it would is a market where a fixed number of individuals buy a fixed amount of gas that costs a fixed amount to get to market in a given period of time.

The best measure of profit for "are they sticking it to us?" purposes is looking at profit per unit of good sold. Here's a basic scenario that lays out what I'm talking about:

ABC makes a widget that they sell for $110. The total cost of producing this item is $100. In Year 1, they sell 1,000 items. Their profit for the year would be $10,000. In Year 2, they sell 1,010 items. The cost to produce remains the same, and so does the sales price. Their profit for Year 2 is $10,100. So, while keeping sales price and cost the same, they STILL manage to make a RECORD PROFIT. They made a record profit on $10 a unit simply by selling more than last year.

In Year 3, they decide to drop the price $1. In doing so, they sell 1200 units. Their profit for the year then becomes $10,800. When they reduced the price by $1 while keeping costs the same, they sold more and made a RECORD PROFIT over Year 2. So, by dropping their selling price to $109 and their per unit profit to $9, they still managed to set a record . . . but the consumer was better off for it (so was the company).

The reason I'm saying this is because "record profit" really doesn't mean anything in and of itself in determining if we're being charged too much. Selling more items, period, and even selling more items at a reduced price and per-unit profit level can still result in record profits. Sometime, I'm going to look over the income statements of different oil companies and see if I can determine their per/unit profit. I'll get back on here with what I find.
What you are describeing is Profit Margin, in your scenerio, it is a 10% Profit Margin, for every dollar used to produce vs. Profit made equaling $10 or 10%. Or you could look at it Inclusively and it is about an 9.1% profit Margin. Depending on your Process of Measurement.

That is the Problem with our state of Education these days, most people can't tell you the difference in Profit and Profit Margin. Yet they keep hearing day after day that there is RECORD PROFITS, not knowing what that really means.

[SuBe]

I've just accepted the fact that I'll pay whatever I need to in an effort to maintain the lifestyle my wife, kids and I have come to enjoy. If that means cutting back on niceties in order to pay $3.50 a gallon, so be it.

If I had the opportunity to make billions every quarter for my shareholders and to keep countless thousands employed, I'd do it to.

***That being said...I'm a big fan of the Fairtax. :o
YES!!!!!:up:

[Handsome Rob]

That is the Problem with our state of Education these days, most people can't tell you the difference in Profit and Profit Margin. Yet they keep hearing day after day that there is RECORD PROFITS, not knowing what that really means.

You're absolutely right. It's amazing how many people will be led along by their politicians like sheep, simply because they haven't taken the time to both learn about the issue at hand and then think critically about it.

[SuBe]

You're absolutely right. It's amazing how many people will be led along by their politicians like sheep, simply because they haven't taken the time to both learn about the issue at hand and then think critically about it.
Here's a question for you:

Is it not the Government's responsibility to Educate Most of the Children of this Country? And if so, do they intentionally not teach them things like this to keep the Sheep from opening their eyes? How dangerous would the Population be to the Government if they actually understood the World around them?

This is why we have such wide spread ingorance in Socio/Economic matters. Most people don't understand Tax Structure and the Domino Effect that follows. Most People don't understand anymore than what the Media/Government Complex tells them. And for anyone who wants to misconstrue that, I'm talking about both sides of the aisle, not just Liberals. Remember, a Politicians one career goal is not to do public service, but maintain a Job. What better way to keep that job than keeping the public dependant on you?

[zenile]

Exxon reported both record revenues and record profits, ie net income, in 2007. Volume Production decreased in 4 of 6 operating segments from FY 2006, with an average decrease of 1% across all segments.

[SuBe]

This is one major reason Gas Prices keep going up and why we need a FairTax. This Politician wants to use the Tax Code to change your behavior:


Michigan Congressman Wants 50-Cent Tax Hike on Every Gallon of Gas

Wednesday, March 19, 2008
http://www.foxnews.com/images/foxnews_story.gif

A Michigan congressman wants to put a 50-cent tax on every gallon of gasoline to try to cut back on Americans' consumption.
Polls show that a majority of Americans support policies that would reduce greenhouse gases. But when it comes to paying for it, it's a different story.
Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., wants to help cut consumption with a gas tax but some don't agree with the idea, according to a new poll by the National Center for Public Policy Research.
The poll, scheduled to be released on Thursday, shows 48 percent don't support paying even a penny more, 28 percent would pay up to 50 cents more, 10 percent would pay more than 50 cents and 8 percent would pay more than a dollar.
"I don't want to pay more, I don't think anyone wants to," said Karen Deacon, a motorist.
"I think that wouldn't make any sense," said Frankie Hoe, a motorist. "Ugh ... who's making the money from all this and where is that money going? Is it going to go green? I don't see any green things anywhere."
The automobile is the nation's biggest polluter; Americans use more gas than the next 20 countries combined.

Some environmentalists and economists say pain at the pump may be bad for Americans, but good medicine for a sick planet.
But others say it wouldn't change much. Even if Americans abandoned their cars, global emissions would fall by less than one percent.
"A tax on gas is a way to reduce dependence on import oil, reduce traffic congrestion and reduce carbon emissions," said Lester Brown, president of the Earth Policy Institute.
The Earth Policy Institute proposes raising the gas tax 30 cents per gallon each year over a decade and offset with a reduction of income taxes, Brown said.
David Ridenour, vice president of the National Center for Public Policy Research, said the proposal wouldn't help long term.
"I think when you are talking about raising gas prices, there may be short-term reduction, put off vacations, but bottom line is over long term, that isn't going to have much of an effect," Ridenour said.
While Dingell's idea will likely lie dormant until after the 2008 election, the idea of carbon taxes is not. Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John McCain all support some type of system that either directly or indirectly will raise prices to penalize polluters.
FOX News' William La Jeunesse contributed to this report.

[Darthphere]

Redundant. Does that mean he'll stop driving as well?

[zenile]

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/2008-04-18-oil-prices_N.htm



By John Wilen, Associated Press
NEW YORK — Retail gas prices set records Friday on their seemingly relentless march toward $3.50 a gallon, and diesel prices pushed further above $4 a gallon. Crude futures, meanwhile, surged to a record of $117 a barrel.

The price of crude oil was pushed higher after a militant group in Nigeria said it had sabotaged a major oil pipeline operated by a Royal Dutch Shell joint venture and promised further attacks on the country's petroleum industry.

A spokeswoman for Shell confirmed that the pipeline was leaking, and said the damage appeared to have been caused by explosives. Nigeria is a major supplier of oil to the U.S.

The escalation in crude prices threatened to further boost gasoline costs.
At the pump, the national average price of regular gas rose 2.7 cents overnight to a record $3.445 a gallon, according to a survey of stations by AAA and the Oil Price Information Service. Diesel fuel added 2.2 cents to a record national average of $4.168 a gallon.

The spike in the cost of fuel is hurting consumers already feeling the effects of a slowing economy, a sluggish job market and falling home values. Soaring prices of diesel, which runs most of the world's trucks, trains, ships and heavy equipment, is a major factor pushing food prices higher.

Some analysts expect gas prices to peak near $3.80 a gallon; the Energy Department, in a recent forecast, said prices could average $4 a gallon nationally at times.

"I would say that energy prices are having the most profound effect on the economy in recent memory," said Phil Flynn, an analyst at Alaron Trading, in Chicago, in a research note.

Oil, meanwhile, pushed to records.

Light, sweet crude for May delivery rose to a new trading record of $117 in after-hours electronic trading Friday after settling up $1.83 at a record $116.69 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange. It was the fifth day crude prices set records.

Attacks since early 2006 on Nigerian oil infrastructure by the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta have cut nearly one-quarter of the country's normal petroleum output, boosting oil prices.

Oil's gains on Friday were limited by the dollar, which strengthened against the euro, sending oil prices lower earlier in the day. A stronger dollar makes commodities such as oil less attractive to investors as a hedge against inflation, and it makes oil more expensive to investors overseas. Analysts believe the weaker dollar is the primary reason oil has soared well past $100 a barrel this year.

Analysts expect the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates several more times this year — moves that tend to further weaken the dollar — and reason that those cuts will help propel oil to records.

Oil is not the only factor driving gas prices, which are also rising because refiners are switching from producing winter grade gasoline to the more expensive, but less polluting, version of the fuel they're required to sell during summer. When they do that each spring, they tend to draw supplies down to low levels as they try to sell off all their winter fuel.
Short supplies of alkylate, a blending component key to the creation of summer-grade gas, also have pushed prices higher. Contributing to the price spike, refiners have been cutting back on their production of gasoline, which has a low profit margin. Refiners have to buy the crude they process into gasoline, and soft demand for gas has prevented them from boosting pump prices fast enough to keep up with soaring crude futures.

"The refining margins were poor last month and, as a result, we've seen these voluntary ... or discretionary refining run cuts," said Jim Ritterbusch, president of Ritterbusch and Associates in Galena, Ill.
Ritterbusch estimates that the average difference between what refiners pay for oil and receive for the gasoline they make from it stands somewhere between $13 and $15 a barrel. But in some areas, this difference has actually gone negative at times in recent weeks, meaning that refiners "were losing money on each barrel of gasoline produced," Ritterbusch said.

In other Nymex trading Friday, May heating oil futures rose 2.49 cents to settle at $3.2923 a gallon while May gasoline futures rose 3.15 cents to settle at a record $2.9893 a gallon after earlier rising to a new trading record of $2.9934 a gallon.

May natural gas futures rose 20.4 cents to settle at $10.587 per 1,000 cubic feet.

In London, Brent crude futures rose $1.49 to settle at $113.92 a barrel on the ICE Futures exchange.

:wow::wow: Looks like I'll be filling up the tank with my rebate check :wow::wow:

[fifthfiend]

This is one major reason Gas Prices keep going up and why we need a FairTax.

So instead of a fifty cent sales tax for gas, you want to implement a thirty percent sales tax on gas? And this is somehow a good idea?

This Politician wants to use the Tax Code to change your behavior

Because it's certainly not like gasoline usage carries significant negative externalities or that said usage is not already massively subsidized by the federal government or any such kind of thing for which it would actually be entirely appropriate to expect gasoline owners to bear the cost, or anything totally crazy like that.

[BlackLantern]

I have a very short commute and my grocery store is within walking distance....so this whole gas thing doesn't affect me all that much....it sucks for my mom tho as she has a 30 minute commute

[The Senator]

So instead of a fifty cent sales tax for gas, you want to implement a thirty percent sales tax on gas? And this is somehow a good idea?

Wait... isn't thirty percent of the price we're paying for gas now equivalent to fifty cents? :huh:

[Handsome Rob]

So instead of a fifty cent sales tax for gas, you want to implement a thirty percent sales tax on gas? And this is somehow a good idea?


The 30% exclusive/23% inclusive FairTax would replace ALL taxes on gas. That includes the corporate taxes (income, employer's share of various employee taxes, sales taxes on products purchased, etc.) that the oil companies already pass along to the consumer in addition to the gas tax included at the pump. The gas tax is just the last embedded tax we pay for on gasoline--it's certainly not the only tax.

[Handsome Rob]

I have a very short commute and my grocery store is within walking distance....so this whole gas thing doesn't affect me all that much....it sucks for my mom tho as she has a 30 minute commute

Me, either. Last time I figured it up, gas would only really start impacting my bottom line if it goes over $6. As it stands, I fill up my SUV once every 12-14 days. So, that's two or three times a month. And, I have the option of biking to work a three days a week or so, which I'm going to look into. If I were at my old job with my 45-60 minute commute at my old pay, I'd be in trouble.

But, that was my old job . . . and my old pay. :woot:

[BlackLantern]

Me, either. Last time I figured it up, gas would only really start impacting my bottom line if it goes over $6. As it stands, I fill up my SUV once every 12-14 days. So, that's two or three times a month. And, I have the option of biking to work a three days a week or so, which I'm going to look into. If I were at my old job with my 45-60 minute commute at my old pay, I'd be in trouble.

But, that was my old job . . . and my old pay. :woot:

Oddly enough I had the same situation...my old job, with less pay than I make now, was a 25 minute commute....now I have a better paying job with a 5-10 minute commute, or If I feel really good about a 30 minute walk

[tzarinna]

I just got a job transfer and my first thought was "my god that's far and I'm going to have to cinch the **** up".
I really feel bad for the truck drivers, total despair.

[Malice]

Oddly enough I had the same situation...my old job, with less pay than I make now, was a 25 minute commute....now I have a better paying job with a 5-10 minute commute, or If I feel really good about a 30 minute walk

If my job was five minutes away by car, I would go spend 1000 dollar and buy a damn scooter. As long as I could get there by backroads.

[Arkady Rossovich]

The national average reached a record high today. Do you believe our government has an obligation to step in?

Is it disconcerning to anyone else that no politican seems to give a damn about this when prices at the pumps are severely hurting the middle class families?

Politicans say they want to help, but do nothing.

What are your thoughts?

I edited the post,but what is there..is the most important parts.

I will say this,there are 2 reasons for the gas prices..

1-Not enough supply. Gas is not a infinite resource,it will run out. It's sad that the country is shocked into looking for alternate sources. But with the wallet hurting as it is..people are now seriously considering it..and looking into it.

2-Other countries are using the gas and oil. Gone are the days where America can take most of the resources of the world,there are other counties who needs it..so they are taking it. Your comfortable life style is now over.

[MattBearPig]

$3.57 is the cheapest by my house.

[BlackLantern]

If my job was five minutes away by car, I would go spend 1000 dollar and buy a damn scooter. As long as I could get there by backroads.

I would if it was practical, but my office sits on a main drag with lots of traffic...going backroads would almost take double the time

[Little Foot]

Isn't there just as much a problem in the lack of consumer interest in Hydrogen fuel cell-powered vehicles? Ignoring altogether gas prices, there should still be a push for a transition to alternative fuels, and with such cars commercially available, it comes down to consumers uninterested in converting. Shouldn't consumers be just as readily blamed for high gas prices if they are unwilling to purchase a different commodity?
I immediately acknowledge that not everyone could immediately convert--the price is probably out of most Americans' budgets right now. But if there is a general interest in the product, more of the same will enter the market, and price would drop that way. Then, hopefully, the problems of gasoline prices could be largely ignored altogether by the general consumer.
http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/2046/littlefootqn3.gif

[Hotwire]

A few questions...
Is it a shock to anyone that the gas prices have nearly tripled since Bush, and oil man, became president?
Also, how is it that with the skyrocketing price of a barrel of oil, that oil companyies can post profits in the billions, and still gouge us one the price of their product?
And why, with all of those profits, can none of them build new refineries?
And waht about all the oil wells in Texas and Alaska? Where is that oil going?

[Marx]

A few questions...
Is it a shock to anyone that the gas prices have nearly tripled since Bush, and oil man, became president?
Also, how is it that with the skyrocketing price of a barrel of oil, that oil companyies can post profits in the billions, and still gouge us one the price of their product?
And why, with all of those profits, can none of them build new refineries?
And waht about all the oil wells in Texas and Alaska? Where is that oil going?

When I first paid for gas in 1996, it was 93 cents a gallon. How I miss those days! :csad:

[BlackLantern]

I don't believe any of the wells in Alaska are being tapped....the liberals and wildlife nuts won't let anyone near it....

[Marx]

I don't believe any of the wells in Alaska are being tapped....the liberals and wildlife nuts won't let anyone near it....

Some things in this world should remain preserved BL. Besides, if we would actually break our dependence on oil and create other viable forms of energy, we should. :cwink:

[The Senator]

I don't believe any of the wells in Alaska are being tapped....the liberals and wildlife nuts won't let anyone near it....

The problem isn't so much that it'd screw up one of the last pristine wildernesses in this country, but that gas prices wouldn't be all that affected if we were to drill in the Anwar region. Not only would it cost a lot to drill in that region, but the gas prices would only fall for a short amount of time before they went up again.

If they want to drill for oil in the United States, they should drill in ND and MT where there are vast oil fields left untapped.

[Hotwire]

The problem isn't so much that it'd screw up one of the last pristine wildernesses in this country, but that gas prices wouldn't be all that affected if we were to drill in the Anwar region. Not only would it cost a lot to drill in that region, but the gas prices would only fall for a short amount of time before they went up again.

If they want to drill for oil in the United States, they should drill in ND and MT where there are vast oil fields left untapped.
Good points. The whole idea with drilling in the U.S. is not so much to bring oil praices down for good, but more an attempt to lower them long enough to get an alternative in place.

[strikezone89]

there's absolutly no reason gas should be so expensive and theres no reason why the gov. hasnt stepped in.
i know at least where in live (midwest) our gas/oil doesnt even come from the middle east, we get most of our supply from canada.
the gov. needs to get off there lazy asses and do something about this.

also if they fixed the gas issue... it would stimulate the economy. people dont buy material things because they see the inflation all around them. and the number one thing people see rising is gas prices.
now if people see gas prices dropping then maybe they will go out and spend there money.

[Zen]

Me, either. Last time I figured it up, gas would only really start impacting my bottom line if it goes over $6. As it stands, I fill up my SUV once every 12-14 days. So, that's two or three times a month. And, I have the option of biking to work a three days a week or so, which I'm going to look into. If I were at my old job with my 45-60 minute commute at my old pay, I'd be in trouble.

But, that was my old job . . . and my old pay. :woot:

Biking to work...

**** YES!

you've just surprised me. :yay:

[Nivek]

there's absolutly no reason gas should be so expensive and theres no reason why the gov. hasnt stepped in.
i know at least where in live (midwest) our gas/oil doesnt even come from the middle east, we get most of our supply from canada.
the gov. needs to get off there lazy asses and do something about this.

also if they fixed the gas issue... it would stimulate the economy. people dont buy material things because they see the inflation all around them. and the number one thing people see rising is gas prices.
now if people see gas prices dropping then maybe they will go out and spend there money.


I agree with this opinion. The government has all these branches to protect consumers from gouging and corporate monopolies controlling market prices. But something like Gasoline needs as much government oversight as Cable Companies to protect a solid cornerstone of the United States economy and World Economy. Fuel is the lifeblood that keeps the economy moving. You inflate fuel prices double what they we're 8 years ago, all aspects of the economy needs to adjust. Hence, you have a good portion of the problems we have now.

[Little Foot]

I agree with this opinion. The government has all these branches to protect consumers from gouging and corporate monopolies controlling market prices. But something like Gasoline needs as much government oversight as Cable Companies to protect a solid cornerstone of the United States economy and World Economy. Fuel is the lifeblood that keeps the economy moving. You inflate fuel prices double what they we're 8 years ago, all aspects of the economy needs to adjust. Hence, you have a good portion of the problems we have now.

There is a problem with that logic, unfortunately. Companies like our cable companies and our insurance brokers are American companies. Even United Fruit and Nike, though worldwide industries, are American-based. Oil companies, however, though American, buy from OPEC, which is a foreign oligarchy that controls the price of the oil that it sells. As oil is abundant in the OPEC-based nations, and as the US has been reluctant to drill on its own soil (and I'm not arguing that we should), it's unfair to blame the government for lack of oversight, or to overly blame the companies for dealing with a system that they're not entirely in control of. I understand that prices don't have to be this high, but there are so many factors involved, that it would be hard to elicit real change. Anyway, more consumer interest should be redirected towards available alternative fuels (not ethanol or something like that, which still uses just as much or more fossil fuels in the end); in that scenario, the problem goes away entirely. Or at least I hope.
But what do I know? I'm just a little dinosaur.
http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/2046/littlefootqn3.gif

[Handsome Rob]

Biking to work...

**** YES!

you've just surprised me. :yay:

Hey, you do know "conservative" and "conservation" share the same roots, right? :woot:

[Hotwire]

There is a problem with that logic, unfortunately. Companies like our cable companies and our insurance brokers are American companies. Even United Fruit and Nike, though worldwide industries, are American-based. Oil companies, however, though American, buy from OPEC, which is a foreign oligarchy that controls the price of the oil that it sells. As oil is abundant in the OPEC-based nations, and as the US has been reluctant to drill on its own soil (and I'm not arguing that we should), it's unfair to blame the government for lack of oversight, or to overly blame the companies for dealing with a system that they're not entirely in control of. I understand that prices don't have to be this high, but there are so many factors involved, that it would be hard to elicit real change. Anyway, more consumer interest should be redirected towards available alternative fuels (not ethanol or something like that, which still uses just as much or more fossil fuels in the end); in that scenario, the problem goes away entirely. Or at least I hope.
But what do I know? I'm just a little dinosaur.
http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/2046/littlefootqn3.gif
Yes, Exxon-Mobile, Shell, and the other buy from OPEC, and yes OPEC controls the cost per barrell, yet... Somehow these companies are turning profits in the BILLIONS. We in the U.S. use around 146 billion gallons per year. Now, I had found it once before, but am having trouble relocating it now, but I seem to remember reading the oil profits exceded $146 billion. Surely they could afford to reduce the price of their product.

[BlackLantern]

Yes, Exxon-Mobile, Shell, and the other buy from OPEC, and yes OPEC controls the cost per barrell, yet... Somehow these companies are turning profits in the BILLIONS. We in the U.S. use around 146 billion gallons per year. Now, I had found it once before, but am having trouble relocating it now, but I seem to remember reading the oil profits exceded $146 billion. Surely they could afford to reduce the price of their product.

but they won't because too many in the government rely on Big Oil for campaign contributions and such.....the government can bluster on and on in hearings but they aren't going to do anything....

[Little Foot]

Yes, Exxon-Mobile, Shell, and the other buy from OPEC, and yes OPEC controls the cost per barrell, yet... Somehow these companies are turning profits in the BILLIONS. We in the U.S. use around 146 billion gallons per year. Now, I had found it once before, but am having trouble relocating it now, but I seem to remember reading the oil profits exceded $146 billion. Surely they could afford to reduce the price of their product.

Ha, very true, very good points. That recent Congressional hearing with the oil companies was quite hilarious. Especially when the execs confessed to those huge profits, and when challenged to invest more in resources, said that they were already trying. Exxon earned $40 billion in '07 and said that it was doing enough with $100 million in some research program. Oh well.
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN0120444320080401
http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/2046/littlefootqn3.gif

[Hotwire]

Ha, very true, very good points. That recent Congressional hearing with the oil companies was quite hilarious. Especially when the execs confessed to those huge profits, and when challenged to invest more in resources, said that they were already trying. Exxon earned $40 billion in '07 and said that it was doing enough with $100 million in some research program. Oh well.
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN0120444320080401
http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/2046/littlefootqn3.gif
With $40 billion, they could easily afford to build a few refineries.

No one ever answered this one, though...
Does anyone else find it and odd coincidence that with an oil man as the president, gas prices have nearly tripled?

[Little Foot]

With $40 billion, they could easily afford to build a few refineries.

Very good point, I agree. It's really quite hilarious, in a black comedy sort of way.

No one ever answered this one, though...
Does anyone else find it and odd coincidence that with an oil man as the president, gas prices have nearly tripled?

Yeah, I think that's just an odd coincidence. I'm more than willing to acknowledge that we now have the ability to mandate American control of Iraqi oil resources; I also am well aware of Halliburton's corruption, and its connection to Cheney. However, there have been oil peaks like this before--for instance, under Carter.

[wiegeabo]

Yes, Exxon-Mobile, Shell, and the other buy from OPEC, and yes OPEC controls the cost per barrell, yet... Somehow these companies are turning profits in the BILLIONS. We in the U.S. use around 146 billion gallons per year. Now, I had found it once before, but am having trouble relocating it now, but I seem to remember reading the oil profits exceded $146 billion. Surely they could afford to reduce the price of their product.

Not all of those record profits necessarily come from any kind of illegal activities. OPEC has refused to significantly increase oil production for some time now. Yet global demand (especially from countries like China) have been rising rapidly. As any economist can tell you, when supply stays the same and demand rises, prices go up or there's a shortage. So the oil companies have to pass on the costs of buying oil from OPEC to us by increasing gas prices.

OPEC has no need to ramp up production since they're probably already making more money they can count from the increased price of oil. And the oil companies can't lower the price of gas because that would just boost our consumption and cause a shortage. This means that the oil companies could be getting huge profits because the cost of refining might be much lower than the price of gas, but they're already at maximum (or near max) production to meet demand. So they can just keep raising the price and make money because we're still willing (have no alternative) to pay for it. And the catch is, if they did try to lower gas prices, we'd just buy more gas and push the price right back up or cause a shortage.

[wiegeabo]

With $40 billion, they could easily afford to build a few refineries.

No one ever answered this one, though...
Does anyone else find it and odd coincidence that with an oil man as the president, gas prices have nearly tripled?


But refineries take time to build. Even if they started one today, it may take a few years to get it online. That doesn't do us any good now. And if they're already refining all the oil they can get from OPEC anyway, then there's no point in building a new refinery. Now, if the refineries aren't maxed out in capacity (but they are refining all the oil they get) then what we could use is a new source of oil to tap and ramp up supply.

Of course, what we need in the long run are non-oil fuel sources. Hopefully, with gas prices so high, and all the money that can be made supplying energy (as seen by these record oil profits) non-oil energy is looking very profitable as well.

[Little Foot]

Not all of those record profits necessarily come from any kind of illegal activities. OPEC has refused to significantly increase oil production for some time now. Yet global demand (especially from countries like China) have been rising rapidly. As any economist can tell you, when supply stays the same and demand rises, prices go up or there's a shortage. So the oil companies have to pass on the costs of buying oil from OPEC to us by increasing gas prices.

OPEC has no need to ramp up production since they're probably already making more money they can count from the increased price of oil. And the oil companies can't lower the price of gas because that would just boost our consumption and cause a shortage. This means that the oil companies could be getting huge profits because the cost of refining might be much lower than the price of gas, but they're already at maximum (or near max) production to meet demand. So they can just keep raising the price and make money because we're still willing (have no alternative) to pay for it. And the catch is, if they did try to lower gas prices, we'd just buy more gas and push the price right back up or cause a shortage.

I never got the impression that the issue at hand was whether the oil companies were operating legally or illegally.
http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/2046/littlefootqn3.gif

[BlackLantern]

I'm not defending the President by any means but its not like he can hit a button and raise the price of oil....I think OPEC just sees how dependent the US and the west is on oil and is capitalizing on that dependence

[Little Foot]

I'm not defending the President by any means but its not like he can hit a button and raise the price of oil....I think OPEC just sees how dependent the US and the west is on oil and is capitalizing on that dependence

The problem is that this issue is so multifaceted that it becomes difficult to offer an appropriate solution, if there is one. I think that everyone can agree to that.

[wiegeabo]

I never got the impression that the issue at hand was whether the oil companies were operating legally or illegally.
http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/2046/littlefootqn3.gif


I have no idea if they are or aren't operating illegally. But I doubt, even if they are, all of those profits are coming from them. Of course, any illegal activities should be stopped and prosecuted, but I still think most of these high prices come from a ton of other factors (low OPEC supply, rising global demand, lack of competition and alternatives...)

[wiegeabo]

The problem is that this issue is so multifaceted that it becomes difficult to offer an appropriate solution, if there is one. I think that everyone can agree to that.

Agreed. Fixing any single thing may not help, and could make things worse.

[Marx]

I'm not defending the President by any means but its not like he can hit a button and raise the price of oil....I think OPEC just sees how dependent the US and the west is on oil and is capitalizing on that dependence

OR CAN HE??? Hmm.... :hehe:

[Little Foot]

I have no idea if they are or aren't operating illegally. But I doubt, even if they are, all of those profits are coming from them. Of course, any illegal activities should be stopped and prosecuted, but I still think most of these high prices come from a ton of other factors (low OPEC supply, rising global demand, lack of competition and alternatives...)

Yeah, I agree completely. My point was, I wasn't under the impression that anyone felt that they were acting illegally, although I could be easily mistaken.
http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/2046/littlefootqn3.gif

[BlackLantern]

http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/2046/littlefootqn3.gif

Let's melt this little turd down for oil....we could probably get half a barrel out of him.....and doesn't this violate some kind of sig rule?

[wiegeabo]

Yeah, I agree completely. My point was, I wasn't under the impression that anyone felt that they were acting illegally, although I could be easily mistaken.
http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/2046/littlefootqn3.gif

Oh, ok.

Surprisingly, I don't think they have acted illegally. Or, at least, I'm not yet convinced they have. I think they're benefiting from a windfall of situations that have just made this the best year to be a oil company.


We'll see how well they'll be fairing when the easy oil runs out over the next few decades.

[Little Foot]

Let's melt this little turd down for oil....we could probably get half a barrel out of him.....and doesn't this violate some kind of sig rule?

Gosh--Little Foot's the lover, not the hater. Anyway, there's probably a good chance that he's a "fossil fuel" now. Oh how corny of me.

Oh, ok.

Surprisingly, I don't think they have acted illegally. Or, at least, I'm not yet convinced they have. I think they're benefiting from a windfall of situations that have just made this the best year to be a oil company.


We'll see how well they'll be fairing when the easy oil runs out over the next few decades.

I agree.

[Lightning Strykez!]

Honestly? I am shocked that this problem has been "allowed" to go on for as long as it has. No one--not the President, the House Speaker, Congress--NO ONE--has stepped in or even said anything to the American people about this. Frankly I find it disgusting that people have to make a choice between filling up their gas tanks versus eating a meal because their hungry.

:mad:

[Little Foot]

Honestly? I am shocked that this problem has been "allowed" to go on for as long as it has. No one--not the President, the House Speaker, Congress--NO ONE--has stepped in or even said anything to the American people about this. Frankly I find it disgusting that people have to make a choice between filling up their gas tanks versus eating a meal because their hungry.

:mad:

I'd like to again call attention to the recent Congressional hearings on the subject.

[BlackLantern]

I'd like to again call attention to the recent Congressional hearings on the subject.

which were a joke....I've seen pond scum with more backbone

[Lightning Strykez!]

I'd like to again call attention to the recent Congressional hearings on the subject.

And I'd like to call to mind that gas prices are 20 cents away from FOUR FRICKEN DOLLARS HERE. :mad:

[Little Foot]

And I'd like to call to mind that gas prices are 20 cents away from FOUR FRICKEN DOLLARS HERE. :mad:

I'm not arguing with you here. I agree that something should be done, and that the United States government has not done much in regards to the issue. But it was factually inaccurate to say that no one in government had spoken on the matter. I'm not here to make you an enemy. I'm here to be...me.
...
...
Call me...LITTLE FOOT.http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/2046/littlefootqn3.gif

[Lightning Strykez!]

I'm not arguing with you here. I agree that something should be done, and that the United States government has not done much in regards to the issue. But it was factually inaccurate to say that no one in government had spoken on the matter. I'm not here to make you an enemy. I'm here to be...me.
...
...
Call me...LITTLE FOOT.http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/2046/littlefootqn3.gif

Awww....

And you can call me Fee-Fee. :)

http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2007/05/29/tubbies_narrowweb__300x334,0.jpg

Now let's cuddle-wuddle!

[wiegeabo]

Found this eye-opening statistic. One average, for every 5 mph you go over 60, you're paying an extra $0.20 a gallon. http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/driveHabits.shtml

So, if you're a compulsive speeder, you may want to think about that.


I also heard a statistic that if everyone increased their gas mileage by just 2 mpg, we'd be able to cut our dependence of foreign oil. Damned if I can find the source right now, but I'm still looking.

[Little Foot]

Awww....

And you can call me Fee-Fee. :)

http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2007/05/29/tubbies_narrowweb__300x334,0.jpg

Now let's cuddle-wuddle!

Sarcasm? Yes. But I respect you for that.

Found this eye-opening statistic. One average, for every 5 mph you go over 60, you're paying an extra $0.20 a gallon. http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/driveHabits.shtml

So, if you're a compulsive speeder, you may want to think about that.


I also heard a statistic that if everyone increased their gas mileage by just 2 mpg, we'd be able to cut our dependence of foreign oil. Damned if I can find the source right now, but I'm still looking.

Noooooo! That's impossible! MUST...SPEED...

Seriously, I'm horrible about speeding.

[wiegeabo]

Noooooo! That's impossible! MUST...SPEED...

Seriously, I'm horrible about speeding.


Cruise control is your friend. :cwink:

[Little Foot]

Cruise control is your friend. :cwink:
My car is...aging horribly. Cruise control doesn't work, and I can't afford to fix it, being a college student and what-not. :csad:

[wiegeabo]

Hmmm, than I have only one thing to say.

$0.20 per gallon. It's probably more with an oder car.

[Little Foot]

Hmmm, than I have only one thing to say.

$0.20 per gallon. It's probably more with an oder car.

I know, and it sucks. But until I have the resources to transition...

[wiegeabo]

I didn't mean that. I meant no more speeding. I have a long commute to work, so I feel the pain too. I spent over two grand in gas last year. Now, I'm on pace to break three. :(

[Little Foot]

I didn't mean that. I meant no more speeding. I have a long commute to work, so I feel the pain too. I spent over two grand in gas last year. Now, I'm on pace to break three. :(

Oh, don't worry, I wasn't offended or anything. I understood what you meant, and I could definitely cut back on the speeding. I'm just...acknowledging the poor gas mileage that I'm stuck with. Not bad, but with mileages in the 30s and 40s now for new cars (at least), just over 20 doesn't seem so wonderful--though I know there's much worse out there.
http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/2046/littlefootqn3.gif

[wiegeabo]

Oh, don't worry, I wasn't offended or anything. I understood what you meant, and I could definitely cut back on the speeding. I'm just...acknowledging the poor gas mileage that I'm stuck with. Not bad, but with mileages in the 30s and 40s now for new cars (at least), just over 20 doesn't seem so wonderful--though I know there's much worse out there.
http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/2046/littlefootqn3.gif


There is. My truck's lucky to get 20. Which is why I make my sister drive it since she had the shorter commute. :D Of course she speeds. When she drives the car, she gets 25. When I drive it, I get 30. (I actually got 34 this last fillup and damn near had a party.)

[Little Foot]

There is. My truck's lucky to get 20. Which is why I make my sister drive it since she had the shorter commute. :D Of course she speeds. When she drives the car, she gets 25. When I drive it, I get 30. (I actually got 34 this last fillup and damn near had a party.)

Wow--that's an impressive increase.:wow:

[Marx]

I'm not arguing with you here. I agree that something should be done, and that the United States government has not done much in regards to the issue. But it was factually inaccurate to say that no one in government had spoken on the matter. I'm not here to make you an enemy. I'm here to be...me.
...
...
Call me...LITTLE FOOT.http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/2046/littlefootqn3.gif

Awww....

And you can call me Fee-Fee. :)

http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2007/05/29/tubbies_narrowweb__300x334,0.jpg

Now let's cuddle-wuddle!

There are times on this forum when I am quite frightened! Now...is one of those times.

[Little Foot]

There are times on this forum when I am quite fightened! Now...is one of those times.

Give in to your urge to adopt a childish monicker!
http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/2046/littlefootqn3.gif

[wiegeabo]

Wow--that's an impressive increase.:wow:

I agree. Which is why I think everyone should be able to bump there's up at least 2.

[Little Foot]

I agree. Which is why I think everyone should be able to bump there's up at least 2.

Yeah, I definitely understand now.

[Zen]

http://www.fit-life.info/cache/200px-BMX_rider_silhouette.jpg

[wiegeabo]

Bunch of tips for upping gas mileage and sticking it to the man:

1) This one is so simple, it's almost stupid. Keep track of your mileage. It's surprising how much better you'll drive when you realize what you're spending. Just keep track of the miles since your last fillup and divide by the gallons of the next fillup. Make it a game and try to beat your high score. Make it a competition and try to beat your friend's best scores (or percent improvement).

2) Don't speed. It's cliche but true. Driving 55 uses 20% less gas than 70. So slowing down should at least get you 10%.

3) Get that crap out of your car. Every 100 pounds you take out is a 1% increase. So take those boxes of books out of the back seat. Dump that dead body wrapped in the rug out of your trunk. Lose some weight. Whatever you have to do, lighten the load.

4) Get that crap off your car. Yes that bike/luggage/ski rack may weigh your car down a bit. But what it's really doing is killing your car's aerodynamics because they cause a lot of drag. If you don't need them, take them off.

5) Brake better. Braking eats your gas mileage because you lose speed you spent gas building up, and you have to burn gas to speed up again. Just leaving a bigger gap between the car in front of you gives you more time to coast or brake less. And if you're coming up to a red light, go ahead and just take your foot of the gas so you don't have to brake so hard (and maybe not have to stop at all when the light changes).

6) Keep those tires inflated. Not only is it safer, but it can save you 1% n mileage.

7) Cruise control is your friend. Moving up and down in speed eats gas. Cruise control can keep you at a steady pace, and improve engine efficiency. But it's best used on a flat highway. Don't use it in-town, or on a hilly road (since cruise control will accelerate up a hill and brake going down, both of which waste gas).

8) Don't fill up until you need to. Gas weighs a lot, and the less gas you have in your tank, the less gas you have to burn to move your car. So wait until you're below a quarter tank. Just don't risk running out.

9) Low RPM shifting (manual transmissions). Manual transmissions tend to get better mileage because you can control when shifting happens. Shifting up early and shifting down late can save gas. (In automatic transmission cars, always drive with the overdrive gear on since it's more efficient.)

10) Shifting into neutral (automatic transmissions). When idling, your car gets 0 mpg. But it uses less gas when idling in neutral instead of drive. This is because the engine doesn't need to work as hard. Neutral also gives your transmission a chance to cool down, which can reduce wear and tear. BIG WARNINGS: Only do this when you'll be idling for a long time (like at a long red or waiting for a train to pass). Frequent shifting can actually add more wear and tear than neutral would save. You'll end up spending more in transmission repair than saving in gas. Also, never coast downhill in neutral. It'll eat up your brakes and is usually illegal.

11) Windows or air conditioner? The best thing to do is keep your windows up and not use the AC. But that's rarely possible. Your car's drag increases when the windows are down. But the AC eats gas too. Once you get over 40, the drag outweighs the AC. So the rule of thumb is, windows down in-town, AC on the highway.

12) Enjoy the slipstream. But don't tailgate a semi-truck! Because you don't need to. Driving behind a semi not only saves gas because you're driving slower, but even 150 feet behind a semi you can cut your wind drag by 10-20%.

13) Purely a money saving tip, but get a cash back credit card and only buy gas with it. Then pay the card off before you get any finance charges. This means your credit card becomes an ATM, and you'll get money back. (I get 1% back for 3 quarters of the year, and 5% during the other quarter.) And you'll boost your credit rating too.

[BlackLantern]

good info thanks for that

[Little Foot]

Thanks for the tips!

[Tron5000]

Gas prices are currently $0.70 more per gallon than at this same time last year. The average American uses approximately 15 gallons of gas per week. That means that it is costing you an extra $10.50 per week to drive than it cost you at this time last year.

If you haven't been able to produce an extra $10.50 a week, then you don't need to be driving. You got bigger problems.

[rdh007]

I bought gas on Monday and paid 3.42. I ran some errands at noontime the next day and it was 3.69. I am confused.

[rdh007]

Gas prices are currently $0.70 more per gallon than at this same time last year. The average American uses approximately 15 gallons of gas per week. That means that it is costing you an extra $10.50 per week to drive than it cost you at this time last year.

If you haven't been able to produce an extra $10.50 a week, then you don't need to be driving. You got bigger problems.
What if you're on a fixed income and it hasn't gone up $11/week? Oh, lemme guess, when we go to the fairtax, you'll make more money than you can imagine while dancing in a field of daisies and rainbows.

[jaguarr]

What if you're on a fixed income and it hasn't gone up $11/week? Oh, lemme guess, when we go to the fairtax, you'll make more money than you can imagine while dancing in a field of daisies and rainbows.

He doesn't have time for details like that. He's too busy making more money than poor people. Poor people don't need to drive, anyway. They just get in the way of the people like him who are on the road who have places to be and money to make!

jag

[BlackLantern]

He doesn't have time for details like that. He's too busy making more money than poor people. Poor people don't need to drive, anyway. They just get in the way of the people like him who are on the road who have places to be and money to make!

jag

Why are the poor people out of their pen or cage or whatever? Just keep them locked up in Wal-mart...that's where they all work and that place has everything they need so they shouldn't be out and about anyway

[rdh007]

They have to go to the Medicaid offices so that those of us who do work can pay for their healthcare. Zod knows the Waltons shouldn't have to pay for it.

[Tron5000]

What if you're on a fixed income and it hasn't gone up $11/week? Oh, lemme guess, when we go to the fairtax, you'll make more money than you can imagine while dancing in a field of daisies and rainbows.

If you're on a fixed income, you need to get a job that offers some advancement. Or maybe cut out the text messaging. Or the extra 200 channels you pay for on DirecTV. Or maybe cook a meal once in a while instead of eating out. Or buy used CDs and DVDs instead of new ones. Or pass up that 6 pack or that bag of weed.

Nice job with the FairTax comment, though. Very clever. Keep up the good work.

[jaguarr]

If you're on a fixed income, you need to get a job that offers some advancement. Or maybe cut out the text messaging. Or the extra 200 channels you pay for on DirecTV. Or maybe cook a meal once in a while instead of eating out. Or buy used CDs and DVDs instead of new ones. Or pass up that 6 pack or that bag of weed.



Or maybe those people should get their 75 year old asses out into the workforce? :dry:

jag

[Tron5000]

Or maybe those people should get their 75 year old asses out into the workforce? :dry:

jag

If you are 75 years old and you have lived in America for an extended period of time and have not been able to properly save and invest your money so that you can afford an extra $10.50 a week, you don't need to be driving anywhere. You obviously need someone else to take care of you since your poor decisions over the 75 years of your life have left you unable to care for yourself.

[SuBe]

What if you're on a fixed income and it hasn't gone up $11/week? Oh, lemme guess, when we go to the fairtax, you'll make more money than you can imagine while dancing in a field of daisies and rainbows.
Actually yes, with the FairTax, they would recieve 100% of their Paycheck vs today, that would help pay their Gas needs, plus they would get the PreBate Check once a month to pay their Tax Liability up to the Poverty level, so they wouldn't by paying any taxes at all until they pass spending after the Poverty level, which is roughly $883 a month. So, they would have more money from their Paycheck, the Prebate, no taxes on investment, no Taxes Liability on Education (Helps out College Kids), and more economic oppurtunity due to more Jobs because of International Business moving to the United States because of 0% Corporate Taxes. So, yes, there is more economic oppurtunity, and Gas prices will be cheaper, because of no Corporate Taxes, you receive 100% of your Paycheck, receive the Prebate, and only a 23% tax on the Retail price of the Gas. So, yes, the FairTax will help this.

You have to keep in mind that the Corporate Taxes Oil Companies paid in 2004, $58 Billion, so you will see prices fall by roughly $58 Billion a year, but add $0.23 to each $0.77 of gas, which is Far Far cheaper than the $58 Billion, plus $0.18 Federal Tax per Gallon of Gas.

[jaguarr]

If you are 75 years old and you have lived in America for an extended period of time and have not been able to properly save and invest your money so that you can afford an extra $10.50 a week, you don't need to be driving anywhere. You obviously need someone else to take care of you since your poor decisions over the 75 years of your life have left you unable to care for yourself.

Wow. Strong elitism. :down

jag

[Tron5000]

Wow. Strong elitism. :down

jag

It's not "elitism." It's reality. If you're 75 years old and can't afford gas, you are a failure. Plain and simple. When I'm 75, I won't be asking my kids or the government to help take care of me. I'll have money in my bank account, because I'm not an idiot.

[jaguarr]

It's not "elitism." It's reality. If you're 75 years old and can't afford gas, you are a failure. Plain and simple. When I'm 75, I won't be asking my kids or the government to help take care of me. I'll have money in my bank account, because I'm not an idiot.


Wow more strong elitism coupled with an inability to look at life through anyone else's eyes or circumstances but your own. :down

jag

[Hotwire]

Gas prices are currently $0.70 more per gallon than at this same time last year. The average American uses approximately 15 gallons of gas per week. That means that it is costing you an extra $10.50 per week to drive than it cost you at this time last year.

If you haven't been able to produce an extra $10.50 a week, then you don't need to be driving. You got bigger problems.
And if you're someone like me, who has to drive long distances for work? I recently took a trip that, four years ago, would have cost me around $45 in gas, has now cost me $90. My pay has not changed, and before you start with the Fair Tax thing, I already get 100% of my check. Perhaps you may not be adversly effected by the high fuel prices, but most of us are, and for you to sit there and trivialize it, and try to rationalize it with averages, is just smug, to say the least.

[Tron5000]

Wow more strong elitism coupled with an inability to look at life through anyone else's eyes or circumstances but your own. :down

jag

It's all fine and good to use catchphrases like "elitism," but you're not addressing the issue. Why can't these elderly people pay for gas? Because they have made poor decisions throughout their life. Working 40 hours a week instead of 50 or 60. Spending money on booze instead of making that money work for you. Buying things you can't afford. Having kids you can't afford. Not furthering your education or workplace experience that would help you advance in life.

How about looking at life through the eyes of those who have achieved and succeeded? Oh, I forget. People who have money saved up are probably just "fortunate" or were "given" that money. They didn't work hard for it or anything.

[Tron5000]

And if you're someone like me, who has to drive long distances for work? I recently took a trip that, four years ago, would have cost me around $45 in gas, has now cost me $90. My pay has not changed, and before you start with the Fair Tax thing, I already get 100% of my check. Perhaps you may not be adversly effected by the high fuel prices, but most of us are, and for you to sit there and trivialize it, and try to rationalize it with averages, is just smug, to say the least.

Your pay has not increased in 4 years? Might want to look into a career change there.

[jaguarr]

It's all fine and good to use catchphrases like "elitism," but you're not addressing the issue. Why can't these elderly people pay for gas? Because they have made poor decisions throughout their life. Working 40 hours a week instead of 50 or 60. Spending money on booze instead of making that money work for you. Buying things you can't afford. Having kids you can't afford. Not furthering your education or workplace experience that would help you advance in life.

How about looking at life through the eyes of those who have achieved and succeeded? Oh, I forget. People who have money saved up are probably just "fortunate" or were "given" that money. They didn't work hard for it or anything.

Wow. Strong elitism and sterotyping of poor people who didn't have the advantages you had growing up and had to work multiple jobs to feed their families, make sacrifices just to have a roof over their head, served in the military by force of a draft and were left with little to no options when they got out of the service, never had the opportunity to go to college like you, possibly were disabled on the job or in the service, etc., etc. But to you they're all lazy alcoholics who barely worked 40 hours a week, wasted whatever money they DID have and didn't try to get ahead in life. Got it. :down

jag

[Hotwire]

It's all fine and good to use catchphrases like "elitism," but you're not addressing the issue. Why can't these elderly people pay for gas? Because they have made poor decisions throughout their life. Working 40 hours a week instead of 50 or 60. Spending money on booze instead of making that money work for you. Buying things you can't afford. Having kids you can't afford. Not furthering your education or workplace experience that would help you advance in life.

How about looking at life through the eyes of those who have achieved and succeeded? Oh, I forget. People who have money saved up are probably just "fortunate" or were "given" that money. They didn't work hard for it or anything.
You worked hard, made some money, good for you. But the way you look down at those who have not made it, is sad. You do not know their situations. Perhaps they had made it, were well off, and then a severe illness hit, they found out they were underinsured, and now they're broke. But hey, they didn't plan for it, so tuff s***, right?

[SuBe]

And if you're someone like me, who has to drive long distances for work? I recently took a trip that, four years ago, would have cost me around $45 in gas, has now cost me $90. My pay has not changed, and before you start with the Fair Tax thing, I already get 100% of my check. Perhaps you may not be adversly effected by the high fuel prices, but most of us are, and for you to sit there and trivialize it, and try to rationalize it with averages, is just smug, to say the least.
You will be getting an extra $196 a month if you are single a month to offset your Taxes on Necessities. So, yes, the Fairtax will help.

[Hotwire]

Your pay has not increased in 4 years? Might want to look into a career change there.
I happen to enjoy what I do.

[Hotwire]

You will be getting an extra $196 a month if you are single a month to offset your Taxes on Necessities. So, yes, the Fairtax will help.
Well hot damn, my wife can quit her job!

[SuBe]

Well hot damn, my wife can quit her job!
Would that not help your Gas costs and Taxes on Food? If your are married you actually get $399 a month to cover your Taxes below the poverty level, that is extra money. You should be happy.

[Tron5000]

Wow. Strong elitism and sterotyping of poor people who didn't have the advantages you had growing up and had to work multiple jobs to feed their families, make sacrifices just to have a roof over their head, served in the military by force of a draft and were left with little to no options when they got out of the service, never had the opportunity to go to college like you, possibly were disabled on the job or in the service, etc., etc. But to you they're all lazy alcoholics who barely worked 40 hours a week, wasted whatever money they DID have and didn't try to get ahead in life. Got it. :down

jag

And what advantages did I have that others did not? You seem to be knowledgeable on the subject, so help me out with that.

I work 2 jobs. Some weeks I work nearly 70 hours. I'm working hard and saving money so that I can go back to school in the fall and finish the courses I need to get a degree, which will in turn help me get a better-paying job. Then I won't be working 2 jobs anymore.

Don't tell me about working hard. Don't tell me about advantages. I don't get a dime from anyone but my employers. I bust my ass every single day to pay my bills and save money for the future. So, yes, when other people don't work hard and want things to be taken care of by other people, I do view them as "lazy."

[Tron5000]

I happen to enjoy what I do.

Then don't complain about your pay. You like your job, so you choose to accept the wage that your employer pays you. But then you complain about prices going up. Well, seems to me you're choosing your lifestyle, but you want to b**** about things that are out of your control, rather than bettering your economic situation by doing things that you can control.

[jaguarr]

And what advantages did I have that others did not? You seem to be knowledgeable on the subject, so help me out with that.

I work 2 jobs. Some weeks I work nearly 70 hours. I'm working hard and saving money so that I can go back to school in the fall and finish the courses I need to get a degree, which will in turn help me get a better-paying job. Then I won't be working 2 jobs anymore.

Don't tell me about working hard. Don't tell me about advantages. I don't get a dime from anyone but my employers. I bust my ass every single day to pay my bills and save money for the future. So, yes, when other people don't work hard and want things to be taken care of by other people, I do view them as "lazy."

Good for you for working so hard. You're still an elitist.

jag

[SuBe]

Good for you for working so hard. You're still an elitist.

jag
Is it wrong to work for money instead of taking it from other Taxpayers?

[Tron5000]

Good for you for working so hard. You're still an elitist.

jag

You still didn't tell me what "advantages" I had that other people did not. I grew up in America, went to public school, and have paid my own way in this world since I graduated high school at age 17. I don't accept handouts. I paid for school (and I will, myself, with the money that I make from working 2 jobs, pay to finish my schooling).

Since you mentioned the "advantages" that I've enjoyed that others did not, can you inform me of what these "advantages" may be?

[Hotwire]

Then don't complain about your pay. You like your job, so you choose to accept the wage that your employer pays you. But then you complain about prices going up. Well, seems to me you're choosing your lifestyle, but you want to b**** about things that are out of your control, rather than bettering your economic situation by doing things that you can control.
That's what us lazy, alcoholics do.

But hey, if anything increases in price, you're right, we should all find better paying jobs to make sure we can afford them. Of course, then there would be no one to work the low paying service jobs.

[Hotwire]

Is it wrong to work for money instead of taking it from other Taxpayers?
No, but to turn your nose up at those less fortunate than yourself, and call them lazy, is.

[Darthphere]

Tron5000 is in for a rude awakening when all that money he has saved up in the bank disappears during the next economic crisis. LAWL!

[Tron5000]

That's what us lazy, alcoholics do.

But hey, if anything increases in price, you're right, we should all find better paying jobs to make sure we can afford them. Of course, then there would be no one to work the low paying service jobs.

The world needs ditch diggers.

You're obviously comfortable in your present situation, being that you like your job and all. But then you want to complain about prices rising while your pay is not. So, the fact that your purchasing power is lower than it once was is reflective of your decision to remain at your job while your pay does not increase. But instead of trying to change the situation, you'd rather just complain about prices. Don't do anything about it; just sit there and complain, and hope someone comes along to save you.

[Darthphere]

And what advantages did I have that others did not? You seem to be knowledgeable on the subject, so help me out with that.

I work 2 jobs. Some weeks I work nearly 70 hours. I'm working hard and saving money so that I can go back to school in the fall and finish the courses I need to get a degree, which will in turn help me get a better-paying job. Then I won't be working 2 jobs anymore.

Don't tell me about working hard. Don't tell me about advantages. I don't get a dime from anyone but my employers. I bust my ass every single day to pay my bills and save money for the future. So, yes, when other people don't work hard and want things to be taken care of by other people, I do view them as "lazy."

A degree in what? Because just having a degree isn't a guarantee of you having a job, or keeping a job long term. Just ask people with degrees that worked for Enron.

[Tron5000]

No, but to turn your nose up at those less fortunate than yourself, and call them lazy, is.

What makes me so "fortunate" that also makes other people "less fortunate"?

If you want to use "less"-something, how about...Less educated. Less driven to succeed. Less willing to make sacrifices.

[jaguarr]

Is it wrong to work for money instead of taking it from other Taxpayers?

Not at all. In fact, it's preferred and everyone should do it if they are able to do so. But we're not talking about people leeching off the system. We're talking about people who have very restricted incomes due to their circumstances or retirement that are having difficulties due to the economy being so FUBAR, including the gas prices. They're being adversely affected by circumstances beyond their control to a far greater degree than other folks in the populace because of it. In many instances, it's not because they didn't plan for COLA increases in the economy in their retirement planning; they just didn't expect such sharp increases (nor did their financial planners).

You still didn't tell me what "advantages" I had that other people did not. I grew up in America, went to public school, and have paid my own way in this world since I graduated high school at age 17. I don't accept handouts. I paid for school (and I will, myself, with the money that I make from working 2 jobs, pay to finish my schooling).

Since you mentioned the "advantages" that I've enjoyed that others did not, can you inform me of what these "advantages" may be?

Well, let's see, here. Apparently you are able-bodied enough to work. Many people are not. To my knowledge you have never been drafted into a war and suffered physical and/or emotional trauma as a result that left you unable to work a normal job, nor were you summarily abandoned by your government when it came to covering your health care expenses and the opportunity to get an education after your service. To my knowledge you didn't have a learning disability that went undiagnosed because such things didn't really exist 50 years ago that made it difficult for you to pursue a higher education or even just graduate high school. To my knowledge, you weren't pulled out of school as a child to work on the family farm or in the family factory to help make ends meet for the entire family, thus ruining your chances of getting an advanced education. To my knowledge, you've never had a health crisis that your insurance didn't cover you for like long-term cancer, leaving you with horrendous levels of medical bills that pretty much left you destitute, even after the bankruptcy. To my knowledge, you apparently have the advantage of being able to go to college due to your satisfactory grades, your ability to garner employment that allows you to pay for that (also a product of your education that not everyone had, particularly when said 75 year olds were your age) and possibly some eligibility for student loans, scholarships or grants. Probably more to add to that list, but frankly, I'm tired of addressing your elitism. Go on about your day, looking down upon those less fortunate than you.

jag

[jaguarr]

A degree in what? Because just having a degree isn't a guarantee of you having a job, or keeping a job long term. Just ask people with degrees that worked for Enron.

There are so many people with MBA's flipping burgers at McDonald's, it's mindboggling.

jag

[Darthphere]

There are so many people with MBA's flipping burgers at McDonald's, it's mindboggling.

jag

Yeah, I have people at my job which is retail who have degrees and are working for barely $8 an hour.

Also, the elitism in this thread is mindboggling.

[SuBe]

I just want to talk about the FairTax. :(

[Darthphere]

I know, I know.

Also, I'm still laughing at how incredibly naive Tron is thinking his money is safe in his bank account. It's almost dare I say, ROFLCopter worthy.

[fifthfiend]

And what advantages did I have that others did not? You seem to be knowledgeable on the subject, so help me out with that.

I work 2 jobs. Some weeks I work nearly 70 hours. I'm working hard and saving money so that I can go back to school in the fall and finish the courses I need to get a degree, which will in turn help me get a better-paying job. Then I won't be working 2 jobs anymore.

Don't tell me about working hard. Don't tell me about advantages. I don't get a dime from anyone but my employers. I bust my ass every single day to pay my bills and save money for the future. So, yes, when other people don't work hard and want things to be taken care of by other people, I do view them as "lazy."

Congratulations on being a masochist. The people who aren't in love with misery think maybe they shouldn't have to completely throw their lives away just to have a slim shot at financial security.

[Darthphere]

Congratulations on being a masochist. The people who aren't in love with misery think maybe they shouldn't have to completely throw their lives away just to have a slim shot at financial security.

This post wins at the internet.

[zenile]

Dang...Tron works 70+ hours a week and still manages to post in every single thread in the politics forum. This guy must not sleep :whatever:

[Tron5000]

Not at all. In fact, it's preferred and everyone should do it if they are able to do so. But we're not talking about people leeching off the system. We're talking about people who have very restricted incomes due to their circumstances or retirement that are having difficulties due to the economy being so FUBAR, including the gas prices. They're being adversely affected by circumstances beyond their control to a far greater degree than other folks in the populace because of it. In many instances, it's not because they didn't plan for COLA increases in the economy in their retirement planning; they just didn't expect such sharp increases (nor did their financial planners).



Well, let's see, here. Apparently you are able-bodied enough to work. Many people are not. To my knowledge you have never been drafted into a war and suffered physical and/or emotional trauma as a result that left you unable to work a normal job, nor were you summarily abandoned by your government when it came to covering your health care expenses and the opportunity to get an education after your service. To my knowledge you didn't have a learning disability that went undiagnosed because such things didn't really exist 50 years ago that made it difficult for you to pursue a higher education or even just graduate high school. To my knowledge, you weren't pulled out of school as a child to work on the family farm or in the family factory to help make ends meet for the entire family, thus ruining your chances of getting an advanced education. To my knowledge, you've never had a health crisis that your insurance didn't cover you for like long-term cancer, leaving you with horrendous levels of medical bills that pretty much left you destitute, even after the bankruptcy. To my knowledge, you apparently have the advantage of being able to go to college due to your satisfactory grades, your ability to garner employment that allows you to pay for that (also a product of your education that not everyone had, particularly when said 75 year olds were your age) and possibly some eligibility for student loans, scholarships or grants. Probably more to add to that list, but frankly, I'm tired of addressing your elitism. Go on about your day, looking down upon those less fortunate than you.

jag

I also come to work every day instead of aimlessly wandering the streets of downtown Atlanta. I buy $50 sneakers instead of $125 ones. I don't waste my money on lottery tickets. Or rims. Or a new hat every week. I cook food at home instead of eating out. Don't act like the only people at the bottom of the economic scale are only there because they're not "able-bodied," or because they were drafted into a war. The vast majority of these people don't do a damn thing to better their circumstances, yet somehow they're "less fortunate." Give me an f-ing break.

Perhaps these people are "less fortunate" because they don't give a damn and want mommy or the government to take care of everything for them.

[Tron5000]

Congratulations on being a masochist. The people who aren't in love with misery think maybe they shouldn't have to completely throw their lives away just to have a slim shot at financial security.

So instead of financial security coming from hard work, it should just be given to people? Is that what you're getting at?

The people who made this country great did so off their hard work, and blood, sweat and tears. These people did not think they were entitled to anything, as most people on this site obviously do.

[Tron5000]

Dang...Tron works 70+ hours a week and still manages to post in every single thread in the politics forum. This guy must not sleep :whatever:

I'm at work right now, homey. And you'll notice I rarely post at night. That's cause I'm working at a job with no internet access.

[Hotwire]

What makes me so "fortunate" that also makes other people "less fortunate"?

If you want to use "less"-something, how about...Less educated. Less driven to succeed. Less willing to make sacrifices.
I was going to reply to this, but jag did it for me.

[jaguarr]

I also come to work every day instead of aimlessly wandering the streets of downtown Atlanta. I buy $50 sneakers instead of $125 ones. I don't waste my money on lottery tickets. Or rims. Or a new hat every week. I cook food at home instead of eating out. Don't act like the only people at the bottom of the economic scale are only there because they're not "able-bodied," or because they were drafted into a war. The vast majority of these people don't do a damn thing to better their circumstances, yet somehow they're "less fortunate." Give me an f-ing break.

Perhaps these people are "less fortunate" because they don't give a damn and want mommy or the government to take care of everything for them.

Wow. Strong elitism. :down

jag

[Hotwire]

I'm at work right now, homey. And you'll notice I rarely post at night. That's cause I'm working at a job with no internet access.
Let's hope your boss doesn't fire you for surfing the net while you are supposed to busting your ass.

[zenile]

Beat me to it. Hopefully kiddo can see his own hypocrisy about people not busting their tails at work while he's typing away on a comic book message board at work. I'm just saying...

[Marx]

Gas prices just hit $3.59 a gallon where I live... http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon13.gif

[Tron5000]

Beat me to it. Hopefully kiddo can see his own hypocrisy about people not busting their tails at work while he's typing away on a comic book message board at work. I'm just saying...

Just 'cause I have time to discuss issues on a message board doesn't mean I don't work hard. And at least I'm at work (1 of my 2 jobs), not just screwing around all day. I manage a retail store (during the day), and sometimes there is down time during which I can post on here.

But I guess I'm just "fortunate" that that is the case, right?

[fifthfiend]

So instead of financial security coming from hard work, it should just be given to people? Is that what you're getting at?

The people who made this country great did so off their hard work, and blood, sweat and tears. These people did not think they were entitled to anything, as most people on this site obviously do.

The people who made this country great fought wars because they ****ing well were entitled to things like a government that actually served its people and worked to further the common good. And later generations of people made America greater by building labor unions and Social Security programs because they, too, were ****ing well entitled to a fair wage for a fair day's work and an old age not spent in desperation and starvation. Jesus I don't know how you're taking any kind of college classes considering how fantastically hard you must have ****ing failed 10th grade Civics.

[Tron5000]

The people who made this country great fought because they ****ing well were entitled to things like a government that actually served its people and worked to further the common good. Jesus I don't know how you're taking any kind of college classes considering how hard you must have ****ing failed 10th grade Civics.


Ooooooooohhh, sounds like someone's a little worked up.

We didn't take Civics in 10th grade. That was World History year.

By a "government that actually served its people," do you refer to a government that protects the right of its citizens to work hard and succeed, or a government that caters to its citizens' every need with handouts and fostering an environment where success and self-reliance are penalized while reliance and lethargy are rewarded with dollars taken from my paycheck?

[fifthfiend]

Ooooooooohhh, sounds like someone's a little worked up.

We didn't take Civics in 10th grade. That was World History year.

By a "government that actually served its people," do you refer to a government that protects the right of its citizens to work hard and succeed, or a government that caters to its citizens' every need with handouts and fostering an environment where success and self-reliance are penalized while reliance and lethargy are rewarded with dollars taken from my paycheck?

Yup, you definitely learned all your Civics from Rush Limbaugh. Man I just remembered this forum has an ignore function, gonna go and use that now.

That I got sucked this far into your **** should probably invalidate my Winning at the Internet award.

[Tron5000]

Yup, you definitely learned all your Civics from Rush Limbaugh. Man I just remembered this forum has an ignore function, gonna go and use that now.

I don't listen to Limbaugh, but thanks for playing. And I made it onto someone's ignore list? Must be doing something right, if my words are so upsetting that you can't bear to read them. Thanks for the add!

[wiegeabo]

So...this is a thread about gas prices, right?

[Little Foot]

It's all fine and good to use catchphrases like "elitism," but you're not addressing the issue. Why can't these elderly people pay for gas? Because they have made poor decisions throughout their life. Working 40 hours a week instead of 50 or 60. Spending money on booze instead of making that money work for you. Buying things you can't afford. Having kids you can't afford. Not furthering your education or workplace experience that would help you advance in life.

How about looking at life through the eyes of those who have achieved and succeeded? Oh, I forget. People who have money saved up are probably just "fortunate" or were "given" that money. They didn't work hard for it or anything.

You are the biggest snob, the most ignorant elitist, that I have ever known. Many "rich" people have just inherited money. They are wealthy without having to try for it. People who are "rich" and earn it normally have high-paying jobs that require an education that not everyone can get. People who are poor cannot afford a high-paying job. I know plenty of struggling lower-middle-class and working class individuals who don't waste money on beer or new DVDs or whatever other stupid excuses you made up that you feel poor people must spend their money on. The fact that you are so completely lacking in empathy really suggests that you are a horrible person. People who have always rationalize for why the others have not. And it's just ignorant.
http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/2046/littlefootqn3.gif

[Little Foot]

You still didn't tell me what "advantages" I had that other people did not. I grew up in America, went to public school, and have paid my own way in this world since I graduated high school at age 17. I don't accept handouts. I paid for school (and I will, myself, with the money that I make from working 2 jobs, pay to finish my schooling).

Since you mentioned the "advantages" that I've enjoyed that others did not, can you inform me of what these "advantages" may be?

Mainly the advantage of ability. What of those who have to work a full-time job through high school to support themselves and their families? What of those who fail out of high school because they have been exposed to a poor environment, raised to look down upon themselves?
Anyway, not everyone can all make a lot of money. There's a limited supply, after all. You may work hard, but you sure don't seem very bright.
--------------
P.S. I just want to apologize to everyone else for dredging this back up. But the fact that this guy is so sure of himself and so elitist, when he's in a position where he's struggling to barely scrape by...he's just...well, he seems stupid.

[Tron5000]

You are the biggest snob, the most ignorant elitist, that I have ever known. Many "rich" people have just inherited money. They are wealthy without having to try for it. People who are "rich" and earn it normally have high-paying jobs that require an education that not everyone can get. People who are poor cannot afford a high-paying job. I know plenty of struggling lower-middle-class and working class individuals who don't waste money on beer or new DVDs or whatever other stupid excuses you made up that you feel poor people must spend their money on. The fact that you are so completely lacking in empathy really suggests that you are a horrible person. People who have always rationalize for why the others have not. And it's just ignorant.
http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/2046/littlefootqn3.gif

You don't know me, so that first sentence is factually incorrect.

I'm a "horrible person" because I advocate working hard, advancing one's self in the marketplace, and saving and investing money instead of spending it on discretionary items?

Here's what I "have" that "others have not": 2 jobs, work ethic, determination, drive, desire for a better life for me and my family, and the good sense to know that these traits will be rewarded.

Do you know how many "rich" people inherited money? The majority of the millionaires in America made their fortunes; it was not given to them.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/longterm/books/chap1/millionairenextdoor.htm

Most of America's millionaires are first-generation rich. How is it possible for people from modest backgrounds to become millionaires in one generation? Why is it that so many people with similar socioeconomic backgrounds never accumulate even modest amounts of wealth?

Most people who become millionaires have confidence in their own abilities. They do not spend time worrying about whether or not their parents were wealthy. They do not believe that one must be born wealthy. Conversely, people of modest backgrounds who believe that only the wealthy produce millionaires are predetermined to remain non-affluent. Have you always thought that most millionaires are born with silver spoons in their mouths? If so, consider the following facts that our research uncovered about American millionaires:

* Only 19 percent receive any income or wealth of any kind from a trust fund or an estate.

* Fewer than 20 percent inherited 10 percent or more of their wealth.

* More than half never received as much as $1 in inheritance.

* Fewer than 25 percent ever received "an act of kindness" of $10,000 or more from their parents, grandparents, or other relatives.

* Ninety-one percent never received, as a gift, as much as $1 of the ownership of a family business.

* Nearly half never received any college tuition from their parents or other relatives.

* Fewer than 10 percent believe they will ever receive an inheritance in the future.

America continues to hold great prospects for those who wish to accumulate wealth in one generation. In fact, America has always been a land of opportunity for those who believe in the fluid nature of our nation's social system and economy.

More than one hundred years ago the same was true. In The American Economy, Stanley Lebergott reviews a study conducted in 1892 of the 4,047 American millionaires. He reports that 84 percent "were nouveau riche, having reached the top without the benefit of inherited wealth."

[Tron5000]

Mainly the advantage of ability. What of those who have to work a full-time job through high school to support themselves and their families? What of those who fail out of high school because they have been exposed to a poor environment, raised to look down upon themselves?
Anyway, not everyone can all make a lot of money. There's a limited supply, after all. You may work hard, but you sure don't seem very bright.
--------------
P.S. I just want to apologize to everyone else for dredging this back up. But the fact that this guy is so sure of himself and so elitist, when he's in a position where he's struggling to barely scrape by...he's just...well, he seems stupid.

Who says I'm "struggling to barely scrape by"? My bills get paid (on time). I put money away in savings accounts and I'm saving money to pay for my education.

So now I'm "stupid," "elitist" and a "horrible person" because I have no sympathy for those who have made poor life decisions that have resulted in their current circumstances?

Well, that's all fine and good. I'll be the "stupid," "elitist" "horrible person" who gets to play 4 rounds of golf a week at the age of 50 because I've made good decisions in life. I'll make sure I remember how "stupid" I am when I'm working on my backswing and my long irons.

[Little Foot]

You don't know me, so that first sentence is factually incorrect.

I'm a "horrible person" because I advocate working hard, advancing one's self in the marketplace, and saving and investing money instead of spending it on discretionary items?

Here's what I "have" that "others have not": 2 jobs, work ethic, determination, drive, desire for a better life for me and my family, and the good sense to know that these traits will be rewarded.

Do you know how many "rich" people inherited money? The majority of the millionaires in America made their fortunes; it was not given to them.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/longterm/books/chap1/millionairenextdoor.htm

Um...millionaires are not exactly the ones with the highest incomes now...they're more of the upper-middle-class...my dad's a doctor, and he fits that bill. But again, you, my dad, and others like you have the advantage of not being chronically ill, physically or mentally incapable of working, not having to drop out of public school to support your family, not being surrounded by people telling you that you can't amount to much, not being in an inner-city environment surrounded by drug-dealers, prostitutes, and rival gangs, etc.
I don't need to know you to know that you're an arrogant snob. And arrogant snobs, by being arrogant snobs, are horrible people--sense a "snob" is a derogatory term for a displeasingly arrogant person.
Sorry, but as far as your latter point goes, you automatically lose. You remain a horrible person in my book.

[Little Foot]

Who says I'm "struggling to barely scrape by"? My bills get paid (on time). I put money away in savings accounts and I'm saving money to pay for my education.

So now I'm "stupid," "elitist" and a "horrible person" because I have no sympathy for those who have made poor life decisions that have resulted in their current circumstances?

Well, that's all fine and good. I'll be the "stupid," "elitist" "horrible person" who gets to play 4 rounds of golf a week at the age of 50 because I've made good decisions in life. I'll make sure I remember how "stupid" I am when I'm working on my backswing and my long irons.

Go ahead. I don't like golf. It'll be interesting to see if you actually succeed in your goals. Meanwhile, I'm not working my butt off, and I'm still looking forward to a high-paying future. It's all about the circumstances, little horrible man.

[Tron5000]

Um...millionaires are not exactly the ones with the highest incomes now...they're more of the upper-middle-class...my dad's a doctor, and he fits that bill. But again, you, my dad, and others like you have the advantage of not being chronically ill, physically or mentally incapable of working, not having to drop out of public school to support your family, not being surrounded by people telling you that you can't amount to much, not being in an inner-city environment surrounded by drug-dealers, prostitutes, and rival gangs, etc.
I don't need to know you to know that you're an arrogant snob. And arrogant snobs, by being arrogant snobs, are horrible people--sense a "snob" is a derogatory term for a displeasingly arrogant person.
Sorry, but as far as your latter point goes, you automatically lose. You remain a horrible person in my book.

Well I guess I'll just cry myself to sleep tonight since I'm such a "horrible person."

Did you ever see me make a statement about those who are impaired physically or mentally such that they cannot work? No, because I never have. But I will address that part of the population: these people need, and should receive, assistance, and I have no problem helping these people with my tax dollars.

But that doesn't explain those people who choose to work the register at McDonald's, or sling clothing at Old Navy, or wait tables for 30 hours a week just to make enough money to pay the rent.

You know what you do if people tell you you can't amount to much? You tell them to take a hike. Don't hang out with drug dealers and prostitutes. That's probably not a great plan for success.

[Mister J]

The petty nonsense that's going back and forth in here is going to end. Continued aspersions cast of a personal nature are an invitation for some time off to calm the hell down.

...and what in the name of Mercury does any of this have to do with gas prices? :confused:

[Tron5000]

The petty nonsense that's going back and forth in here is going to end. Continued aspersions cast of a personal nature are an invitation for some time off to calm the hell down.

...and what in the name of Mercury does any of this have to do with gas prices? :confused:

Scroll back a few pages. You'll see how the gas price discussion morphed into what is currently going on.

[BlackLantern]

I don't hate the poor but I don't have any sympathy for them

[Little Foot]

I want to apologize to Tron and any other posters that I offended by any of my remarks. I think it is safe to say that we disagree radically on the issue of the condition of the American social class. I think that it is difficult to dictate an easy solution to the issue that is liberal or conservative (or any other political ideology) without ignoring part of the issue entirely, and I acknowledge that I am just as guilty of politicizing the issue.
Now back to gas prices...

[BlackLantern]

Not really affecting me yet as I have a very short commute and am within walking distance of my grocery store....

[Little Foot]

I have to make long-distance trips to visit my family at home, but during the weeks, it's not bad, because I live on-campus.

[BlackLantern]

I have to make long-distance trips to visit my family at home, but during the weeks, it's not bad, because I live on-campus.

Just a suggestion...maybe cutting out a visit or 2 might help a bit....only go home when you absolutley have to

[Little Foot]

Yeah, I know...and I'm going to try for that next semester. But I'm a freshman, and my significant other is in my home town, so...it makes it difficult.

[BlackLantern]

Yeah, I know...and I'm going to try for that next semester. But I'm a freshman, and my significant other is in my home town, so...it makes it difficult.

Toughen up then....

[Tron5000]

I want to apologize to Tron and any other posters that I offended by any of my remarks. I think it is safe to say that we disagree radically on the issue of the condition of the American social class. I think that it is difficult to dictate an easy solution to the issue that is liberal or conservative (or any other political ideology) without ignoring part of the issue entirely, and I acknowledge that I am just as guilty of politicizing the issue.
Now back to gas prices...

It's all good. We can (and likely will) disagree greatly on a number of issues, but we should keep the discussion to the issues and not veer off into personal attacks or name-calling and the like.

And back to gas prices...there are many ways to combat this. First, we need to drill for the oil that is in (or off the coast of) the country. Then we need to build more refineries (something that has not been done in some 25 years or so). And we have to get rid of the ridiculous government mandates on different types of fuel at different times of the year. If the private sector was free to produce more of the fuel that most Americans use (87 octane), the supply would increase, thus lowering the cost.

[wiegeabo]

It's all good. We can (and likely will) disagree greatly on a number of issues, but we should keep the discussion to the issues and not veer off into personal attacks or name-calling and the like.

And back to gas prices...there are many ways to combat this. First, we need to drill for the oil that is in (or off the coast of) the country. Then we need to build more refineries (something that has not been done in some 25 years or so). And we have to get rid of the ridiculous government mandates on different types of fuel at different times of the year. If the private sector was free to produce produce more of the fuel that most Americans use (87 octane), the supply would increase, thus lowering the cost.

The problem with those ideas, and probably any we come up with, is that they're all longterm solutions that will take years to benefit from. Probably the only this we can do in the short term is curb consumption and save gas.

But I agree that if we're going rely on fossil fuels, we'll need new deposits to drill and new refineries (if they're not already at maximum capacity). I just hope in the mean time, the alternative fuel companies will start tapping into those huge oil profits.

[Tron5000]

The problem with those ideas, and probably any we come up with, is that they're all longterm solutions that will take years to benefit from. Probably the only this we can do in the short term is curb consumption and save gas.

But I agree that if we're going rely on fossil fuels, we'll need new deposits to drill and new refineries (if they're not already at maximum capacity). I just hope in the mean time, the alternative fuel companies will start tapping into those huge oil profits.

Yes, they are long-term solutions. The quickest way to reduce prices would be, as you say, to curb consumption. If the demand goes down while supply stays the same, the price will decline. I'm thinking of long-term solutions, as oil will continue to be vital to energy production for decades to come.

I just hope alternative fuels are developed and produced on a large enough scale that they will be cheaper than oil. It takes over 1 liter of fossil fuels just to produce and deliver a liter of ethanol, so ethanol is not likely a cost-effective solution to our dependence on oil. Plus, government mandates on the production and subsidies to the price of ethanol are causing huge increases in the price of food products, leading to hunger, riots and even the toppling of a government in foreign nations.

[Little Foot]

Yes, they are long-term solutions. The quickest way to reduce prices would be, as you say, to curb consumption. If the demand goes down while supply stays the same, the price will decline. I'm thinking of long-term solutions, as oil will continue to be vital to energy production for decades to come.

I just hope alternative fuels are developed and produced on a large enough scale that they will be cheaper than oil. It takes over 1 liter of fossil fuels just to produce and deliver a liter of ethanol, so ethanol is not likely a cost-effective solution to our dependence on oil. Plus, government mandates on the production and subsidies to the price of ethanol are causing huge increases in the price of food products, leading to hunger, riots and even the toppling of a government in foreign nations.

Yeah, I can agree that ethanol is a poor alternative. But the obvious answer is already available:
http://world.honda.com/FuelCell/

The best answer, to me, is to start getting more stations up to cater to these vehicles.

[wiegeabo]

Yes, they are long-term solutions. The quickest way to reduce prices would be, as you say, to curb consumption. If the demand goes down while supply stays the same, the price will decline. I'm thinking of long-term solutions, as oil will continue to be vital to energy production for decades to come.

I just hope alternative fuels are developed and produced on a large enough scale that they will be cheaper than oil. It takes over 1 liter of fossil fuels just to produce and deliver a liter of ethanol, so ethanol is not likely a cost-effective solution to our dependence on oil. Plus, government mandates on the production and subsidies to the price of ethanol are causing huge increases in the price of food products, leading to hunger, riots and even the toppling of a government in foreign nations.


It depends on the ethanol. Corn based ethanol is a horrible solution. Not only is corn inefficient (takes 1-1.4 units of energy to make 1 unit of corn energy), but it drives up food prices because everything has corn in it.

Ethanol based on sugarcane gets over 8 units of energy for each unit used. And it wouldn't adversely effect food prices like corn.

What's even better is switchgrass (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switchgrass). It's just a tall grass that needs very little care and grows like crazy anywhere. And it gives anywhere from 4-12 units of energy for each put in. Plus, on a single acre, you can only grow 400 gallons of corn ethanol, or 665 gallons of cane ethanol. But switchgrass will get you 1000 gallons per acre.

[BlackLantern]

we can't just grind up the homeless and use them as some sort of fuel source? is that not an option j/k

[Little Foot]

It depends on the ethanol. Corn based ethanol is a horrible solution. Not only is corn inefficient (takes 1-1.4 units of energy to make 1 unit of corn energy), but it drives up food prices because everything has corn in it.

Ethanol based on sugarcane gets over 8 units of energy for each unit used. And it wouldn't adversely effect food prices like corn.

What's even better is switchgrass (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switchgrass). It's just a tall grass that needs very little care and grows like crazy anywhere. And it gives anywhere from 4-12 units of energy for each put in. Plus, on a single acre, you can only grow 400 gallons of corn ethanol, or 665 gallons of cane ethanol. But switchgrass will get you 1000 gallons per acre.

I'd heard about sugarcane ethanol before, but I still thought that it would be hard to get that redirection away from corn ethanol. However, I'd never heard of switchgrass ethanol, and that seems like it would be really easy to produce. Thanks for the info.
I still favor hydrogen fuel-cell power, though...

[wiegeabo]

I'd heard about sugarcane ethanol before, but I still thought that it would be hard to get that redirection away from corn ethanol. However, I'd never heard of switchgrass ethanol, and that seems like it would be really easy to produce. Thanks for the info.
I still favor hydrogen fuel-cell power, though...

The government really favors corn because all the lobbiests are pushing that way (as are the farmers who are making a ton of money).

I like hydrogen too, but the problem is distribution. Ethanol is easy to distribute since we can use existing gas pipelines. But a whole new infrastructure is needed for hydrogen. But Iceland can go hydrogen, so I guess there's still hope.

[Little Foot]

The government really favors corn because all the lobbiests are pushing that way (as are the farmers who are making a ton of money).

I like hydrogen too, but the problem is distribution. Ethanol is easy to distribute since we can use existing gas pipelines. But a whole new infrastructure is needed for hydrogen. But Iceland can go hydrogen, so I guess there's still hope.

Indeed. And that's what I meant when I said that I could never see ethanol interests refocused on sugarcane. Too much money in corn.

To go really liberal here, while on the subject of wasting produce...
The meat industry consumes so much produce to feed its eventual products. I know that's really off-topic, but...it sort of ties in.

[BlackLantern]

Indeed. And that's what I meant when I said that I could never see ethanol interests refocused on sugarcane. Too much money in corn.

To go really liberal here, while on the subject of wasting produce...
The meat industry consumes so much produce to feed its eventual products. I know that's really off-topic, but...it sort of ties in.

You come try and take my steak from me you dirty granola eating hippie:cmad:

[Little Foot]

You come try and take my steak from me you dirty granola eating hippie:cmad:

Ha! Well, I admit: I'm still a milk and eggs person, myself. And given all of the messed-up things that the dairy industry does to cows, and the poultry industry to chickens...I can't act all high and mighty. But I can't guarantee a vegan lifestyle right now. And it'll be a while before I think I'll be ready to take that plunge.
I just want to be like my hero, I guess:
http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/2046/littlefootqn3.gif

[wiegeabo]

You come try and take my steak from me you dirty granola eating hippie:cmad:

Meh. Except for the occasional burger, I've pretty much lost my taste for beef. The quality just isn't what it used to be. And if it wasn't for my love of chicken, I could give up meat altogether.

[Little Foot]

Meh. Except for the occasional burger, I've pretty much lost my taste for beef. The quality just isn't what it used to be. And if it wasn't for my love of chicken, I could give up meat altogether.

Good man.

[SuBe]

I love steak and anyother kind of meat, hell, I'd eat a doplin if I could catch one!!!

I'm not kidding.

[rdh007]

If you catch a doplin, don't eat it. Make money off your discovery...;) :p

[SuBe]

If you catch a doplin, don't eat it. Make money off your discovery...;) :p
Got me again!!!! Dumb wine making fingers not type good.

[Arkady Rossovich]

Gas prices continue to increase in cost. Are they near the point where you can't use your car?

[BlackLantern]

Gas prices continue to increase in cost. Are they near the point where you can't use your car?

for some people its getting near that territory.....Im fortunate enough to be able to walk or ride my bike to work if needs be....if gas gets near 5 a gallon then I will probably start doing that..

[SentinelMind]

John McCain, Hillary Clinton are advocating takes oil out of the Strategic Oil Reserves, created by Congress in the 70s after Oil Embargo in cases of drastic cut in oil supply. They, and some Congress members want to take oil out to fight the high gas prices.

Obama disagrees with taking oil out of reserves, but agrees we should stop putting oil in that reserve...

President Bush, who the law says has only authority over this issue, disagrees and says the oil isn't moving.

I must say, I actually agree with Bush.....I don't think we should be declaring high gas prices as a reason to deplete our oil reserves. The amount there is so insignificant to affect oil prices, its less than a fraction of one percent of entire American supply and would do little to impact gas prices.

What do you guys think?

[wiegeabo]

I pretty much agree with you. It's too small an amount to really do anything. Even if it was equivalent to 1% of the yearly consumption of US oil, it would cut the price of gas by what? 4 cents? And only for a year. And that small drop might spur a small jump in consumption which will only make things worse. The best use of the Strategic Reserve is probably in times of war for military use.

As for not putting more oil into it, I'm somewhat conflicted. I think it's important to have a reserve, and the amount the government buys is so relatively small it probably does little to the price of gas. But I also favor government getting out of the private sector when possible, and this would do that. But, if price did drop, I think consumption would just jump a bit and offset any savings.

So I guess I don't agree with McCain or Clinton. Not sure if I agree with Obama.

[Little Foot]

I'd probably say I agree with Obama. Not that it would make much of a difference, but I'm not sure I see the importance of adding more oil to the reserve right now.

[strikezone89]

there's absolutly no reason gas should be so expensive and theres no reason why the gov. hasnt stepped in.
i know at least where in live (midwest) our gas/oil doesnt even come from the middle east, we get most of our supply from canada.
the gov. needs to get off there lazy asses and do something about this.

also if they fixed the gas issue... it would stimulate the economy. people dont buy material things because they see the inflation all around them. and the number one thing people see rising is gas prices.
now if people see gas prices dropping then maybe they will go out and spend there money

[Little Foot]

there's absolutly no reason gas should be so expensive and theres no reason why the gov. hasnt stepped in.
i know at least where in live (midwest) our gas/oil doesnt even come from the middle east, we get most of our supply from canada.
the gov. needs to get off there lazy asses and do something about this.

also if they fixed the gas issue... it would stimulate the economy. people dont buy material things because they see the inflation all around them. and the number one thing people see rising is gas prices.
now if people see gas prices dropping then maybe they will go out and spend there money

It's nice to believe that the government should just step in and flick some magic switch to fix everything, but unfortunately, it just doesn't work that way. The issue is far more complex than that.

[wiegeabo]

there's absolutly no reason gas should be so expensive and theres no reason why the gov. hasnt stepped in.
i know at least where in live (midwest) our gas/oil doesnt even come from the middle east, we get most of our supply from canada.
the gov. needs to get off there lazy asses and do something about this.

also if they fixed the gas issue... it would stimulate the economy. people dont buy material things because they see the inflation all around them. and the number one thing people see rising is gas prices.
now if people see gas prices dropping then maybe they will go out and spend there money

The midwest may get its oil from Canada, but about three-quarters of the oil the nation uses is from the OPEC. And as long as they keep supply tight, we're stuck. And because you do get you gas from Canada, I bet it's already some of the cheapest around. The last national average I saw was around $3.50 a gallon. Here in California, it's above $3.80. (We're always higher than the national average.)


Then you throw in the exponentially increasing demand for oil by developing countries (especially China and India), and the upward pressure is just going to keep increasing the price.

[Kelly]

I love steak and anyother kind of meat, hell, I'd eat a doplin if I could catch one!!!

I'm not kidding.


Not a red meat eater myself......haven't had red meat in about 7 + years.....Fish, specifically sushi is my fav.

[Arkady Rossovich]

It's nice to believe that the government should just step in and flick some magic switch to fix everything, but unfortunately, it just doesn't work that way. The issue is far more complex than that.

It just shows how much red tape there is around this sort of thing. I believe that oil companies lobby to keep their interests over the people,so you pay more..endlessly and nothing seems to get better.

[Little Foot]

It just shows how much red tape there is around this sort of thing. I believe that oil companies lobby to keep their interests over the people,so you pay more..endlessly and nothing seems to get better.

Yeah, I agree...but...the problem with a discussion like this is, all of these issues could comprise volumes for each individual topic, and it's difficult to discuss it when there are so many factors to consider.

[strikezone89]

It's nice to believe that the government should just step in and flick some magic switch to fix everything, but unfortunately, it just doesn't work that way. The issue is far more complex than that.
yah.. but aren't there laws about monopolies?
thats is exacatly what all of these oil companies are running.

[BlackLantern]

a monopoly, in my thinking, is just ONE company pushing out the others in a specific industry.......there are multiple oil companies all raising prices...i think its plain old price gouging

[Little Foot]

yah.. but aren't there laws about monopolies?
thats is exacatly what all of these oil companies are running.

They aren't monopolies. Otherwise, it would be only one company running everything. They're not even an oligarchy, technically (though OPEC is). There is price gouging, there are a lot of problems--but that has to do with supply and demand, not market dominance.

[Soundwave]

They aren't monopolies. Otherwise, it would be only one company running everything. They're not even an oligarchy, technically (though OPEC is). There is price gouging, there are a lot of problems--but that has to do with supply and demand, not market dominance.

There's also the issue of price speculators who have invested billions of dollars in oil futures. Some analysts say that is the biggest reason for the rising prices in the commodities markets.

[wiegeabo]

They aren't monopolies. Otherwise, it would be only one company running everything. They're not even an oligarchy, technically (though OPEC is). There is price gouging, there are a lot of problems--but that has to do with supply and demand, not market dominance.


OPEC is a cartel. In an oligopoly, the free market and competition still exists. In a cartel market, the companies work together to fix price/supply/everything.

[wiegeabo]

Has anyone heard of gas banks? It's been pretty successful up in Minnesota (or was it Michigan?).

Basically it's just a big gas station with a massive reserve of gas (ten times normal or more). You pre-pay for all your gas upfront at the current market price. Then, whenever you pump gas at the bank, it's at the price you bought it at. So, if you bought gas at $.99 a gallon five years ago, you'd still be paying $.99 a gallon today. (Actually, you wouldn't technically be paying anything today, but the principle is the same.)

I wish we had had one here a few years ago.

[Little Foot]

There's also the issue of price speculators who have invested billions of dollars in oil futures. Some analysts say that is the biggest reason for the rising prices in the commodities markets.

True.

OPEC is a cartel. In an oligopoly, the free market and competition still exists. In a cartel market, the companies work together to fix price/supply/everything.

Whoops--I so meant to write "oligopoly." That was dumb of me. But a cartel is just an overt form of an oligopoly. You're getting caught up in semantics.

[Little Foot]

Has anyone heard of gas banks? It's been pretty successful up in Minnesota (or was it Michigan?).

Basically it's just a big gas station with a massive reserve of gas (ten times normal or more). You pre-pay for all your gas upfront at the current market price. Then, whenever you pump gas at the bank, it's at the price you bought it at. So, if you bought gas at $.99 a gallon five years ago, you'd still be paying $.99 a gallon today. (Actually, you wouldn't technically be paying anything today, but the principle is the same.)

I wish we had had one here a few years ago.

That sounds fun, but it seems like it's a little too late for that to catch on.

[Midnyte_Sun]

I was in Europe a Month ago and Gas was about...8-9 US dollars per gallon. I think like 70% of the value of Gas over there is taxes, which the gov't uses to pay for public transport.

If there was a meaningful public transport system in my dinky little town, I'd probably use it.

[wiegeabo]

I was in Europe a Month ago and Gas was about...8-9 US dollars per gallon. I think like 70% of the value of Gas over there is taxes, which the gov't uses to pay for public transport.

If there was a meaningful public transport system in my dinky little town, I'd probably use it.


Same here. I've got a good commute and I'd love to use that time to sleep, I mean work. But the only bus between the two towns takes over an hour, picks up on the other side of the town I live, and drops off too far away from my work to walk. Plus it would drop me off a half-hour before work starts. And I think the train is on the wrong side of town too.

[wiegeabo]

I was in Europe a Month ago and Gas was about...8-9 US dollars per gallon.


Hah. This reminded me. I saw I Am Legend last night and the price of gas in the movie was $6.63 a gallon. Wait, that's not funny. :(

*puts gun to head*

[Mr. Credible]

i don't use the term "lol" very often, or like, ever... but, lol:

bush blames congress for high oil prices

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aPQAOLlelQds&refer=home

April 29 (Bloomberg) -- President George W. Bush blamed Congress for blocking his initiatives to mitigate rising energy costs by expanding domestic production and said lawmakers also are delaying action on other measures to address higher food costs and the mortgage crisis.

``It's a tough time for our economy,'' Bush said at a news conference today at the White House. While the public is demanding action, ``on many of these issues, all they are getting is delay.''

The president dismissed calls to stop federal purchases of crude oil for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and he declined to endorse proposals to suspend collection of federal gasoline and diesel taxes as ways to cut costs to consumers.

Democratic leaders, who have majorities in the House and Senate, responded to Bush's remarks by faulting administration policies and accusing the president of failing to act.

Bush ``has closed his eyes and put his hands over his ears as these crises have grown,'' Senator Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat, said at a news conference after Bush spoke.

While Bush addressed foreign policy issues including the Middle East, Afghanistan and Africa, the U.S. economy and energy were the main subjects, as they have been in the political campaign to succeed him next year.

Economic Outlook

The president declined to say whether the U.S. economy is in a recession.

``Economists can argue over the terminology,'' Bush said. ``The average person doesn't really care what we call it.''

The Commerce Department tomorrow is scheduled to release the government's initial estimate of first-quarter gross domestic product. Bush said he hadn't been briefed on the numbers and expected ``they'll show that it's a very slow economy. I can't guess what the number will be.''

The median estimate of economists in a Bloomberg News survey is that the economy probably expanded at a 0.5 percent pace from January through March. That would be the smallest gain in five years.

With gasoline prices up an average of 66 cents from a year ago to $3.60 a gallon and diesel up to $4.24 a gallon from $2.92 last year, the administration is facing calls for action to stem the increases.

Petroleum Reserve

A group of 14 Senate Republicans earlier today asked Bush to stop buying crude oil for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to ease price pressures, matching a similar request previously made by Democrats in the House.

The reserve, authorized for 1 billion barrels stored mainly in salt caverns along the Gulf Coast, was created to deal with supply disruptions. Bush said it was in the national interest to fill it for that reason.

Besides, he said, halting the 67,000- to 68,000-barrel a day input would do little to ease the cost of gasoline because it amounts to about 0.1 percent of global demand.

``I have analyzed the issue and I don't think it would affect price,'' Bush said.

Republican Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas, one of the senators who made the request, said it's time for a pause in purchases. ``The family budget is under intense pressure'' and supplies in reserve now exceed U.S. energy program commitments, she said in a statement after Bush spoke.

Suspending Federal Tax

Bush declined to endorse other short-term measures as well. In the presidential campaign, Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican John McCain are urging a three-month moratorium on collecting the 18.4-cent per gallon federal gasoline tax and the 24.4-cent tax on diesel fuel. Democrat Barack Obama opposes a tax suspension, saying it will do little for consumers and will divert money needed for highway and bridge repairs.

Bush said he would ``take a look'' at any proposals that may come from Congress. He said Congress would open more domestic land to oil exploration if it was ``truly interested'' in solving the problem of high gas prices.

Lawmakers have been ``vocal'' in opposing measures to expand U.S. oil production, including exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, he said.

Democrats said Bush's policies exacerbate the problem.

House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel in a statement said Bush ``remains addicted to the big oil companies, and the big oil companies remain addicted to the billions of dollars in taxpayer subsidies they receive from this administration.''

Food, Housing

On the rising cost of food, which Bush said is related to higher energy prices, the president said lawmakers also were partly at fault because they have failed to overhaul the ``massive, bloated'' farm bill. Now is the time for ``reducing unnecessary subsidies'' to wealthy farmers, he said.

``We are deeply concerned about food prices here at home,'' Bush said. This year, he said, the U.S. would be ``generous'' in food donations because of scarcities overseas.

He also called on lawmakers to act on his proposals to ease the housing crisis.

``Americans should not have to wait any longer for their elected officials to pass legislation to help more people stay in their homes,'' Bush said.

Home prices in 20 U.S. metropolitan areas fell in February by the most on record, pointing to an imbalance between supply and demand that shows no sign of ending.

Prices will probably keep sliding as foreclosures push even more properties onto the market just as stricter lending rules limit the number of qualified buyers. Shrinking home values have contributed to a slowdown in consumer spending that may already have tipped the economy into a recession.

[Kelly]

Well I would like to see more domestic drilling.........

[Handsome Rob]

I commuted to work by bicycle for the first time, today.

Miles per Gallon of a Toyota Prius (my dad's average mileage to/from work): 50 mpg

Miles per Equivalent Gallon (converted to calories) of a cyclist on a road bike: 900+ mpg

Maybe I should sell Al Gore a carbon credit . . . :whatever:

[Kelly]

Well if this crap keeps up.......a Prius Hybrid WILL be my next car....

[Handsome Rob]

i don't use the term "lol" very often, or like, ever... but, lol:

bush blames congress for high oil prices

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aPQAOLlelQds&refer=home

April 29 (Bloomberg) -- President George W. Bush blamed Congress for blocking his initiatives to mitigate rising energy costs by expanding domestic production and said lawmakers also are delaying action on other measures to address higher food costs and the mortgage crisis.

``It's a tough time for our economy,'' Bush said at a news conference today at the White House. While the public is demanding action, ``on many of these issues, all they are getting is delay.''

The president dismissed calls to stop federal purchases of crude oil for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and he declined to endorse proposals to suspend collection of federal gasoline and diesel taxes as ways to cut costs to consumers.

Democratic leaders, who have majorities in the House and Senate, responded to Bush's remarks by faulting administration policies and accusing the president of failing to act.

Bush ``has closed his eyes and put his hands over his ears as these crises have grown,'' Senator Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat, said at a news conference after Bush spoke.

While Bush addressed foreign policy issues including the Middle East, Afghanistan and Africa, the U.S. economy and energy were the main subjects, as they have been in the political campaign to succeed him next year.

Economic Outlook

The president declined to say whether the U.S. economy is in a recession.

``Economists can argue over the terminology,'' Bush said. ``The average person doesn't really care what we call it.''

The Commerce Department tomorrow is scheduled to release the government's initial estimate of first-quarter gross domestic product. Bush said he hadn't been briefed on the numbers and expected ``they'll show that it's a very slow economy. I can't guess what the number will be.''

The median estimate of economists in a Bloomberg News survey is that the economy probably expanded at a 0.5 percent pace from January through March. That would be the smallest gain in five years.

With gasoline prices up an average of 66 cents from a year ago to $3.60 a gallon and diesel up to $4.24 a gallon from $2.92 last year, the administration is facing calls for action to stem the increases.

Petroleum Reserve

A group of 14 Senate Republicans earlier today asked Bush to stop buying crude oil for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to ease price pressures, matching a similar request previously made by Democrats in the House.

The reserve, authorized for 1 billion barrels stored mainly in salt caverns along the Gulf Coast, was created to deal with supply disruptions. Bush said it was in the national interest to fill it for that reason.

Besides, he said, halting the 67,000- to 68,000-barrel a day input would do little to ease the cost of gasoline because it amounts to about 0.1 percent of global demand.

``I have analyzed the issue and I don't think it would affect price,'' Bush said.

Republican Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas, one of the senators who made the request, said it's time for a pause in purchases. ``The family budget is under intense pressure'' and supplies in reserve now exceed U.S. energy program commitments, she said in a statement after Bush spoke.

Suspending Federal Tax

Bush declined to endorse other short-term measures as well. In the presidential campaign, Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican John McCain are urging a three-month moratorium on collecting the 18.4-cent per gallon federal gasoline tax and the 24.4-cent tax on diesel fuel. Democrat Barack Obama opposes a tax suspension, saying it will do little for consumers and will divert money needed for highway and bridge repairs.

Bush said he would ``take a look'' at any proposals that may come from Congress. He said Congress would open more domestic land to oil exploration if it was ``truly interested'' in solving the problem of high gas prices.

Lawmakers have been ``vocal'' in opposing measures to expand U.S. oil production, including exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, he said.

Democrats said Bush's policies exacerbate the problem.

House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel in a statement said Bush ``remains addicted to the big oil companies, and the big oil companies remain addicted to the billions of dollars in taxpayer subsidies they receive from this administration.''

Food, Housing

On the rising cost of food, which Bush said is related to higher energy prices, the president said lawmakers also were partly at fault because they have failed to overhaul the ``massive, bloated'' farm bill. Now is the time for ``reducing unnecessary subsidies'' to wealthy farmers, he said.

``We are deeply concerned about food prices here at home,'' Bush said. This year, he said, the U.S. would be ``generous'' in food donations because of scarcities overseas.

He also called on lawmakers to act on his proposals to ease the housing crisis.

``Americans should not have to wait any longer for their elected officials to pass legislation to help more people stay in their homes,'' Bush said.

Home prices in 20 U.S. metropolitan areas fell in February by the most on record, pointing to an imbalance between supply and demand that shows no sign of ending.

Prices will probably keep sliding as foreclosures push even more properties onto the market just as stricter lending rules limit the number of qualified buyers. Shrinking home values have contributed to a slowdown in consumer spending that may already have tipped the economy into a recession.

That's funny. I seem to remember the Democrats saying that they were going to bring down gas prices when they took over Congress. The average price was around $2.23 during election month 2006. It's currently around $3.50 a gallon. That would be nearly a 57% increase.

I guess neither branch can affect gas prices as much as it would like to.

[zenile]

That's funny. I seem to remember the Democrats saying that they were going to bring down gas prices when they took over Congress. The average price was around $2.23 during election month 2006. It's currently around $3.50 a gallon. That would be nearly a 57% increase.

I guess neither branch can affect gas prices as much as it would like to.

Can you please cite this? Not that I disagree, I just don't remember who said this.

[Handsome Rob]

Can you please cite this? Not that I disagree, I just don't remember who said this.

I'd cite it if I could, but I just remember hearing about it in sound bites from the news. I was thinking the same thing then that I am now ("Yeah, right").

Of course, I could have imagined it and then believed it actually happened. I am 32, after all. I could be getting senile, zenile. :csad:

[Anita18]

If high gas prices FINALLY force people to give up the SUVs that they don't need, I'm all for it. :oldrazz: The only people I feel bad for are the people who work in transportation, like truck drivers. Those trucks use more expensive diesel and have poor mileage. It must suck for them right now, since their salaries haven't caught up to the gas increase yet. And then the price increase will be passed onto us, but c'est la vie.

We have the cheapest gas in the world, still. Europe and Australia have been paying out of their nostrils in comparison for years. When I went to Australia about 6 years ago, gas was about $3 a liter. I feel like we have no business complaining about gas prices compared to them. :o We're just not used to it, which is why everyone's in an uproar.

Changes will have to be made, obviously, if this keeps up. More fuel-efficient cars, more public transportation, etc. We could fix it by trying to get them to lower gas prices, but we can't wait forever. We've got to figure stuff out now.

[SuBe]

I'd cite it if I could, but I just remember hearing about it in sound bites from the news. I was thinking the same thing then that I am now ("Yeah, right").

Of course, I could have imagined it and then believed it actually happened. I am 32, after all. I could be getting senile, zenile. :csad:
It was Nancy Pelosi 2 years ago saying she had a common sense plan to fix gas prices. I remember reading the story about that.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/house-gop-challenges-pelosi-for-gas-price-plan-2008-04-22.html

[fifthfiend]

We're just not used to it, which is why everyone's in an uproar.

It's less that we're not used to it and more that our transportation infrastructure is built around the principle of cars and cheap gas so not having that means a lot of people are ****ed. It's more expensive in Europe but you've got a whole lot less people who commute an hour and a half a day by car.

[Anita18]

It's less that we're not used to it and more that our transportation infrastructure is built around the principle of cars and cheap gas so not having that means a lot of people are ****ed. It's more expensive in Europe but you've got a whole lot less people who commute an hour and a half a day by car.
And obviously that will have to change if this keeps up - I love the fact that in places like NYC and Europe you don't need a car. I would go downtown more often if there was a train that went directly. I like driving but I hate gridlock (which is every day rush hour) and I hate parking.

I'm not sure how the public transportation is in Australia. I think they're more similar to us, in terms of transportation but I'm not sure.

[Handsome Rob]

It was Nancy Pelosi 2 years ago saying she had a common sense plan to fix gas prices. I remember reading the story about that.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/house-gop-challenges-pelosi-for-gas-price-plan-2008-04-22.html

Truly, you are beyond Super, man. :up:

[SuBe]

Truly, you are beyond Super, man. :up:
Thanks Robby!

[Marx]

Well I would like to see more domestic drilling.........

I would to, but NOT in Alaska.

[Hotwire]

Well I would like to see more domestic drilling.........
I've driven through some of Texas' oil fields. Where the hell is that oil going? Are we using it, or selling it?

[BlackLantern]

I would to, but NOT in Alaska.

O stop it.....**** the caribou and break out the derricks....:oldrazz:

[wiegeabo]

O stop it.....**** the caribou and break out the derricks....:oldrazz:

Oil's good for the species. Gets rid of the weak ones. Makes the species stronger. :up: ;)

[SuBe]

I would to, but NOT in Alaska.
Why not in Alaska? Should they not be apart of the Solution too?

[Agent M]

Why not in Alaska? Should they not be apart of the Solution too?
yeah, is there a reson alaska should be excluded?

[wiegeabo]

Yeah. We should invade those mother****ers! Only, like, 30 or 40 people live there. 50 tops. No problem.

*senator whispers in ear*

Really? Well, if they're already a part of this country, whet the hell's the problem?