Oil Prices Soaring! [Archive] - The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community

Bronco_Beerslug

08-12-2005, 12:08 PM

Many Fear Financial Hit of Gas Prices
By WILL LESTER, Associated Press Writer 2 hours, 11 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - The pinch at the pump is starting to feel more like a punch for a growing number of Americans.

With gas prices soaring, almost two-thirds of those surveyed for an AP-AOL poll expect fuel costs will cause them financial hardship in coming months. That was sharply higher than in April, when about half felt that way.

Crude oil prices reached a record high of more than $66 a barrel Friday. That's almost 50 percent higher than a year ago.

The average price of a gallon of regular gasoline was more than $2.40 per gallon at week's end, compared with $1.86 a year ago and about $2.21 in April, according to the auto club AAA.

The poll conducted for The Associated Press and America Online News found that 64 percent say gas prices will cause money problems for them in the next six months, while 35 percent did not think so. In April, 51 percent expressed concerns about the cost of gas.

Those most likely to be worried about the financial impact are people with low incomes, the unemployed and minorities.

The AP-AOL survey of 1,000 adults was conducted Aug. 9-11 by Ipsos, an international polling firm. The survey has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.
http://tinyurl.com/7upqq

W*GS

08-12-2005, 12:39 PM

W*GS

08-12-2005, 12:47 PM

See

http://money.cnn.com/pf/features/lists/global_gasprices/

for example.

Bronco_Beerslug

08-12-2005, 01:04 PM

Do we Americans have a god-given right to cheap gasoline?

I don't think so.

Besides, it's odd that the liberals here on the OM are more upset than others - isn't "expensive" gas something you want? Reduce the numbers of cars on the road and that sort of thing?
I don't know since I don't talk to him so maybe you can find out for us. I'm pretty sure people from all parties and even those that have no party affiliation are upset with ever increasing gas prices.

Rascal

08-12-2005, 01:14 PM

[QUOTE=W*GS]Do we Americans have a god-given right to cheap gasoline?

I don't think so.

[QUOTE]

What is your freaking problem?

Are you not going to be upset with gas prices until they are an all time high? You go ahead and wait for a barrell to cost 70+...while the rest of us want a solution and are sick and tired of having to pay for extravogant gas prices (I don't give a damn how it rates to the rest of the world...I'm an American damnit we are the best country in the world as such I demand the best perks and cheap gas is one of them!!).

Excuse me for wanting some sort of action by our gov't to lower the price of gas. Gas prices go up while my salary remains the same...excuse me for bitching. Paying 2.30+ in Oklahoma for gas is freaking ridiculous and I demand my gov't to do something about it. If you are content to pay these high gas prices I suggest you send me a check or else I'm going to keep bitching about it.

Stepping off soap box.

W*GS

08-12-2005, 01:18 PM

I'm pretty sure people from all parties and even those that have no party affiliation are upset with ever increasing gas prices.

I'm not particularly upset.

We've spent trillions over the decades to assure our access to imported oil - that cost has never been figured into the price of a gallon of gas. Those bills are coming due, in a way, and so we're getting what we deserve.

If we use less of the stuff because it's too expensive, then that's all to the good.

Old Dude

08-12-2005, 01:20 PM

I'm actually in favor of higher gas prices.

I hope it goes up to $4.75 a gallon.

In Colorado, anyway.

I consider this payback to all the S-O-Bs who voted to raise the cigarette taxes last year.

What?

W*GS

08-12-2005, 01:20 PM

Excuse me for wanting some sort of action by our gov't to lower the price of gas.

I think cable TV is too expensive.

I want the government to step in and fix the prices so it's cheaper.

You get your cheap gas, I get my cheap cable TV, right?

Attempt to finagle the market, and you'll get burned, one way or another, every time.

ak1971

08-12-2005, 01:25 PM

Hopefully Greenspan will pull his head out of his butt and not continue to raise rates as he did in 2000. With oil going up, we are going to need to see a pull back on rates so the economy doesnt really go belly, but what the hell do I know....

IMHO....Just steal everything, then price is irrelivant.

Bronco_Beerslug

08-12-2005, 01:25 PM

If we use less of the stuff because it's too expensive, then that's all to the good.
If you have the money you're not going to be particularly upset. BUT most Americans don't have the ever increasing wages to keep pace with gas prices so it will end up affecting us negatively in the end. If gas goes over $4 a gallon like Old Dude would like to see we will be in a recession for sure and possibly a depression.

EDIT: Forgot to add that unlike Europe, millions of Americans travel great distances to work and our mass transit in this country sucks!

Rascal

08-12-2005, 01:26 PM

Fine Wigs go make your own damn party of those who are happy (or not particularly upset) with oil prices.

And how can I use less of the stuff? There are no public transportation available and I can't afford to buy a new or moderately new car? So praytell einstein...wtf am I suppose to do?

My wife's car gets 35 MPG and mine get roughly 25 MPG...so it's not like we are driving a hummer or something.

Rascal

08-12-2005, 01:28 PM

I think cable TV is too expensive.

I want the government to step in and fix the prices so it's cheaper.

You get your cheap gas, I get my cheap cable TV, right?

Attempt to finagle the market, and you'll get burned, one way or another, every time.

You have a choice for cable TV...I don't have a choice for gas. Big difference. Plus our economy isn't built on cable TV...it is built on gasoline.

Rascal

08-12-2005, 01:33 PM

It would be one thing to pay high gas prices but know that something is being done about it (building new refineries or bringing alternative fuels online)...but as it stands now we are paying high gas prices and our gov't is sitting on their collective asses getting blow jobs from ugly ass interns (Clinton doesn't need to be your last name for this to apply IMO).

W*GS

08-12-2005, 01:36 PM

If you have the money you're not going to be particularly upset. BUT most Americans don't have the ever increasing wages to keep pace with gas prices so it will end up affecting us negatively in the end.

We're paying plenty for gas - just not directly, at the pump, like we should be.

If gas goes over $4 a gallon like Old Dude would like to see we will be in a recession for sure and possibly a depression.

Gee, that would get our attention, wouldn't it? Maybe we ought to look a little closer at what our addiction to fossil fuels is really costing us, eh?

EDIT: Forgot to add that unlike Europe, millions of Americans travel great distances to work and our mass transit in this country sucks!

That's the result of conscious choices on our part to live far away from where we work, and not to fund mass transit. Gee, those choices may not be such good ones in light of $4/gal gasoline, eh?

If gas prices stay at these levels or continue to rise, I expect lots and lots of near-new SUVs at used car lots in the very near future. And that's a very good thing. I hate them effers.

W*GS

08-12-2005, 01:38 PM

And how can I use less of the stuff? There are no public transportation available and I can't afford to buy a new or moderately new car? So praytell einstein...wtf am I suppose to do?

Figure out how to be economical with what you can afford. Imagine walking to the store to get those few things you forgot last time instead of driving, for example. It will be cheaper and you'll get in better shape ta boot.

Mile High Shack

08-12-2005, 01:39 PM

oh, it's not going to stop until it reaches 70

the analysts being paid by the oil companies are going to assure that

I don't forsee a big depression, just a big sell off in SUVs and people having small cars like Europe

Mile High Shack

08-12-2005, 01:39 PM

Figure out how to be economical with what you can afford. Imagine walking to the store to get those few things you forgot last time instead of driving, for example. It will be cheaper and you'll get in better shape ta boot.

that is feasibly impossible

walk about 5 miles to the stoor and balance everything, it's not like people live around the corner from stores now days

Rascal

08-12-2005, 01:44 PM

You are a moron Wigs.

Mile High Shack

08-12-2005, 01:45 PM

Spider

08-12-2005, 01:45 PM

Spider

08-12-2005, 01:46 PM

You have a choice for cable TV...I don't have a choice for gas. Big difference. Plus our economy isn't built on cable TV...it is built on gasoline.
LOL .. good counter point

Bronco_Beerslug

08-12-2005, 01:49 PM

the solution in the mean time seems easy to me

I mean, why don't we build more refineries, I know it will take awhile to build them, but I don't understand why we haven't been building any for awhile

personally I think this is mostly done by the oil companies...........paid off "analysts" to bump the price up
Won't help very much because we already are refining every thing that can be pumped out of the ground. Big gas and oil is loving this!

W*GS

08-12-2005, 01:50 PM

walk about 5 miles to the stoor and balance everything, it's not like people live around the corner from stores now days

How many folks truly live 5 miles or more from where they get most of their food? And, why a special trip? Why not stop by the way home from work?

Face it - so many Americans are so fat because they don't get off their butts and walk, they get in their cars. And now they complain that gas is too expensive.

Tough, I say.

Old Dude

08-12-2005, 01:53 PM

... Face it - so many Americans are so fat because they don't get off their butts and walk, they get in their cars. And now they complain that gas is too expensive.

Tough, I say.

Hey, I'm fat and lazy and I don't even drive...

Spider

08-12-2005, 01:54 PM

How many folks truly live 5 miles or more from where they get most of their food? And, why a special trip? Why not stop by the way home from work?

Face it - so many Americans are so fat because they don't get off their butts and walk, they get in their cars. And now they complain that gas is too expensive.

Tough, I say.
what about those that use vehicles for work ? you do understand that the pirce of fuel gets passed off on to you right ?
I just signed a contract that says I get to charge a 10% fuel charge ..... you do you think picks up th tab for this ?

Bronco_Beerslug

08-12-2005, 01:54 PM

How many folks truly live 5 miles or more from where they get most of their food? And, why a special trip? Why not stop by the way home from work?

Face it - so many Americans are so fat because they don't get off their butts and walk, they get in their cars. And now they complain that gas is too expensive.

Tough, I say.

What a sympathetic guy! Like I said, millions of Americans live away from their jobs and retail stores. I did for years before my last move. If you could see past your tunnel vision you would understand this. High fuel prices will affect everything we do in life, not just driving the car.

Mile High Shack

08-12-2005, 01:54 PM

Won't help very much because we already are refining every thing that can be pumped out of the ground. Big gas and oil is loving this!

that is simply not true

we have plenty in reserve, but not enough refinery space to make the gas we need lol

Bronco_Beerslug

08-12-2005, 01:55 PM

that is simply not true

we have plenty in reserve, but not enough refinery space to make the gas we need lol
Wrong! I watch the numbers every day.

Do you see gas lines because there isn't enough gas?
There are draw downs in crude stocks almost every week now instead of accumulations because we are using it faster than we can pump it out of the ground and buy it.

ak1971

08-12-2005, 01:57 PM

Won't help very much because we already are refining every thing that can be pumped out of the ground. Big gas and oil is loving this!

...and I am loving it (kind of) actually took a stock tip from someone on this board a few month back on VLO....Well, now I can use my profits to pay for gas.

Bronco_Beerslug

08-12-2005, 01:58 PM

...and I am loving it (kind of) actually took a stock tip from someone on this board a few month back on VLO....Well, now I can use my profits to pay for gas.
I wonder who gave that to you?

Mile High Shack

08-12-2005, 01:58 PM

Wrong! I watch the numbers every day.

Do you see gas lines because there isn't enough gas?

Oil prices settled at a record high near $67 Friday, as U.S. refinery outages looked set to test gasoline supplies in the world's biggest-consuming nation.

The threat of hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico and concerns over Iran's decision to resume uranium-conversion activities also fueled the price increase, analysts said.

But some traders said purely speculative buying was a big factor behind the $10 per barrel surge in just over three weeks.

"This is a bubble that will have to burst at some point," said Mike Fitzpatrick, an oil broker at Fimat USA in New York. A large increase in supply or a noticeable dropoff in demand will be needed to end the buying frenzy, he said.

Light sweet crude for September delivery gained $1.06 to settle at $66.86 a barrel Friday on the New York Mercantile Exchange -- the highest close since Nymex trading began in 1983. Crude peaked at $67.10 earlier in the day, up from Thursday's settlement price of $65.80. On July 20, prices settled at $56.72.

Oil prices are 46 percent higher than a year ago, but they would need to surpass $90 a barrel to exceed the inflation-adjusted peak set in 1980.

Gasoline futures climbed to $1.990 a gallon, an increase of 4.92 cents. Heating oil futures rose 0.7 cent to $1.9050 a gallon.

In London, Brent crude for September delivery closed at $66.45 a barrel, up $1.07.

Tropical Storm Irene strengthened Friday as it neared the East Coast, but its threat to land was uncertain, forecasters said. The five-day forecast from the National Hurricane Center suggested Irene could approach the coastline between North Carolina and Massachusetts, or curve out to sea.

With bullish sentiment unabated and crude prices hitting consecutive highs this week, analysts expect September contracts to test the $70 a barrel threshold.

Iran's nuclear program has drawn criticism from the West. The country is the No. 2 producer in the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, which produces roughly a third of the world's oil.

Analysts said gasoline demand, currently at its peak in the U.S. summer driving season, was pushing crude's gains. Last week, U.S. gasoline demand picked up by 1.4 percent from a year ago, according to government data.

Coupled with new reports of refinery outages this week, traders fear U.S. refiners, already running at 95 percent of capacity, are straining to satisfy the rising demand.

"People fear there won't be enough gasoline at a time when it's so greatly demanded, so they're just buying, buying and buying," said Tetsu Emori, chief commodities strategist at Mitsui Bussan Futures in Tokyo.

The U.S. Energy Department said Wednesday that gasoline inventories fell 2.1 million barrels to 203.1 million barrels last week.

"The refinery breakdowns are a big issue; they're happening at a time when gasoline supplies are already very tight," Emori said.

Among the latest refinery outages: several units at ConocoPhillips' 306,000 barrel-a-day Wood River, Ill., refinery were shut after a thunderstorm caused a power failure at the plant, while Premcor Inc.'s 190,000-barrel-a-day refinery in Memphis, Tenn., was shut due to a power outage.

Also, BP PLC shut down a hydrogen-recovery unit Aug. 10 at its massive 470,000 barrel-a-day Texas City refinery, following a decision by the company to keep high-pressure units off line until they can be proven safe, BP spokesman Scott Dean said Thursday.

The three other high-pressure units at the refinery were already off line Wednesday and will be kept down pending investigations, Dean said.

The incidents are the latest in a string of outages to hit about a dozen U.S. refineries that together can process 2.7 million barrels a day of crude oil, some 16 percent of total U.S. refining capacity.

Associated Press Writer Gillian Wong in Singapore contributed to this report.

sounds like to me this is based on fears of refinery capacity

Bronco_Beerslug

08-12-2005, 02:01 PM

sounds like to me this is based on fears of refinery capacity
It is in part but terrorism, and more statements of peak capacity being reached
has every one ready to hit panic mode at the drop of a hat.

Mile High Shack

08-12-2005, 02:02 PM

It is in part but terrorism, and more statements of peak capacity being reached
has every one ready to hit panic mode at the drop of a hat.

capacity of refinery's

we have plenty of oil

Bronco_Beerslug

08-12-2005, 02:04 PM

capacity of refinery's

we have plenty of oil

:) I'm telling you, we DON'T have plenty of oil. Watch CNBC or Bloomberg and listen to the analysts explain what is happening.

Every time OPEC announces there will be an increase in oil production the markets ignore it because the increase is already accounted for.

W*GS

08-12-2005, 02:07 PM

what about those that use vehicles for work ? you do understand that the pirce of fuel gets passed off on to you right ?
I just signed a contract that says I get to charge a 10% fuel charge ..... you do you think picks up th tab for this ?

We all do.

So?

Mile High Shack

08-12-2005, 02:08 PM

:) I'm telling you, we DON'T have plenty of oil. Watch CNBC or Bloomberg and listen to the analysts explain what is happening.

Every time OPEC announces there will be an increase in oil production the markets ignore it because the increase is already accounted for.

and from all the financial articles I read, there is plenty, but we don't have enough refinery space to produce the petroleum products you need

maybe I'm not reading the right things

I have also been watching this for awhile

matter of fact, I'm trying to do my part, bought a cheap used compact car, gonna drive that around now, and if gas gets up to 3/gallon, I guess I'll get a bus pass and try and take that to work

Mile High Shack

08-12-2005, 02:09 PM

We all do.

So?

I think his point was, this jump in gas is going to cause a loaf of bread to cost 10 bucks

W*GS

08-12-2005, 02:10 PM

What a sympathetic guy! Like I said, millions of Americans live away from their jobs and retail stores.

That's a choice that was freely made that has costs associated with it. One aspect of the costs of that choice is getting more expensive.

Tough.

It's like folks who live in the foothills here in Colorado complaining about forest fires. Sorry folks, that's a choice you made and tough noogies if your house burns down.

If you could see past your tunnel vision you would understand this.

What "tunnel vision"? The bills are starting to come due - why is it that most everyone is so upset by that? I'm not. We've been living a lie of cheap gas for a very long time.

Rascal

08-12-2005, 02:12 PM

I've heard analysts on both sides say oil capacity or refinery capacity...either way there is a problem. My question is what are we going to do about and why the hell isn't the gov't doing anything?

W*GS

08-12-2005, 02:13 PM

I think his point was, this jump in gas is going to cause a loaf of bread to cost 10 bucks

And?

Do you tell smokers that you appreciate their complaints when cigarette taxes push the cost of a pack up, or do you tell them to quit, and quit whining?

W*GS

08-12-2005, 02:14 PM

I've heard analysts on both sides say oil capacity or refinery capacity...either way there is a problem. My question is what are we going to do about and why the hell isn't the gov't doing anything?

Geezus, are you a liberal or something?

"Help, help, Big Mommy Government! Gas prices are too high! Waaah! Waaah! Fix it for me, fix it for me!"

Criminy, what a bunch of babies!

Rascal

08-12-2005, 02:16 PM

Rascal

08-12-2005, 02:19 PM

Yeap I'm now a liberal wigs...show me the next voting booth and I'll vote for Hillary Cliton herself.

What an idiot.

Sorry if I actually expect my gov't to do something besides taking in 33% of my paycheck in taxes.

ak1971

08-12-2005, 02:22 PM

I wonder who gave that to you?

:thumbs:

W*GS

08-12-2005, 02:23 PM

Sorry if I actually expect my gov't to do something besides taking in 33% of my paycheck in taxes.

So, for that 33%, you want Uncle Sam to wipe your ass, too?

Sheesh.

Mile High Shack

08-12-2005, 02:25 PM

And?

Do you tell smokers that you appreciate their complaints when cigarette taxes push the cost of a pack up, or do you tell them to quit, and quit whining?

dopey me, I'm addicted to bread

Bronco_Beerslug

08-12-2005, 02:30 PM

Slug...got any stock tips for me? I need some help :) maybe if we go to a game sometime I'll buy your beer(s) or something....or I'll just agree with everything you say in the political forum for a week :) I'd prefer the beer but your choice.
Yep I sure do. Hold onto your oil and gas stocks!

OK, You can buy me a beer at a game sometime.

PS, I'm not too late with this tip am I?

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 02:33 PM

High fuel prices will affect everything we do in life, not just driving the car.

Exactly.

If W*GS had the first clue about the subject, he might understand this.

When the price of diesel goes up, shipping costs go up, and prices for all consumer goods go up. Also, our system of food production is largely petroleum-based. Hell, a large number of products ranging from plastics to prescription drugs are petroleum-based.

At any rate, Smirk and Dick's oil buddies are getting what they wanted.

They are posting record profits and they're swimming in cash.

Pass some of those profits on to the consumer, you say?

Are you kidding?

How would they pay for that new yacht or that third house on the French Riviera or that private island in the Caribbean?

Hotrod

08-12-2005, 02:36 PM

Do we Americans have a god-given right to cheap gasoline?

I don't think so.

Besides, it's odd that the liberals here on the OM are more upset than others - isn't "expensive" gas something you want? Reduce the numbers of cars on the road and that sort of thing?

You simply have become the single most hateful person on this message board. Some would say this as a joke but I truely think you should seek mental health help ASAP.

Rascal

08-12-2005, 02:37 PM

Yep I sure do. Hold onto your oil and gas stocks!

OK, You can buy me a beer at a game sometime.

PS, I'm not too late with this tip am I?

:(

yes.

bronco_diesel

08-12-2005, 02:38 PM

i live a good 25+ miles away from work. the area my work is located, i cannot afford to buy a place. so i bought a place where i can afford.

gas prices will hit us in everything we do. taking a dump is going to cost more $$ now, because the toilet paper we use to wipe is going to cost more to transport.

not everyone can make huge changes to cut corners and save. there is a huge populous that already has been cutting corners.

i am a cyclist - i'd ride my bike to work every day, but that is just not feasible.

i'd like my government to step up - but how much can they truly do? we use more oil than any other country...

i don't think being american entitles us to cheap oil...being american is about freedom. granted, i see the costs of oil limiting things we can do...but it is not taking away my rights.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 02:42 PM

i'd like my government to step up - but how much can they truly do?

Oil companies are posting record profits and swimming in cash.

Bush's response: Cut their taxes!

Hotrod

08-12-2005, 02:42 PM

Slug...got any stock tips for me? I need some help :) .

Stay away and buy Gold :thumbs:

W*GS

08-12-2005, 02:43 PM

If W*GS had the first clue about the subject, he might understand this.

You're in no position to lecture anyone about having a clue.

I'm surprised you're not using the rise in the price of crude as evidence for your "Peak Oil" theory.

Why not?

W*GS

08-12-2005, 02:45 PM

i'd like my government to step up - but how much can they truly do? we use more oil than any other country...

Our government has been enabling our addiction to oil for decades now. How much has it cost us already what with having to kiss the asses of ME jagoffs and terrorists, expending trillions of dollars over the years, putting our security at risk, fouling the planet...

Oil is a filthy way to meet our energy wants, in more ways than one.

W*GS

08-12-2005, 02:48 PM

You simply have become the single most hateful person on this message board. Some would say this as a joke but I truely think you should seek mental health help ASAP.

Why?

Because all the folks who think it's their God-given right to drive an SUV behemoth that gets 11 mpg get miffed when the price of gas approaches what a gallon of milk costs?

The folks whining are a bunch of crybabies.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 02:51 PM

Hotrod

08-12-2005, 02:52 PM

Why?

Because all the folks who think it's their God-given right to drive an SUV behemoth that gets 11 mpg get miffed when the price of gas approaches what a gallon of milk costs?

The folks whining are a bunch of crybabies.

Tell it to the single parents who have little choice but to drive the same old used car that burns oil and gas at breakneck speed. Yet have no other option but to drive their kids to daycare then on to their jobs. The problem is you more often paint with one size brush.

I choice to live outside of town and choice to drive an older truck which get aroung 15mpg its hurting right now but that was my choice Ill pay that price but dont forget some are in a bind and there is little to nothing they can do about it. While people like you instead want to argue about cable prices they feed their kids the best they can.

W*GS

08-12-2005, 02:55 PM

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 02:56 PM

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 02:58 PM

And don't forget what diesel just said:

A lot of people have to make long commutes to and from work because they can't afford to live in the same areas of town where they work.

W*GS

08-12-2005, 02:59 PM

Tell it to the single parents who have little choice but to drive the same old used car that burns oil and gas at breakneck speed. Yet have no other option but to drive their kids to daycare then on to their jobs.

Life sucks, don't it?

While people like you instead want to argue about cable prices they feed their kids the best they can.

You missed the point. As usual.

Will higher gas prices hurt? Of course they will. Have they been subsidized for decades? Yes they have. Is our addiction to oil costing us, in ways more subtle (and dangerous) than gasoline prices? Yes, it is. Will government fix it? No, it won't - since our government has enabled our addiction for decades. Is it all Bush's fault? Hell no - it's our fault.

bronco_diesel

08-12-2005, 02:59 PM

Why?

Because all the folks who think it's their God-given right to drive an SUV behemoth that gets 11 mpg get miffed when the price of gas approaches what a gallon of milk costs?

The folks whining are a bunch of crybabies.

w*gs, there are plenty of people that don't own cars because they cannot afford them...yet a price hike will still put a pinch on them. it touches everything we do.

it's not just about the snobs who drive suv's.

W*GS

08-12-2005, 03:02 PM

Funny how W*GS complains about people who drive SUVs but doesn't utter a peep of protest about the Bush/Cheney policy of eliminating tax breaks for people who buy hybrid vehicles while giving whopping rebates to people who buy Hummers.

Funny how LABF doesn't note that the US has been addicted to cheap oil for decades, as official government policy, and instead heaps all blame on the current pricks in the WH.

Where were you when all those past Presidents, administrations, and Congresses didn't do squat, and continued to subsidize our addiction to cheap oil with military adventurism, cuddling up to ME jagoffs, and everything else?

You're an addict, and you're blaming the dealers and enablers for your addiction. When you gonna be responsible for yourself, and quit being a baby?

W*GS

08-12-2005, 03:04 PM

w*gs, there are plenty of people that don't own cars because they cannot afford them...yet a price hike will still put a pinch on them. it touches everything we do.

Yep.

And?

How much more misery and cost, in dollars and blood, is our addiction to oil going to cost us before we get smart and do things differently?

ak1971

08-12-2005, 03:07 PM

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 03:10 PM

w*gs, there are plenty of people that don't own cars because they cannot afford them...yet a price hike will still put a pinch on them. it touches everything we do.

it's not just about the snobs who drive suv's.

Don't confuse the O'W*GS Factor with inconvenient facts - you will simply slow him in his quest to become America's best corporate brownie hound and defender of the status quo.

W*GS

08-12-2005, 03:14 PM

Don't confuse the O'W*GS Factor with inconvenient facts - you will simply slow him in his quest to become America's best corporate brownie hound and defender of the status quo.

Oh yeah. Knocking around puds like you on the OM really impresses the Suits. Heck, I get job offers from headhunters for CEO positions all the time because of my posts here. My skill at creaming you in arguments translates incredibly well to running the head office.

This is the umpteenth time you've used this nonsense, LABF - you need new material and drop it. It was breathtakingly stupid the first time.

bronco_diesel

08-12-2005, 03:17 PM

Yep.

And?

How much more misery and cost, in dollars and blood, is our addiction to oil going to cost us before we get smart and do things differently?

who here is saying we shouldn't do things differently?
i think we all understand and agree to that.

what we are faced with right now is a pinch. it appears from your posts that you are not sympathetic to those who will hurt by this - even if i means no food on the table...to the point that you are labeling those who complain to be the snobby SUV cry babys.

we all agree things need to change...but there is more to just changing. it's a process.

Merlin

08-12-2005, 03:26 PM

I find myself in the surprising position of defending W*gs, but you guys are either being purposely obtuse or you are missing the gist of his argument. Although I agree that this administration is strongly pro-oil, that has nothing to do with his argument. He is arguing that gas in America has been subsidized for the past few decades by all administrations, and he is right! Look at Europe, Japan, and so on to get an idea of more realistic costs of oil. Moreover, it is the subsiding process that has led to the quagmire we find ourselves in, and the only way we ever change our behavior is when economic constraints force us to re-examine our general behavior. It is no accident that big cars came back in vogue after the mid eighties, since the price of gas was again artificially low. The only way Americans will behave responsibly in their use of energy is if they have to pay a cost that reflects its true ramifications.

Merlin

W*GS

08-12-2005, 03:32 PM

it appears from your posts that you are not sympathetic to those who will hurt by this - even if i means no food on the table...to the point that you are labeling those who complain to be the snobby SUV cry babys.

How many people will actually have to starve themselves so they can afford gasoline?

C'mon, that's baloney.

Everyone here who's taking shots at me has the exact same mindset as an addict. I'm doing a cyberintervention, and boy, y'all got it real bad. DTs are nothing compared to what you're going to have to deal with.

W*GS

08-12-2005, 03:33 PM

Hotrod

08-12-2005, 03:37 PM

Thank you.

Merlin gets it.

Merlins been getting it in the *** around here for awhile.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 03:37 PM

Bronco_Beerslug

08-12-2005, 03:41 PM

Thank you.

Merlin gets it.
He does and he doesn't, just like you. It's already been explained how millions of Americans will be affected by these sky high prices. It's not like it's been a gradual change where people have time to adapt to the changes.
But I like your condescending attitude to all Americans who are less fortunate than you and don't posses your Einstein like intellect.
Must be tough being the only diamond in the rough, eh?

Merlin

08-12-2005, 03:41 PM

Merlins been getting it in the *** around here for awhile.
Now, now. Just because you got your ass whooped a few times does not mean you need to project your pain unto others.

Merlin

Hotrod

08-12-2005, 03:43 PM

But I like your condescending attitude to all Americans who are less fortunate than you and don't posses your Einstein like intellect.
Must be tough being the only diamond in the rough, eh?

Beerslug gets it. W*GS you would be much more sucessful if your posts were not so upity. Your personality would seem to indicate someone who spends their life looking down on everyone else.

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 03:43 PM

Oil companies are posting record profits and swimming in cash.

Bush's response: Cut their taxes!

What does the coporate income tax rate have to do with the price of gasoline?

The 2 are completely unrelated. It just makes for a good soundbite.

Bronco_Beerslug

08-12-2005, 03:45 PM

What does the coporate income tax rate have to do with the price of gasoline?

The 2 are completely unrelated. It just makes for a good soundbite.
That's accurate but you have to admit with the oil and gas industry enjoying all-time record profits, giving tham tax breaks now doesn't seem to wash.

Merlin

08-12-2005, 03:55 PM

That's accurate but you have to admit with the oil and gas industry enjoying all-time record profits, giving tham tax breaks now doesn't seem to wash.
But it has nothing to do with the arguments being presented here. All this statement reveals is a political agenda of a speaker. It obfuscates the issues by appealing to emotions. The only way this statement has any value is if it is used to suggest that the government instead should be increasing its taxes on the oil industry so that it may reduce them at the gas pumps.

Merlin

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 03:55 PM

What does the coporate income tax rate have to do with the price of gasoline?

The 2 are completely unrelated. It just makes for a good soundbite.

That's not what the AWOL Monkey claims.

His tax cuts for the wealthy and for corporations are supposed to "spur the economy," remember?

That's accurate but you have to admit with the oil and gas industry enjoying all-time record profits, giving tham tax breaks now doesn't seem to wash.

Exactly.

These companies have not created any new jobs, and the tax cuts they have enjoyed have not "spurred the economy" as the Mad Cowboy always suggests whenever he attempts to justify his trickle-down policies.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 03:56 PM

W*GS

08-12-2005, 03:57 PM

It's not like it's been a gradual change where people have time to adapt to the changes

Is the current climb in the price of gas truly news and completely unexpected to anyone?

You've chortled about how well your investments are doing (at least that's the impression I've gotten) so at least one person, you, had an idea that this was coming.

Did you tell all your friends and others, or did you keep it under your hat so your investments would continue to do well?

But I like your condescending attitude to all Americans who are less fortunate than you and don't posses your Einstein like intellect.
Must be tough being the only diamond in the rough, eh?

You're just peeved I've got the guts to say what you're unwilling to say.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 03:59 PM

The Monkey claimed that cutting taxes on the super-rich and on corporations would stimulate the economy and put money in your pocket - hence making the price of gas more affordable.

Those of us who were awake when Saint Ron ran this sort of scam the first time around weren't fooled.

W*GS

08-12-2005, 04:00 PM

The only way this statement has any value is if it is used to suggest that the government instead should be increasing its taxes on the oil industry so that it may reduce them at the gas pumps.

Now you're getting the idea.

Thanks for the late Friday guffaw, LABF.

Please, continue the "logic" you've presented.

Then, when you get to the conclusion, and (hopefully) realize how stupid you are, beat yourself about the head mercilessly.

Spider

08-12-2005, 04:02 PM

We all do.

So?
So it doesnt bother you that you have to pay more when you realy dont have to ?
you realize oil companies are producing a hellva profit ....... I dont know about you W*GS , but I dont enjoy making other people rich .......

Merlin

08-12-2005, 04:05 PM

Now you're getting the idea.
The difference in actual costs to the consumer would be minor in that case. Moreover, the problem with gas prices has been that the gov't has been subsidizing it all these years, and cutting taxes is not addressing the problem. Lastly, there appears to be some strong inconsistencies in some of the argumentations being presented in this forum. On the one hand Bush is being rightly criticized for the budget deficit, but on the other it is being suggested that he reduce the taxes at the gas pump, even thought they are already artificially low. Again, the tax cut is reprehensible, but unrelated to this discussion since it would have little effect on the consumer if returned to them at the pump.

Merlin

Spider

08-12-2005, 04:05 PM

While the middle class and people in America who work for a living are getting squeezed harder and harder by prices at the pump, Bush and Cheney's oil buddies are raking in the dough like never before.

What happens to those record profits?

They sure aren't getting taxed or contributing to the economy in any other way.

These companies aren't creating any new jobs.

The profits are simply going into someone's Swiss bank account or portfolio.
It is just more then at the pumps ....... It is a ripple effect , fr example , you go to the store to buy milk and bread , well the store has to have it shipped in , the delivery company has to charge more cause of gas prices , in turn the store has to raise the price of bread and milk ...... W*GS is ok with this , I think majority of American are not .......

W*GS

08-12-2005, 04:06 PM

So it doesnt bother you that you have to pay more when you realy dont have to ?

In what way can the price of gasoline be reduced without the costs of doing so cropping up in some way or another?

you realize oil companies are producing a hellva profit ....... I dont know about you W*GS , but I dont enjoy making other people rich .......

...which assumes that if they're richer, you're poorer? Now, if you make it a habit to toss cash out the car window as you're going down the street, you might have a point. Otherwise, you don't.

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 04:07 PM

That's accurate but you have to admit with the oil and gas industry enjoying all-time record profits, giving tham tax breaks now doesn't seem to wash.

From 1996 to 2000 60% of corporations failed to pay any income tax. This is not a new phenomon.

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 04:08 PM

The price of gas is a supply and demand problem, not to mention a reflection of the costs associated with producing a gallon of gas.

Bronco_Beerslug

08-12-2005, 04:12 PM

Is the current climb in the price of gas truly news and completely unexpected to anyone?

You've chortled about how well your investments are doing (at least that's the impression I've gotten) so at least one person, you, had an idea that this was coming.

Did you tell all your friends and others, or did you keep it under your hat so your investments would continue to do well?

You're just peeved I've got the guts to say what you're unwilling to say.

Your impression is wrong. Find a post where I've bragged or used bravado to try and impress anyone with my trading of securities. Just like (most) everyone in the business thinks, you never know for sure what's going to happen. You can only use knowledge and research to form your best guesses.

I'm definitely not "peeved" because you think you have more "guts" than me.
Try raising 3 kids by yourself and then come back and tell me about "guts".

I do find you to be uncaring, vain, conceited and abrasive among other things, whether you really are or just fronting yourself.

Bronco_Beerslug

08-12-2005, 04:13 PM

From 1996 to 2000 60% of corporations failed to pay any income tax. This is not a new phenomon.
I'm talking about the most recent tax breaks and incentives as they enjoy all-time record profits the last couple of years.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 04:14 PM

The price of gas is a supply and demand problem, not to mention a reflection of the costs associated with producing a gallon of gas.

That's why it's nice to be Bush and Cheney:

You and your oil industry donors can influence the logistics of supply and demand and get rich.

Spider

08-12-2005, 04:15 PM

In what way can the price of gasoline be reduced without the costs of doing so cropping up in some way or another?
first off get out of Iraq when we can .... the war tanks are not cheap to run ....
Secondly rebuild New refineries in the old spots .......I live a few miles from a refinery went by there today , still a ghost town ...... Biuld more tank farms ( ie storage tanks ) release a % of the national reserve .. I know these are only stop gap measures , but better then nothing

...which assumes that if they're richer, you're poorer? Now, if you make it a habit to toss cash out the car window as you're going down the street, you might have a point. Otherwise, you don't.
Sure , what used to cost 300.00 in fuel is now over 600.00 in fuel , double the intake of Cash , double the out put of cash .... I am now -300 compared to having 300 .....paying double causes this , in turn I have to charge extra for hauling , in turn the stores have to charge more for the product , in turn the consumer pays more , and yet your pay doesnt go up for alot of people ...... Not hard to figure out W*GS ...seriously .......

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 04:17 PM

....... I dont know about you W*GS , but I dont enjoy making other people rich .......

That's where you and W*GS would sharply differ, I'm afraid.

W*GS is a corporate brownie hound who apparently believes in trickle-down.

He seems to think that if he helps the rich get richer at the expense of the poor, working, and middle classes, there will be some payoff for him.

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 04:18 PM

Why doesnt everyone just go long on oil stocks then?

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 04:19 PM

That's why it's nice to be Bush and Cheney:

You and your oil industry donors can influence the logistics of supply and demand and get rich.

What influence do they have over China, and these jerked off regimes that are sitting on the stuff.?

W*GS

08-12-2005, 04:23 PM

Your impression is wrong. Find a post where I've bragged or used bravado to try and impress anyone with my trading of securities.

You mention it on a regular basis as if you have some sort of "in" or smarts when it comes to economics.

It's pretty clear to me you don't.

Try raising 3 kids by yourself and then come back and tell me about "guts".

I got your three kids, and a wife, to support. So don't tell me your sob story.

I do find you to be uncaring, vain, conceited and abrasive among other things, whether you really are or just fronting yourself.

How is pointing out obvious truths "uncaring" or "vain"?

Do you tell a smoker finally paying the price of her addiction with terminal lung cancer that she's not to blame? That someone will "fix" her? That it's all someone else's fault?

The facts are what they are. If my relating them makes me a nasty person, well, the problem is yours, not mine.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 04:24 PM

What influence do they have over China, and these jerked off regimes that are sitting on the stuff.?

Their trade policies, i.e., the WalMart-ization of the world, have helped China become a major economic force/consumer of oil, for one.

W*GS

08-12-2005, 04:25 PM

He seems to think that if he helps the rich get richer at the expense of the poor, working, and middle classes, there will be some payoff for him.

Exactly how would that work?

You've got it figured out, apparently - tell me how my posts here on the OM will endear me to the Powerful and Mighty. I'd like to know, since being a hell of lot richer sure would be nice.

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 04:26 PM

W*GS

08-12-2005, 04:26 PM

Their trade policies, i.e., the WalMart-ization of the world, have helped China become a major economic force/consumer of oil, for one.

Who's forcing anyone to buy Chinese goods?

"Clinton Democrat"?

Bull.

W*GS

08-12-2005, 04:30 PM

first off get out of Iraq when we can .... the war tanks are not cheap to run ....

When is "when we can", and, now that we've broken Iraq, don't we have a moral obligation to the Iraqi people to help them fix it? Or do we just cut and run?

Secondly rebuild New refineries in the old spots .......I live a few miles from a refinery went by there today , still a ghost town ...... Biuld more tank farms ( ie storage tanks ) release a % of the national reserve .. I know these are only stop gap measures , but better then nothing

"Stopgap" is exactly right.

Do you treat an alcoholic by giving him beer instead of vodka?

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 04:31 PM

That's rich, we should somehow keep China in the bronze age so we can drive around in Hummer's and fill up for 20 bucks.

Spider

08-12-2005, 04:31 PM

When I buy a gallon of gas, 5 to 7 cents of what I pay ends up as profits to the oil company. (Local and federal taxes, by contrast, average 48 cents.) If "big oil" were ordered to reduce its profit margins to zero, would I notice the difference?
LOL . did you think before you posted this ?
Ok lets say it is true , How many Gallons of gas are bought each day in America ?
besides trasportation is under half of our total oil use what about plastics ?
Heating ..... How much profit is made there ?

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 04:33 PM

LOL . did you think before you posted this ?
Ok lets say it is true , How many Gallons of gas are bought each day in America ?
besides trasportation is under half of our total oil use what about plastics ?
Heating ..... How much profit is made there ?

Talk about non sequitr???? If the Oil Companies were ordered to reduce their profits to zero, there would be no appreciable difference at the pump. (a nickle per gallon or so)

Spider

08-12-2005, 04:34 PM

When is "when we can", and, now that we've broken Iraq, don't we have a moral obligation to the Iraqi people to help them fix it? Or do we just cut and run?
well as we all know we had no business going in , We do have to fix what Bush broke ... but we dont stay a day longer .......

"Stopgap" is exactly right.

Do you treat an alcoholic by giving him beer instead of vodka?
LOL weak comparision . noticed you didnt tackle the second part of my post ... But how you treat a drunkard ...... you dont , the drunkard has to want help ....

Bronco_Beerslug

08-12-2005, 04:37 PM

You mention it on a regular basis as if you have some sort of "in" or smarts when it comes to economics.

Complete BS from a poor rendition of a BS artist! Prove your theory Einstein. Show were on a regular basis I've mentioned I have an "in" or smarts when it comes to economics.

I got your three kids, and a wife, to support. So don't tell me your sob story.

You're the one complaining about a sob story (I'm sure your wife would appreciate that). I stated it takes guts to raise 3 kids without your sob story wife, not belittling people because they may be less fortunate than you.

How is pointing out obvious truths "uncaring" or "vain"?
Do you tell a smoker finally paying the price of her addiction with terminal lung cancer that she's not to blame? That someone will "fix" her? That it's all someone else's fault?
Why are they the obvious truths? Because you say they are?
Your poor attempt at comparing a terminal smoker to the rest of American citizens is amateurish at best.

The facts are what they are. If my relating them makes me a nasty person, well, the problem is yours, not mine.
Hello, anyone there? It's not your talking point but your delivery that makes you look like some dickless bookworm that hasn't been laid in years.

Spider

08-12-2005, 04:41 PM

Talk about non sequitr???? If the Oil Companies were ordered to reduce their profits to zero, there would be no appreciable difference at the pump. (a nickle per gallon or so)
Hilarious! first off their profit is more then 7 cents a gallon , and 1 thing you will learn is people hate to lower prices .....
Point is even @ a penny a gallon profit the amount of Gas and oil sold every day in the USA is mind boggling ......... and in turn you pay a nickle less per gallon it adds up , old saying you watch your pennies and the dollars will take care of themselfs ......
you are a diesel mechanic I will put this a way you can understand better ......
I own a rig that is Nickle and diming me every run . Would I be better off buying a new truck and truck payments or keep repairing the old 1 every run ?
Now you want to bring up Tax ? that more of a local thing , dont like it move.... is all I can say ..... evey state charges different amounts on tax @ the pumps ............

W*GS

08-12-2005, 04:42 PM

Complete BS from a poor rendition of a BS artist! Prove your theory Einstein. Show were on a regular basis I've mentioned I have an "in" or smarts when it comes to economics.

You wouldn't mention your securities trading if you weren't trying to make it sound like you knew something of economics.

You're the one complaining about a sob story (I'm sure your wife would appreciate that). I stated it takes guts to raise 3 kids without your sob story wife, not belittling people because they may be less fortunate than you.

You brought up the "Poor me, I'm raising three kids myself" bit, not me.

Why are they the obvious truths? Because you say they are?

Point out anything I've said that's untrue regarding the history of the politics of oil in this country.

Your poor attempt at comparing a terminal smoker to the rest of American citizens is amateurish at best.

It's rather apt. Think a wee bit.

Hello, anyone there? It's not your talking point but your delivery that makes you look like some dickless bookworm that hasn't been laid in years.

Now you're in LABF-mode.

I gotcha.

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 04:50 PM

This isn't hidden data, if you divide the profits by the total amount of gasoline sold, you'll arrive at a figure of 5-7 cents. The fed and local taxes amount for around 50 cents depending on where you live.

Spider

08-12-2005, 04:53 PM

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 04:56 PM

That's rich, we should somehow keep China in the bronze age so we can drive around in Hummer's and fill up for 20 bucks.

Who said anything about keeping China is the bronze age?

The problem is that the corporate kleptocrats and the cheap labor conservatives who are running the country are only concerned about their own bottom line - not the American economy or the American consumer.

Hence, if making China the next economic superpower while simultaneously bankrupting America makes for greater profits, then so be it.

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 05:03 PM

If you say so .......But how does off road use figure in ?

I've never heard of off road use gasoline... diesel yes

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 05:04 PM

Who said anything about keeping China is the bronze age?

The problem is that the corporate kleptocrats and the cheap labor conservatives who are running the country are only concerned about their own bottom line - not the American economy or the American consumer.

Hence, if making China the next economic superpower while simultaneously bankrupting America makes for greater profits, then so be it.

Who gave China MFN status?

Hogan11

08-12-2005, 05:06 PM

It's all Clinton's fault.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 05:08 PM

It's all Clinton's fault.

LOL

Took the words right out of my mouth...

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 05:10 PM

"Record oil company profits" is a nebulous concept anyhow. The profitibility of providing a gallon of gasoline hasn't increased at all.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 05:11 PM

W*GS?

http://www.bartcop.com/bobble-corp-w.gif

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 05:12 PM

What can the President of the US nomatter what party he is do to reduce China's consumption of oil?

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 05:15 PM

"Record oil company profits" is a nebulous concept anyhow. The profitibility of providing a gallon of gasoline hasn't increased at all.

Apparently you haven't been keeping up with oil company earning statements.

All indications are that these companies have so much disposable cash that they can't figure out ways to spend it.

Psssst! How about lowering prices at the gas pump?

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 05:16 PM

What can the President of the US nomatter what party he is do to reduce China's consumption of oil?

Stop investing in China and start investing in America.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 05:18 PM

It's not your talking point but your delivery that makes you look like some dickless bookworm that hasn't been laid in years.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Bronco_Beerslug again.

^5

:laugh:

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 05:25 PM

Psssst! How about lowering prices at the gas pump?

Giving the gas away for only what they have into it would only lower the price to the consumer 5-7 cents.

Bronco_Beerslug

08-12-2005, 05:38 PM

You wouldn't mention your securities trading if you weren't trying to make it sound like you knew something of economics.

You forgot to address the point again. Prove it!

You brought up the "Poor me, I'm raising three kids myself" bit, not me.

Once again, it has nothing to do with pity. You're the one who brought that up.

Now you're in LABF-mode.

I gotcha.
Oh, I don't know. Maybe we should start a poll to see what the consensus is regarding your "always on the rag attitude"?

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 05:46 PM

Giving the gas away for only what they have into it would only lower the price to the consumer 5-7 cents.

How so?

What math are you using to come to this conclusion?

A 5-7 cent difference between cost and retail price certainly wouldn't account for the record profits and disposable cash on hand.

At any rate, even if you are correct, 5-7 cents is better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 05:50 PM

Once again, it has nothing to do with pity. You're the one who brought that up.

Do you suppose that if W*GS didn't live so close to his place of work and, say, faced a 50-60 mile round trip to work everyday then he would be singing a different tune about gas prices?

Nah - he'd probably just think of it as a necessary and noble sacrifice for the corporatist cause.

Bronco_Beerslug

08-12-2005, 05:52 PM

When I buy a gallon of gas, 5 to 7 cents of what I pay ends up as profits to the oil company. (Local and federal taxes, by contrast, average 48 cents.) If "big oil" were ordered to reduce its profit margins to zero, would I notice the difference?
That's only correct for some oil companies. Others who own their own refineries and or pump out their own crude make considerably more.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 05:56 PM

Bottom line:

njbil can minimize and downplay oil company profits all he wants, but his claims are in direct conflict with these company's own accounting statements.

According to their own accounting, these companies are posting record profits and are so flush with disposable cash that they don't know how to spend it all.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 05:59 PM

The multinational oil companies are rolling in cash but they have little to spend it on. Demand for fossil fuels is growing at a spanking pace, the price of a barrel has risen to record levels and you might think it was Christmas every day for a company such as ExxonMobil.

Instead, big oil is fretting. According to Deutsche Bank, the Western oil majors will together accumulate about $45 billion (£25.3 billion) in spare cash after investing in projects, paying their bills, taxes and the annual dividend.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8210-1266132,00.html

clarker

08-12-2005, 06:01 PM

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 06:02 PM

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 06:05 PM

Oh, my God they must be evil, they are making money.

I thought that what buisnesses did. Make money.

Talk about completely missing the point.

No one said making money was evil.

What is evil is the current radical redistribution of wealth from the working and middle classes to the top 1% facilitated by the complete merger of corporate interests with government power represented by Team Thug.

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 06:08 PM

The record profits are not due to the 7 cents they are making at the pump.

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 06:13 PM

Big Oil's Burden of Too Much Cash

Born from the megamergers of the 1990's, the world's giant oil companies have delivered on their promise. They have cut costs, increased returns and raised profits to records. Now, flush with cash, they find themselves in a paradoxical position - they are making more money than they can comfortably spend.

http://www.energybulletin.net/4318.html

You left this part out.

One reason exploration spending is declining is quite simple - there is less oil left to drill for in places that are open for exploration, like North America or the North Sea, while the bulk of the world's known reserves, mainly in the Middle East, are mostly shut off to foreign investors

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 06:15 PM

The record profits are not due to the 7 cents they are making at the pump.

What difference does this make, if true?

It doesn't matter where the profits come from - all that the average consumer knows is that he's taking it in the tailpipe at the gas pump and that none of these companies is investing any of its surplus cash in the US economy.

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 06:17 PM

Sure they are, they are paying out a higher dividend and buying back stock.

If Oil companines are pancea you're making them out to be then mortgage your house and sink everything into Conoco stock.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 06:17 PM

You left this part out.

It would only support my case.

That is, if these companies aren't spending money on exploration, drilling, etc., then what are they doing with all that surplus cash?

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 06:19 PM

If Oil companines are pancea you're making them out to be then mortgage your house and sink everything into Conoco stock.

And be part of the problem, not the solution, eh?

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 06:21 PM

It would only support my case.

That is, if these companies aren't spending money on exploration, drilling, etc., then what are they doing with all that surplus cash?

Strengthening their balance sheet.

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 06:23 PM

Oil prices are high, crude oil prices are high, oil company profits are high, and Bush is president.

You're just trying to draw some nebulous connection between them.

Hogan11

08-12-2005, 06:33 PM

Release some of the strategic reserves like Clinton did.

Oh I forgot, it's always Clinton's fault.....sorry, carry on.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 06:41 PM

Oil prices are high, crude oil prices are high, oil company profits are high, and Bush is president.

You're just trying to draw some nebulous connection between them.

The connection is well-known, well-documented and anything but "nebulous":

1) Bush and Cheney are oil men

2) Big Oil = Bush/Cheney's biggest contributor

3) Enron was invited to write U.S. energy policy

Hogan11

08-12-2005, 06:43 PM

The connection is well-known, well-documented and anything but "nebulous":

1) Bush and Cheney are oil men

2) Big Oil = Bush/Cheney's biggest contributor

3) Enron was invited to write U.S. energy policy

Cheney promised his minions $60.00 + a barrel and delivered....isn't that right?

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 06:59 PM

Someone was bitching about those meetings being held in secrecy, now you're giving out what happened... which one is it?

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 07:00 PM

The connection is well-known, well-documented and anything but "nebulous":

1) Bush and Cheney are oil men

2) Big Oil = Bush/Cheney's biggest contributor

3) Enron was invited to write U.S. energy policy

And what does all that have to do with the price of a gallon of gasoline? Lets keep our eye on the ball here.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 07:01 PM

Cheney promised his minions $60.00 + a barrel and delivered....isn't that right?

You are correct, sir.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 07:04 PM

And what does all that have to do with the price of a gallon of gasoline? Lets keep our eye on the ball here.

BushCo = a total merger of oil company interests with government power, and you don't think this has any bearing on the price of gas?

My buddy Spider still has some oceanfront property in Wyoming for sale if you're interested.

Bronco_Beerslug

08-12-2005, 07:06 PM

Interesting article! Neither one of my online books have offered betting on oil futures yet.

Think gas prices will go higher? You can bet on it
Posted on Fri, Aug. 12, 2005
By Kevin G. Hall
Knight Ridder Newspapers

WASHINGTON - You're seeing gas prices rise in the blink of an eye, and it seems a sure bet they'll go higher. That's why a major Internet sports-betting parlor began offering odds on rising gas prices this month, and why business is booming for traders who buy and sell oil contracts.

The volume of contracts for future delivery of crude oil set a record Thursday on the New York Mercantile Exchange (Nymex), and it seems everyone is gambling, hedging and trying to profit from rising fuel prices.

The price of crude oil went above $67 a barrel Friday, before retreating to close at $66.86. Traders expect next week to be equally volatile. Brace yourself for even higher pump prices, since there's a lag before gas prices catch up with crude-oil prices.

On Aug. 6, Pinnacle Sports, a large international Internet bookie headquartered on the Caribbean island of Curacao, began offering odds on future gasoline prices, allowing people who aren't high rollers to bet on fluctuating gas prices in a manner similar to how big institutional investors play the odds on the Nymex.

"This really is the man on the street. Many people read about the fluctuations ... these are the Joe Publics who are getting hit in the pocket with rising gas prices," said Simon Noble, the chief executive officer for Pinnacle UK.

Pinnacle officials won't disclose the number of gamblers who have wagered on U.S. gas prices but offer this comparison: Interest is about on par with betting on the recent Tour de France bicycle race.

Gamblers can wager on three propositions: Whether crude oil will top $70 a barrel by Jan. 1, whether the average price of gas in Los Angeles and New York will top $3.00 a gallon and whether a gallon of regular unleaded gas will exceed a nationwide average of $2.50.

Opponents of gambling view Pinnacle's activities as a vice, but they almost mirror what happens in the futures markets for oil. About 95 percent of the oil contracts trading hands on the Nymex are dubbed paper oil. They're bought and sold by people who never intend to take delivery.

The remaining contracts often are bought by oil-dependent companies such as airlines and refineries as a way of hedging against rising prices. Contracts are for delivery before the following month, so when they buy at $60 a barrel they do so expecting prices to rise even higher. If they guess right, they save money; if they guess wrong and oil prices are lower a month later, then they lose money.

A tremendous amount of trading on the Nymex comes from investors and speculators who want to take profits as oil prices continue climbing. In recent years, large pension-fund administrators and less regulated hedge funds have poured billions into the market for oil futures. And many savvy individual investors have hopped aboard Wall Street's commodity index funds and commodity hedge funds.

"That's how the average person is getting involved (in oil futures). You don't see the dentist from Des Moines buying 100 contracts," said Eric Bolling, an independent floor trader on the Nymex. "It's like buying shares in a mutual fund."

For those with greater appetite for speculation, the Nymex also offers an electronic auction of investment instruments that are a hedge against changes in the statistical data about U.S. crude-oil inventories released weekly by the Energy Information Administration, part of the Energy Department.

"This word hedge is just a euphemism for `Let's gamble,'" said John van Schaik, the editor of the New York trade newsletter Energy Intelligence Briefing.

The biggest difference between online gambling and the futures market is scale. An investor who buys a contract for future delivery of oil commits himself to purchasing either 1,000 barrels of oil or a mini-contract of 500 barrels. A barrel of oil is 42,000 gallons. At $66 a barrel, that's $66,000 for a single regular contract and $33,000 for the mini. Pinnacle's minimum online bet for gas prices is $1 and its maximum is $500.

On Thursday, the Nymex, the main trading place for oil, smashed a daily record for oil contracts. Some 383,599 contracts changed hands, surging past the previous record of 373,048 traded on April 13.

http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/12370546.htm

clarker

08-12-2005, 07:08 PM

BushCo = a total merger of oil company interests with government power, and you don't think this has any bearing on the price of gas?

My buddy Spider still has some oceanfront property in Wyoming for sale if you're interested.So if John Kerry won the election I would be paying $10 a bottle for ketuchup?

Bush and Cheney being former oilmen doesn't prove any wrong doing. If you had proof of wrong doing or knew what happened in those meetings you whine about so much, prove it. Post to link.

Until all your rants are just Michael Moore fed Democratic Wet dreams.

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 07:10 PM

BushCo = a total merger of oil company interests with government power, and you don't think this has any bearing on the price of gas?.

No it doesnt. If Kerry were elected, crude would have still hit 60 bucks a barrel and gas prices would still be where they are.

Bronco_Beerslug

08-12-2005, 07:12 PM

Gas is over $3 in some parts of CA. Here are the averages........

.

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 07:12 PM

Like I said, you're taking a bunch of unrelated concepts and running them through the DNC blender to arrive at this anti Bush cocktail.

clarker

08-12-2005, 07:13 PM

No it doesnt. If Kerry were elected, crude would have still hit 60 bucks a barrel and gas prices would still be where they are.True, but Heinz Ketchup would be 90 bucks a gallon. ;D

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 07:13 PM

Cali is always higher due to special fuel blends.

Bronco_Beerslug

08-12-2005, 07:15 PM

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 07:16 PM

Like I said before, I'm not a big Bush fan. I belong to a union even, but blaming Bush for the price of gas is simplistic at best and intellectually dishonest at worst.

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 07:17 PM

True, but Heinz Ketchup would be 90 bucks a gallon. ;D

And we'd be invading Italy to take control of their tomato fields.

Bronco_Beerslug

08-12-2005, 07:19 PM

Like I said before, I'm not a big Bush fan. I belong to a union even, but blaming Bush for the price of gas is simplistic at best and intellectually dishonest at worst.
Are you saying there is nothing he can do to move prices down?

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 07:34 PM

Are you saying there is nothing he can do to move prices down?

I dont believe there is.

Bronco_Beerslug

08-12-2005, 07:39 PM

I dont believe there is.
That point was debated quite a bit today. Almost all analysts agreed releasing reserves would move prices down immediately.

But what I've been saying for quite awhile now is we need to move to alternate and renewable energy full force, right now, spending billions in research, incentives and manufacturing. We would create all new industries along with moving away from the stranglehold foreign countries now have on us.
And at the same time we would stop the indirect funding of our enemies.

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 07:44 PM

clarker

08-12-2005, 07:48 PM

That point was debated quite a bit today. Almost all analysts agreed releasing reserves would move prices down immediately.

But what I've been saying for quite awhile now is we need to move to alternate and renewable energy full force, right now, spending billions in research, incentives and manufacturing. We would create all new industries along with moving away from the stranglehold foreign countries now have on us.
And at the same time we would stop the indirect funding of our enemies.
I agree with every bit of the second part of your post here. This is where I have a problem with Bush and oil. He will never support research alternative fuel sources. Not ever.

But I still that Presidents get too much credit or too much blame for the state of the economy. I also don't think they have as much power(no matter how bad they would want it) over the price of anything. The market place sets the prices.

Bronco_Beerslug

08-12-2005, 07:49 PM

The reserves would then have to be replaced at taxpayer expense with more expensive fuel oil. It's a couple of week solution tops.

A steady release would affect prices for over a month according to what was said today and you're going to pay for it one way or the other.

Spider

08-12-2005, 07:50 PM

.
Yeah we are feeling the crunch here , and we are the least tax state in the country ............a bunch of people here voted fpr a 1 cent sales tax just so they could bítch about Taxes ;D

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 07:51 PM

Bush and Cheney being former oilmen doesn't prove any wrong doing. If you had proof of wrong doing or knew what happened in those meetings you whine about so much, prove it. Post to link.

Until all your rants are just Michael Moore fed Democratic Wet dreams.

Surely you can't be this naive.

Do you honestly think that Big Oil has given Bush/Cheney all that money with no strings attached?

And are you actually going to sit there and claim that inviting Enron to write U.S. energy policy is a good thing for consumers or that the policies that ensue aren't friendly to Big Oil at the expense of consumers?

I know Spider has some oceanfront property in Wyoming he'd probably like to sell you.

Bronco_Beerslug

08-12-2005, 07:52 PM

I agree with every bit of the second part of your post here. This is where I have a problem with Bush and oil. He will never support research alternative fuel sources. Not ever.

But I still that Presidents get too much credit or too much blame for the state of the economy. I also don't think they have as much power(no matter how bad they would want it) over the price of anything. The market place sets the prices.
But Bush does have the power to do this, IF he wanted to. He could announce a national emergency (if needed) and start us on our way to energy freedom.
But since he is an oilman himself and surrounded by oil men that will never happen.

Off to the Tiki bar. Time to have a brew and dance the night away!

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 07:54 PM

but blaming Bush for the price of gas is simplistic at best and intellectually dishonest at worst.

Not at all.

Not when Bush has essentially allowed Big Oil to write its own energy legislation in exchange for big campaign $$$.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 07:58 PM

But since he is an oilman himself and surrounded by oil men that will never happen.

Bingo.

People like Clarker and njbli would have us believe that it's just a coincidence that Big Oil is Bush's biggest contributor and that Bush allowed Enron to have a hand in writing America's energy policy.

Can you imagine what the bush minions would have said if Clinton had done something like this?

You'd never hear the end of it!

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 08:07 PM

Bingo.

People like Clarker and njbli would have us believe that it's just a coincidence that Big Oil is Bush's biggest contributor and that Bush allowed Enron to have a hand in writing America's energy policy.

Can you imagine what the bush minions would have said if Clinton had done something like this?

You'd never hear the end of it!

He tried to, he had Hillary and a bunch of attorney's attemt to take over one fifth of the US economy.

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 08:10 PM

Not at all.

Not when Bush has essentially allowed Big Oil to write its own energy legislation in exchange for big campaign $$$.

What legislation, obstensibly written by Big Oil, is responsible for high gasoline prices?

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 08:11 PM

A steady release would affect prices for over a month according to what was said today and you're going to pay for it one way or the other.

It doesnt make a lot of sense to me. It's like drawing down your savings to pay your heating bill instead of insulating your house.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 08:20 PM

What legislation, obstensibly written by Big Oil, is responsible for high gasoline prices?

To wit:

This is a policy that was hatched in secret three years ago by the Vice President’s Energy Task Force.

On Sunday the Washington Post reported on the influence that has been wielded in this Administration by the people who raised large amounts of money for President Bush’s campaign.

One of the four people who organized the entire fundraising apparatus was Donald Evans, a Texas oil man.

The article also noted the influence of Enron CEO Ken Lay, who served on the Energy Department transition team and recommended two of the appointees to the five-member Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

When it comes to a national energy policy, this Administration has taken care of the Enrons and the big oil companies ... while middle class families get gouged at the gas pump.

http://reid.senate.gov/gasprices0504.cfm

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 08:22 PM

He tried to, he had Hillary and a bunch of attorney's attemt to take over one fifth of the US economy.

???

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 08:27 PM

That health care debacle. Those meetings were held in secret also.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 08:34 PM

What legislation, obstensibly written by Big Oil, is responsible for high gasoline prices?

Washington, DC - As gas prices surge past $2.23 per gallon, President Bush and the Congressional Republicans are scrambling to use the crisis to push through an energy bill that is nothing more than a gift to special interests that will hurt the environment while doing nothing to lower gas prices. Democrats have proposed and are committed to real solutions. The Republicans in Washington should join with Democrats to focus on reforms that actually reduce the price of oil—including increasing conservation, developing alternative energies, and releasing oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

"President Bush and the Republicans insist there is nothing they can do to lower gas prices. Fact is, there are plenty of ways to give relief to middle class families, but none of them would line the pockets of President Bush's big oil contributors," said DNC Chairman, Gov. Howard Dean. "The Democratic Party is offering real common-sense solutions to lower gas prices."

Republican Energy Bill Is a Special-Interest
Giveaway That Will Not Reduce Gas Prices

Former Tom DeLay Aide Admits that Energy Bill Will Not Solve Gas Price Problem, But Only Gives Appearance of Doing Something. According to the Los Angeles Times, "Politically, it doesn't matter if such provisions deal with the long term, said [Stuart Roy, a Republican strategist and former aide to House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX)]. ‘The most important thing for policy makers in the current environment of relatively high gas prices and the approaching summer travel months is action.'" [Los Angeles Times, 4/16/05]

House Republican Energy Bill Is a Tax Giveaway to Big Energy Companies. According to the Washington Post, "The House this week will consider $8 billion in tax breaks targeted to the energy industry at a time when some of those companies are enjoying soaring profits from high consumer prices. The vast majority of the tax breaks would benefit companies that produce and supply traditional forms of energy, with a large portion going to the oil and natural gas sector… Environmentalists are outraged, saying the bill provides giveaways to big energy companies, such as ExxonMobil Corp., whose 2004 profits set a record." [Washington Post, 4/19/05]

Energy Bill Includes MTBE Waiver Supported by Tom DeLay and Energy Industry. According to the New York Times, "If oil and chemical companies have their way, a majority of [MTBE] lawsuits… will be thrown out by Congress as part of the energy bill backed by the Bush administration. The bill… includes a waiver that would protect the chemical makers, which are some of the biggest oil giants in the United States, from all MTBE liability lawsuits filed since September 2003. The House majority leader, Tom DeLay, and Representative Joe L. Barton, who heads the Energy and Commerce Committee, are staunch supporters of the waiver. Both are Republicans from Texas, where more than a dozen MTBE manufacturers are based." [New York Times, 4/15/05]

MTBE Is a Dangerous Chemical That Is Seeping into Our Water Supplies. MTBE is used in gasoline to reduce carbon monoxide emissions from cars. MTBE dissolves easily in water and does not readily cling to soil, so it moves rapidly into the ground—making it likely to seep into water supplies. Its powerful turpentine-like taste and odor make water undrinkable. Contamination usually results from leaks in at gasoline stations. [New York Times, 4/15/05]

MTBE Waiver is Top Priority for Oil Industry. According to Lawrence Goldstein, president of the Petroleum Industry Research Foundation, "The MTBE waiver issue is Priority 1, 2 and 3 for the refining industry. Without it they aren't going to get behind the energy bill." [NYT, 4/15/05]

Energy Bill Rewards Bush Fundraisers. According to the Washington Post, the 2004 Republican energy bill, nearly identical to the current one, provided billions of dollars in benefits to companies run by at least 22 executives and their spouses who were either "Pioneers" or "Rangers," as well as to the clients of at least 15 lobbyists and their spouses who have achieved similar status as fundraisers. The energy bill provides industry tax breaks worth $23.5 billion over 10 years aimed at increasing domestic oil and gas production, and $5.4 billion in subsidies and loan guarantees. [WP, 11/24/03]

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 08:37 PM

That health care debacle. Those meetings were held in secret also.

The "debacle" happened because the house rethugs refused to compromise on any healthcare plan (or at least any healthcare plan that wasn't a giveaway to the insurance lobby) and chose to throw the baby out with the bathwater instead.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 08:40 PM

A Bill Only Exxon Could Love

After four years of negotiations, members of Congress are patting themselves on the back, having reached an agreement on energy legislation. One problem: it's still a really bad bill. A functional energy policy would reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil, spend taxpayer dollars wisely and respect the environment. The bill agreed on by House and Senate negotiators yesterday accomplishes none of these goals. But oil and utility companies have spent $367 million over the last two years lobbying Congress, so it's expected to pass anyway.

CONGRESS ADDICTED TO FOREIGN OIL: The bill fails to take any steps that will substantively reduce America's dependence on foreign oil. Specifically, the final version "rejected a Senate provision that required reduction of oil consumption by one million barrels per day by 2015." Under the bill "our need for imported oil will continue to grow for as long as models are able to project."

THE $8.5 BILLION GIVEAWAY: Big energy companies are flush with so much cash, they don't know what to do with it. That didn't stop Congress from showering the electricity, coal, nuclear, natural gas and oil industries with $8.5 billion in tax breaks and billions more in loan guarantees and other subsidies. Apparently, members of the conference weren't particularly concerned how they spent taxpayer money. The Washington Post reports, "as House-Senate conferees worked late into the night this week on the final paragraphs of the legislation, a proposal was made, and approved, to provide $250,000 for a study of 'irradiated fuel' -- although many of the conference participants acknowledged they had no idea what that was."

DROPPING THE BALL ON RENEWABLE ENERGY: The final legislation dropped a provision that would have required utilities "to generate at least 10 percent of their electricity through renewable fuels by 2020." The proposal, championed by Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) was "was a low-cost, market-driven approach to cutting demand for fossil fuels and easing air pollution." On this issue, we are officially less progressive than China. Starting with far less capacity than the United States, the Asian nation has committed "to supply 10 percent of its needs from so-called renewable energy sources, including wind, solar energy, small hydroelectric dams and biomass like plant fibers and animal wastes" by 2020.

AN ENVIRONMENTAL DISASTER: The bill contains a host of provisions that will wreak havoc on the environment. For example, the bill creates a loophole in the Safe Drinking Water Act allowing "oil and natural gas drilling companies to inject fluids laced with toxic chemicals and contaminants into oil and gas wells that penetrate underground aquifers, risking contamination of drinking water sources." The bill also "creates a loophole in the Clean Water Act" for oil and gas companies which allows the industry to ignore regulations designed to limit "erosion and runoff into rivers and streams" at construction sites. Funding is also provided for "an inventory of oil and natural gas resources" in sensitive coastal areas, a move seen "by many coastal states as the first step toward reopening these areas to drilling."

IGNORING GLOBAL WARMING: The energy bill "like the Bush administration, is blind to global warming." The final version "contains no substantive provisions to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions that are causing global warming," such as a carbon tax or cap. The conferees even stripped out "a Senate provision acknowledging the threat of climate change." As the world moves forward to deal with the problem, America continues to tread water. The bill merely calls for "further studies and research."

THE "GOOD NEWS": The good news about the bill is that it does not include provisions that would open the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve to drilling or shield companies that contaminate groundwater with the toxic chemical MTBE from legal liability. (Conservatives are planning on trying to jam a provision allowing Arctic drilling in next year's budget). But, after four years, America deserves more than an energy policy that excludes two offensive, regressive policies. Even with ANWR drilling and MTBE out for now, it's "a bill that only industry executives and lobbyists could love."

Full article and sources: http://www.americanprogressaction.org/site/pp.asp?c=klLWJcP7H&b=100480

Raider Bill

08-12-2005, 09:56 PM

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-12-2005, 11:34 PM

Keeping our eye on the ball here, how did a bill just signed Monday retroactively raise gasoline prices?

You miss the point:

THE $8.5 BILLION GIVEAWAY: Big energy companies are flush with so much cash, they don't know what to do with it. That didn't stop Congress from showering the electricity, coal, nuclear, natural gas and oil industries with $8.5 billion in tax breaks and billions more in loan guarantees and other subsidies. Apparently, members of the conference weren't particularly concerned how they spent taxpayer money. The Washington Post reports, "as House-Senate conferees worked late into the night this week on the final paragraphs of the legislation, a proposal was made, and approved, to provide $250,000 for a study of 'irradiated fuel' -- although many of the conference participants acknowledged they had no idea what that was."

In other words, the current misadministration is rewarding its big donors in the oil and gas industry (who are already flush with surplus cash) with even MORE tax cuts and subsidies while doing NOTHING to provide relief to the majority of working and middle-class Americans who are getting squeezed to the breaking point (due, in no small measure, to ridiculous gas prices.)

Hogan11

08-12-2005, 11:43 PM

Keeping our eye on the ball here, how did a bill just signed Monday retroactively raise gasoline prices?

Let me give you a hint.................It didn't!

Paying lip service to renewable fuels is great but the technology isnt there yet. Hybrids are a better short-intermediate "bridge" solution, for vehicles anyhow.

Billions of dollars to improve and build roads that very few of us will be able to afford to drive upon.

Hybrids work for stop & go traffic.....but for the guy driving many HWY miles to work and back, they are this side of useless.

TomServo

08-13-2005, 02:07 AM

Bronco_Beerslug

08-13-2005, 06:38 AM

Totally cracks me up @ whos to blame for gas prices. Its US. how many vehicles are on the road w/only one driver-passenger? How many cars could get by with more than one passenger?

all the dumbasses driving cars like the lincoln navigator w/ even a modern corvette gets double the mpg.

I agree partly with you. Why haven't auto manufacturers been pressured into making vehicles to get higher MPG? Whose bottom line would that cut into?
I wonder if there is any pressure on Congress NOT to raise MPG requirements?

W*GS

08-13-2005, 10:20 PM

Washington, DC - As gas prices surge past $2.23 per gallon, [...]

If you're going to post piffle from the Democratic Party, at least provide the source:

http://www.democrats.org/a/2005/05/drilling_for_ki.php

If anyone here is a partisan hack, it's you, LABF.

W*GS

08-13-2005, 10:26 PM

Do you suppose that if W*GS didn't live so close to his place of work and, say, faced a 50-60 mile round trip to work everyday then he would be singing a different tune about gas prices?

I wouldn't complain - I'd blame myself for such an unnecessarily long commute.

One of the biggest differences between us, LABF, is that you're always searching for someone else to blame - for everything. A trademark of the excessively conspiratorial fear-ridden type. You blame Bush for stubbing your toe.

Take responsibility for your life, instead of hunting high and low for someone else to take responsibility for you - in short, grow up.

W*GS

08-13-2005, 10:27 PM

Stop investing in China and start investing in America.

Provide some examples.

Rigs11

08-13-2005, 10:29 PM

If you're going to post piffle from the Democratic Party, at least provide the source:

http://www.democrats.org/a/2005/05/drilling_for_ki.php

If anyone here is a partisan hack, it's you, LABF.

Read the article and you'll notice that it quotes the New york times and the Washington post. What's the problem?Do you have some better sources to refute this?

W*GS

08-13-2005, 11:08 PM

Read the article and you'll notice that it quotes the New york times and the Washington post. What's the problem?Do you have some better sources to refute this?

Gee, the Democrats using the NYT and WP as sources. There's a real shocker.

I'm just showing that LABF has accused others of being party hacks, yet when he's found out to supply material directly from the Democratic Party (yet, strangely, without attribution) he'll dodge and weave and depend on his ideological brethren to cover for him.

You deserve some rep points from him for being such a good little liberal.

Bronco_Beerslug

08-14-2005, 06:35 AM

Gee, the Democrats using the NYT and WP as sources. There's a real shocker.

I'm just showing that LABF has accused others of being party hacks, yet when he's found out to supply material directly from the Democratic Party (yet, strangely, without attribution) he'll dodge and weave and depend on his ideological brethren to cover for him.

You deserve some rep points from him for being such a good little liberal.
Want to provide some proof that the NYT and the WP are the "democratic party"? Doesn't matter to me where information or stories come from. It's usually pretty easy to confirm the accuracy of them.

W*GS

08-14-2005, 08:08 AM

Want to provide some proof that the NYT and the WP are the "democratic party"?

Come now - how naive are you?

Bronco_Beerslug

08-14-2005, 08:22 AM

Come now - how naive are you?
Well, show me. I don't believe FOX news is the republican party either even though they are leveraged to the right.

Like I've said before almost all articles and news stories are easily verified, or not.

W*GS

08-14-2005, 08:36 AM

Well, show me. I don't believe FOX news is the republican party either even though they are leveraged to the right.

No comment on LABF supplying direct-from-the-ass Democratic Party material without attribution?

In any case, we've hashed over the MTBE issue, and, of course the energy bill contains pork and giveaways to GOP donors. Is this news?

Compare the recently-signed transportation bill. Something for every Representative - billions in pork.

What do you expect from your government? Something less rancid?

How naive are you?

Bronco_Beerslug

08-14-2005, 08:39 AM

No comment on LABF supplying direct-from-the-ass Democratic Party material without attribution?

In any case, we've hashed over the MTBE issue, and, of course the energy bill contains pork and giveaways to GOP donors. Is this news?

Compare the recently-signed transportation bill. Something for every Representative - billions in pork.

What do you expect from your government? Something less rancid?

How naive are you?
The point I'm arguing is just because a story comes from one source or the other, doesn't make it true or untrue.

How hard is this for you to see?

W*GS

08-14-2005, 08:44 AM

The point I'm arguing is just because a story comes from one source or the other, doesn't make it true or untrue.

Anything from the NYT is automatically suspicious, seeing as how they're so blatantly biased towards the Democrats.

I'd just like the liberals to 'fess up and admit what everyone already knows.

Bronco_Beerslug

08-14-2005, 10:05 AM

Anything from the NYT is automatically suspicious, seeing as how they're so blatantly biased towards the Democrats.

And so is anything from Fox, doesn't mean it is automatically untrue.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-14-2005, 04:02 PM

Read the article and you'll notice that it quotes the New york times and the Washington post. What's the problem?Do you have some better sources to refute this?

:laugh:

According to O'W*GS, the NY Times and the WA Post are just mirror sites for bartcop.com (especially when they present inconvenient facts about the misadministration he so steadfastly defends here at the OM.)

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-14-2005, 04:08 PM

Anything from the NYT is automatically suspicious, seeing as how they're so blatantly biased towards the Democrats.

Hilarious!

Is that why the newspaper had to publish a formal apology for its role as a propaganda ministry and uncritical cheerleader for the Smirking Sociopath's illegal invasion of Iraq?

Is that way Judy Miller is sitting in jail?

O'W*GS' subversion of fact, truth, and reality in the service of his extreme right-wing agenda is simply mind-boggling.

W*GS

08-14-2005, 04:23 PM

O'W*GS' subversion of fact, truth, and reality in the service of his extreme right-wing agenda is simply mind-boggling.

Considering the source of this remark...

If anyone here has been (and continues to be) dogmatic in his beliefs regardless of the facts, it's you, dear LABF. You've never let a fact stand in the way of your opinions.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-14-2005, 04:57 PM

Anyway, before The O'W*GS Factor steers this thread about the here-and-now completely off-topic and (as usual) toward a discussion of Clinton and the past...

If they were just "passing on the increased costs of oil," their profits would
match the profits they made when Clinton was president...

http://www.bartcop.com/stock-bp-705.JPG
http://www.bartcop.com/stock-exxon-mobil.JPG

W*GS

08-14-2005, 05:53 PM

Anyway, before The O'W*GS Factor steers this thread about the here-and-now completely off-topic and (as usual) toward a discussion of Clinton and the past...

...and the above is a lame attempt by LABF to cover himself after being caught out as a Democratic Party hack, without the sack to 'fess up to being one.

It's typical of the contempt liberals have for others - they can pass off material lifted directly from their party's website, without attribution, and think no-one else is smart enough to figure it out.

Rascal

08-14-2005, 06:42 PM

Where is Jesus Christ when you need him eh LABS?

Bronco_Beerslug

08-14-2005, 07:53 PM

Anyone for a coke?

-------------------------

http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/p/rids/20050814/i/r14719664.jpg?x=282&y=345&sig=0Vo5ZA4Ule34XIZT9uBh6g--

Gasoline in bottles are displayed and sold for 31.50 pesos to 34 pesos ($0.56-$0.61) along a road in Manila August 14, 2005. Asian markets are set to rise this week on continued fund inflows into the region, but investors will keep a close eye on record high oil prices, as well as awaiting corporate earnings and key inflation data. REUTERS/Cheryl Ravelo

-------------------------------------------------------------------

http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/p/ap/20050812/capt.wx10508122232.gas_prices_poll_wx105.jpg?x=229&y=345&sig=BcwLy13X3cnpWLnIoBz5Sg--

A Chevron service station on Van Ness Avenue displays gas prices above $3 a gallon in San Francisco, Thursday, Aug. 11, 2005. In a poll conducted for the Associated Press and AOL, sixty-four percent of those surveyed say that higher gas prices will cause money problems for them in the next six months. (AP Photo/Eric Risberg)

-------------------------------------------------------------

http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/p/rids/20050813/i/r3690532678.jpg?x=380&y=284&sig=Ahu2ZhE.aVGi.iV6lUQFaA--

A South Korean rides his bicycle past a board displaying gas prices in Seoul August 12, 2005. South Korea's import prices rose for the second consecutive month in the year through July, central bank data showed on Friday, fanned by high crude oil prices and firm raw materials costs. REUTERS/You Sung-Ho

-------------------------------------------------

http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/p/ap/20050811/capt.cadp10108111845.oil_prices_cadp101.jpg?x=380&y=274&sig=Ym2qKgeZKOfRw66xv.Jlhw--

A customer pumps gas near a sign board showing prices of more than $3.00 a gallon for some grades at a Chevron station in Carlsbad, Calif., Thursday, Aug. 11, 2005. Oil prices zoomed higher Wednesday, touching a new high of $65 a barrel, with buyers focused on refinery snags, shrinking U.S. inventories of gasoline and motorists' growing thirst for fuel despite record-high costs. (AP Photo/Denis Poroy)

------------------------------------------------------

http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/p/ap/20050811/capt.mil10508111521.italy_gasoline_prices_mil105.j pg?x=380&y=253&sig=uTX5vJ9gVuHHmxMA0HP4CQ--

A gas station attendant pumps gasoline in downtown Milan, Italy, Thursday, Aug.11, 2005. Oil prices eased just below $65 a barrel Thursday after hitting a new intraday high of $65.30 over gasoline supply fears.(AP Photo/Antonio Calanni)

--------------------------------------------------------

http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/p/ap/20050810/capt.cajh10508102208.oil_prices_cajh105.jpg?x=229&y=345&sig=918dMafFtJRXT61TrRIQFg--

Charles Martinez fills his car at a Chevron gas station in Pasadena, Calif., Wednesday, Aug. 10, 2005. Oil prices zoomed higher Wednesday, touching a new high of $65 a barrel, with buyers focused on refinery snags, shrinking U.S. inventories of gasoline and motorists' growing thirst for fuel despite record-high costs. The latest rally--crude futures have risen 14 percent in three weeks--highlights just how nervous the market has become to output threats. It doesn't seem to matter, analysts said, that the country has enough fuel in inventory to offset routine supply disruptions. (AP Photo/Jae C. Hong)

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-14-2005, 10:41 PM

Where is Jesus Christ when you need him eh LABS?

Yeah - what was I thinking?

Ratscal wouldn't want to go back to paying Clinton-era gas prices - especially if it meant gays could get hitched.

Priorities, right?

Rascal

08-14-2005, 10:54 PM

I guess Jesus hasn't reached you yet LABS...although I do know you've posted as him before.

W*GS

08-14-2005, 11:00 PM

Ratscal wouldn't want to go back to paying Clinton-era gas prices - especially if it meant gays could get hitched.

Remember - it was Clinton who signed the federal law making gay marriage impossible, LABF. Was that good or bad?

Besides, cheaper gas back then had more to do with OPEC upping quotas and increasing production just as Asia was suffering a financial meltdown, leading to a glut of oil.

But far be it from me to remind you of the facts as opposed to your Clinton-worship. Indeed, is cheaper gas really a good thing?

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-14-2005, 11:04 PM

I guess Jesus hasn't reached you yet LABS...although I do know you've posted as him before.

Maybe if I try with all my might to hate gays I'll establish a direct line to Jesus someday just like Ratscal.

:D

W*GS

08-14-2005, 11:30 PM

Maybe if I try with all my might to hate gays [...]

What "try"? You're there already, kiddo.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-15-2005, 12:11 AM

Why?

Because all the folks who think it's their God-given right to drive an SUV behemoth that gets 11 mpg get miffed when the price of gas approaches what a gallon of milk costs?

The folks whining are a bunch of crybabies.

:stupid:

Gas and milk.

Now there's an equation only W*GS could make.

:laugh:

News flash:

Our entire economic system is predicated on cheap oil - not milk.

Rascal

08-15-2005, 08:18 AM

Maybe if I try with all my might to hate gays I'll establish a direct line to Jesus someday just like Ratscal.

:D

I don't hate gays LABS. And if I did it would be against what Jesus taught.

You are obviously an imposter...and a liar. You going to try and deny it was you again or are you going to pony up and admit it was you? I'm guessing you will go with the liar route...typical.

W*GS

08-15-2005, 09:15 AM

Our entire economic system is predicated on cheap oil - not milk.

Should it be? Based on your comments regarding gas prices during Clinton's administration, it's reasonable to conclude you think cheap oil is a good idea.

You're an addict no less than anyone else.

Arkie

08-15-2005, 10:33 AM

Our gas prices would be low if Kerry was President. :puff:

Bronco_Beerslug

08-15-2005, 10:36 AM

Our gas prices would be low if Kerry was President. :puff:
I don't see how but there would be a lot better chance of our government moving faster to renewable and alternate energy if he was.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-15-2005, 03:49 PM

I don't see how but there would be a lot better chance of our government moving faster to renewable and alternate energy if he was.

And you can believe that Kerry wouldn't look at the problem and say "hey, let's give Big Oil another $83 billion worth of tax cuts and call it an 'energy bill'."

Or "hey, let's eliminate tax breaks for people who buy hybrid vehicles and give people who buy Hummers fat rebates."

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-15-2005, 03:57 PM

Dueling Ratscal Quotes:

I don't hate gays LABS. And if I did it would be against what Jesus taught.

Vs:

But I sure as hell will ammend the constitution to keep those sinners from having same sex marriages.

http://72.22.74.110/BB/showthread.php?t=22900&page=2&pp=25&highlight=sinners

You are obviously an imposter...and a liar.

Hilarious!

Ratscal: Poster boy for irony. :D

Boogerboots

08-15-2005, 04:46 PM

I'm slowly making my way through 10 pages of stuff here.

You left this part out.

One reason exploration spending is declining is quite simple - there is less oil left to drill for in places that are open for exploration, like North America or the North Sea, while the bulk of the world's known reserves, mainly in the Middle East, are mostly shut off to foreign investors

Now that's a pantload!! Just check out Hibernia, White Rose and Terra Nova oil fields just off the east coast of Newfoundland.

Hibernia is found East of St. John's, Newfoundland. This field is holding reserves around 610 to 620 million bbl. It is on where two other fields existed and is considered the light good oil.
http://www.oilcareer.com/hibernia.htm

The Terra Nova oil field is estimated to contain over one billion barrels of oil in place,
http://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/010/0001/0001/0010/0002/introduction_e.htm

The White Rose field is estimated to contain 200 to 250 million barrels of recoverable oil, which will be produced using a Floating-Production, Storage and Offloading (FPSO) vessel
http://www.ocean-resources.com/issues/article.asp?ID=541&MagID=24

So lets see... that's 2 billion barrels of oil just in one area off the coast of Newfoundland. And guess how many rigs are out there. Try 3. Three lousy rigs for 2 billion barrels of high grade crude just off the shores of North America that require very little refining. And you still have the northern grand banks and the Flemish Cap that haven't even been touched yet.

And you people that defend these greedy oil companies, just try and wrap your myopic brains around that. THEY ARE CONTROLLING THE SUPPLY TO RAISE THE PRICES. Plain and simple.

How many more areas are like the Eastern Grand Banks which are hidden around the world?? Already tapped and accounted for, but hardly touched or developed. The oil companies are banking on places like this to cash in big time in the next few decades.

Meanwhile the every day consumer is held literally over the barrel and the economy of North America is at stake because of these profiterring petroleum pirates. As WIGS would say... BULL!!!!

Boogerboots

08-15-2005, 04:48 PM

And while we're talking about alternative fuels. How is Ethanol blends more expensive than regular gas??? ? I didn't realize that corn futures went through the roof as well.

What a crock.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-15-2005, 05:16 PM

And you people that defend these greedy oil companies, just try and wrap your myopic brains around that. THEY ARE CONTROLLING THE SUPPLY TO RAISE THE PRICES. Plain and simple...

...Meanwhile the every day consumer is held literally over the barrel and the economy of North America is at stake because of these profiterring petroleum pirates.

Thwack!

Boogerboots hits one out of the park.

:thumbsup:

Spider

08-15-2005, 07:18 PM

well I just dropped 700.00 + in fuel for this trip ....... Ha! can tell I have been out of the game for awhile .... crash course in remembering 101 .... Got an overwieght ticket in Willston N.D ....Hilarious! 1500.00 but man it was good to be back in the saddle ........

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-15-2005, 08:22 PM

Spider

08-15-2005, 09:13 PM

Are you back at Casa de Spider already?

Damn! That was a quick trip, dude.
Yeah ....... 90 MPH + 677 Mile trip= quick run ......... ;D
I have to unload tomarrow , then go back to the Docs to finish my eye exam .....

Rascal

08-15-2005, 09:55 PM

Ratscal: Poster boy for irony. :D

Poor LABS...like I already said before it was joke. Apparently sarcasm is lost on dolts.

And even if I wasn't kidding, where in my statement does it say I hate them? Because I use the word "sinner(s)"? Not so since I'm also a sinner and I don't hate myself ROFL!

Rascal

08-15-2005, 10:02 PM

And while we're talking about alternative fuels. How is Ethanol blends more expensive than regular gas??? ? I didn't realize that corn futures went through the roof as well.

What a crock.

First regarding Newfoundland...I'm not trying to defend oil companies here but it is extremely difficult to build a rig in this environment. I've heard from fisherman it is worth then the north sea area.

Second regarding the blend...apparently you can't just put them together and expect them to suffice. They don't weigh the same amount so they would seperate and eventually you would get pure ethanol coming out which would destroy your car fuel lines and fuel pump. There is an extra refining process in order to make them not seperate. However, I still think we should increase our ethanol % in all of our cars to 16% (I think that is the magic number before it starts causing problems) and then begin a process of increasing that % over time as newer cars come out that are compatible with ethanol (which doesn't require a lot of change).

Raider Bill

08-15-2005, 11:33 PM

At 40 dollars a barrel, it must not have been profitable to drill out there. Several of the oil companies sold their liscenses and stuff a few years back. I suspect you'll see the exploration ramp up, but that kind of stuff cant happen overnight.

Anyhow, if Americans consume as much oil as ever, who's fault is it really?

If your car gets 20 mpg and you drive 12,000 a year and gas is a buck higher a gallon, you're only talking 50 bucks a month.

Most of these cute charts are irrevelant since they arent indexed to inflation.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-15-2005, 11:39 PM

Poor LABS...like I already said before it was joke. Apparently sarcasm is lost on dolts.

A joke? That's a weak cop out - even by your inane standards.

If it was just a joke, can we safely assume you approve of gays and/or gay marriage, then?

Bronco_Beerslug

08-16-2005, 06:48 AM

Ah, .14 a gallon gas. I remember .22 many moons ago but never seen .14.

-----------------------------------------------------------
Gas prices around the world
Think you pay a lot for gas? Perhaps you'd prefer to live in Venezuela.

Gasoline prices in the United States, which have recently hit record highs, are actually much lower than in many countries. A few countries, like Venezuela have prices that are far lower.
The main driver of price disparities between countries is government policy, according to AirInc, a company that tracks the cost of living in various places around the world. Many European nations tax gasoline heavily, with taxes making up as much as 75 percent of the cost of a gallon of gasoline, said a spokesperson for AirInc.

In Venezuela, on the other hand, oil is produced by a government-owned company and local gasoline prices are kept low as a benefit to the nation's citizens, he said. All prices updated May, 2004.
http://tinyurl.com/2y5n2

Nation City Price
UK TEESIDE .............$5.64
HONG KONG HONG KONG.........$5.62
UK MILFORD HAVEN .........$5.56
UK READING ...........$5.56
UK NORWICH ...........$5.54
GERMANY FRANKFURT .......$5.29
DENMARK COPENHAGEN ..$5.08
NORWAY STAVANGER ..$5.07
NORWAY OSLO ..............$4.93
ITALY ROME ...............$4.86
TURKEY ISTANBUL .....$4.85
PORTUGAL LISBON .....$4.80
KOREA SEOUL ................$4.71
SWITZERLAND GENEVA ...$4.56
KOREA KOJE/OKPO .......$4.53
AUSTRIA VIENNA . .$4.50
CROATIA ZAGREB .........$4.32
JAPAN TOKYO ...................$3.84
AUSTRALIA SYDNEY .........$2.63
CAMBODIA PHNOM PENH ..$2.57
TAIWAN TAIPEI ...................$2.47
GEORGIA TBILISI ....$2.31
LAOS VIENTIANE ...........$1.66
THAILAND BANGKOK .$1.60
CHINA TIANJIN .............$1.54
CHINA SHANGHAI ...........$1.48
RUSSIA MOSCOW ..................$1.45
KAZAKHSTAN ALMATY ........$1.36
KAZAKHSTAN ATYRAU .........$1.35
TAJIKISTAN DUSHANBE .$1.32
AZERBAIJAN BAKU ............$1.15
VENEZUELA CARACAS .........$0.14
IRAQ BAGHDAD .......................$0.05

Rascal

08-16-2005, 06:51 AM

A joke? That's a weak cop out - even by your inane standards.

If it was just a joke, can we safely assume you approve of gays and/or gay marriage, then?

there you go making an ass out of yourself again.

The practice of closet gays marrying straight people worked for thousands of years...if isn't broke why fix it?

That would also be a joke dolt.

Boogerboots

08-16-2005, 06:51 AM

First regarding Newfoundland...I'm not trying to defend oil companies here but it is extremely difficult to build a rig in this environment. I've heard from fisherman it is worth then the north sea area.

Second regarding the blend...apparently you can't just put them together and expect them to suffice. They don't weigh the same amount so they would seperate and eventually you would get pure ethanol coming out which would destroy your car fuel lines and fuel pump. There is an extra refining process in order to make them not seperate. However, I still think we should increase our ethanol % in all of our cars to 16% (I think that is the magic number before it starts causing problems) and then begin a process of increasing that % over time as newer cars come out that are compatible with ethanol (which doesn't require a lot of change).

Sorry Rascal, I dont buy into that arguement. First off, the one main rig that's out on the Grand Banks was mainly built by government programs in collaboration with oil companies like Petro Canada and Husky Oil. This rig is similar to those found in the North Sea, which are GBS type oil rigs.

http://flash.lakeheadu.ca/~jabrown/Background1.htm

The 2-3 years it took to build one of these rigs and it turned where I lived into an absolute boom town. It created many well paying jobs in the construction of the rig but it was all done back when oil prices were much cheaper, back in the early to mid 90's. If was seen as feasable then, why are they not building more now??

You would think that government and these oil companies would co-operate again to help ramp up the construction of oil rigs to, in turn, help boost domestic oil production. But it seems that government is just intent on sitting back and letting the tax monies "earned" from gasoline sales to just roll in. This also allows oil companies to continue to charge these ludicrous prices at the pump. It's an obvious win-win between government and the oil industry to just leave things as status quo.

Just a side note, I was in Newfoundland a month ago and regular gas was $1.08/L. (1 US gallon =3.785L). That's over $4 a gallon and that's not factoring in the exchange rates. Tell me these people are not getting ripped off.

As for ethanol blends. The point of my arguement is this. If 10% of the fuel is made up ethanol but the price of making the ethanol has not increased ( I don't remember seeing corn going up to $5 a cob ) then why is the blend more expensive than just 100% gas?? There are specific plants made strictly for the refinement of ethanol based fuels, but someghow the process magically increased in price to coincide with the rise in gas prices??

This to me is another symptom that we're getting ripped off. Corn is cheap, but when it's made into fuel it turns into gold.

Bull.

ak1971

08-16-2005, 07:43 AM

IRAQ BAGHDAD .......................$0.05

Kick ass!

Rascal

08-16-2005, 08:40 AM

As for ethanol blends. The point of my arguement is this. If 10% of the fuel is made up ethanol but the price of making the ethanol has not increased ( I don't remember seeing corn going up to $5 a cob ) then why is the blend more expensive than just 100% gas?? There are specific plants made strictly for the refinement of ethanol based fuels, but someghow the process magically increased in price to coincide with the rise in gas prices??

This to me is another symptom that we're getting ripped off. Corn is cheap, but when it's made into fuel it turns into gold.

Bull.

I'm not saying they can't be built there...I'm just saying it's difficult. Plus why would the oil companies do that on their dollar when they can put a pipe in the ground in the ME and get oil and still charge us out the butt?

Anyway, back to your blend questions. It is more expensive because you can't just mix the ethanol and gasoline together. They require an extra refining process which costs more $$ and those companies are not going to eat that $$ to help out the US and you. Until this country gets off it's ass and takes a proactive measure to switch to ethanol (which can be made from sugar to BTW not just corn...see Brazil) we are going to see even higher gas prices. I'm not entirely sure the gov't should be the ones doing it but I'm not sure consumers complaining to companies will force them to do it either.

We are getting ripped off and will continue to until we quit sucking on big oil's dick.

Falconer

08-16-2005, 08:55 AM

As for ethanol blends. The point of my arguement is this. If 10% of the fuel is made up ethanol but the price of making the ethanol has not increased ( I don't remember seeing corn going up to $5 a cob ) then why is the blend more expensive than just 100% gas?? There are specific plants made strictly for the refinement of ethanol based fuels, but someghow the process magically increased in price to coincide with the rise in gas prices??

This to me is another symptom that we're getting ripped off. Corn is cheap, but when it's made into fuel it turns into gold.

Bull.

Actually, ethanol isn't that great of a fuel. It takes just about as much energy to make ethanol, as the energy you get from it. A much better route to go is to make biodiesel from rapeseed. I actually own a TDI Jetta, which gets 42 mpg city/49 mpg highway. I can buy a conversion kit for around $1600, which would allow me to run on 100% vegetable oil. Unfortunately we are trying to get our own home right now, so it will not be in the very near future. Unless you all would like to pitch in, and I will be you guinia pig. :laugh:

Bronco_Beerslug

08-16-2005, 09:08 AM

Well, I reckon it's time to break out the Ethanol (myths) facts. :)

-----------------------------------------------------
Killing The Ethanol Myths

The growth of the ethanol industry means that ethanol will be entering the fuel supply in new areas of the United States. In California alone, ethanol has grown from being virtually absent just a few years ago to a demand of nearly 1 billion gallons used in 2004.

In spite of the outstanding track record of ethanol for our economy, our environment and our energy supply, some myths still exist—and those who oppose the growth of renewable fuels many times resurrect these myths in an attempt to discredit the ethanol industry.

For more than two decades, NCGA has been promoting the development of the ethanol industry. Here are the facts that kill the myths:

MYTH:
Ethanol raises the cost of gasoline.

FACT: While many predicted that the switch from MTBE to ethanol would increase the price at the pump, the fact is that there has been no negative impact on gasoline supplies or the cost per gallon of gasoline. Ethanol is less expensive than other oxygenates and octane enhancers. In fact, ethanol is also less expensive that ordinary gasoline.

The net effect of blending ethanol with gasoline is actually a product that costs less—and that has been proven as oil prices have escalated of late. A May 2005 report by the Consumer Federation of America notes that drivers everywhere should be saving as much as eight cents per gallon if petroleum marketers would simply blend ethanol into more gasoline.

MYTH:
Ethanol actually adds to air pollution.

FACT: Because ethanol is inherently cleaner than gasoline, it emits less hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide and hydrogen. Ethanol reduces carbon monoxide emissions by as much as 25 percent—and less carbon monoxide helps reduce ozone formation and helps reduce levels of greenhouse gases.

According to EPA, gasoline is the largest source of manmade carcinogens. Ethanol reduces overall toxic pollution by diluting harmful compounds found in gasoline such as benzene and other aromatics.

MYTH:
Ethanol will harm car and truck engines.

FACT: Every major automobile manufacturer approves the use of ethanol blends up to 10 percent (E-10 Unleaded) under warranty. In fact, many auto manufacturers go so far as to recommend the use of clean, renewable fuels such as E-10 Unleaded. Cars built since the 1970s are fully compatible with E-10 Unleaded.

In addition, ethanol in gasoline:

* Adds oxygen to the fuel, thereby raising the air/fuel ratio for more complete combustion;
* Eliminates the need and expense of adding a gas line antifreeze, since the ethanol in the gasoline absorbs more water than a small bottle of isopropyl;
* Prevents burning of engine valves because ethanol burns cooler than gasoline;
* Prevents build-up of olefins in fuel injectors, thus keeping the fuel system cleaner.

MYTH:
Ethanol takes more energy to produce than it contributes.

FACT: In June 2004, the U.S. Department of Agriculture updated its 2002 analysis of the issue and determined that the net energy balance of ethanol production is 1.67 to 1. For every 100 BTUs of energy used to make ethanol, 167 BTUs of ethanol is produced. In 2002, USDA had concluded that the ratio was 1.35 to 1. The USDA findings have been confirmed by additional studies conducted by the University of Nebraska and Argonne National Laboratory.

These figures take into account the energy required to plant, grow and harvest the corn—as well as the energy required to manufacture and distribute the ethanol.

The net energy balance of ethanol production continues to improve because ethanol production is becoming more efficient. For example, one bushel of corn now yields 2.8 gallons of ethanol—up from 2.5 gallons just a few years ago.

MYTH:
Ethanol contributes to global warming.

FACT: Because the energy balance of ethanol production is positive (1.67 to 1), greenhouse gas benefits are also positive. The Argonne National Laboratory has demonstrated that using ethanol produces 32 percent fewer emissions of greenhouse gases than gasoline for the same distance traveled.

Ethanol also reduces emissions of other harmful pollutants such as carbon monoxide—and it dilutes and displaces components of gasoline that produce toxic emissions.

According to a recent study by Smog Reyes: “Ethanol currently is the only compound that can be blended with gasoline to help reduce global warming…”

MYTH:
Ethanol production wastes corn that could be used to feed a hungry world.

FACT: Wet mill ethanol production facilities are also know as corn refineries—and they also producer starch, corn sweeteners, and corn oil—all products that are used as food ingredients for human consumption.

The corn used for ethanol production is field corn typically used to feed to livestock. Ethanol production also results in the production of distillers grains and gluten feed—both of which are fed to livestock as well, helping produce high quality meat products for distribution domestically and abroad.

There is no shortage of corn. In 2004, U.S. farmers produced a record 11.8 billion bushel corn harvest—and some 1.4 billion bushels (about 13 percent) were used in ethanol production. In other words, there is still room to significantly grow the ethanol market without limiting the availability of corn. Steadily increasing average corn yields and the improved ability of other nations to grow corn also make it clear that ethanol production can continue to grow without affecting the food supply.

MYTH:
Ethanol does not benefit farmers.

FACT: The ethanol industry opens a new market for corn growers, allowing them to enjoy greater profitability. Studies have shown that corn prices in areas near an ethanol plant tend to be five to 10 cents per bushel higher than in other areas. This additional income helps cut the costs of farm programs and helps add vitality to rural economies. And the additional profit potential for farmers created by ethanol production allows more farmers to stay in business—helping ensure adequate food suppliers in the future.

Ethanol production also creates jobs—many of them in rural communities where good jobs are hard to come by. A January 2005 study by LECG found that the ethanol industry powered the U.S. economy by creating more than 147,000 jobs, boosting U.S. household income by $4.4 billion and reducing the U.S. trade deficit by $5.1 billion by eliminating the need to import 143.3 million barrels of oil.

Those kinds of numbers help farmers—and all Americans.

Last reviewed June 10, 2005
http://www.ncga.com/ethanol/main/killing_myths.htm

W*GS

08-16-2005, 09:49 AM

Well, I reckon it's time to break out the Ethanol (myths) facts. :)

Well of course the National Corn Growers Association is all for ethanol - they stand to get millions (if not billions) in subsidies to produce the stuff.

enjolras

08-16-2005, 10:33 AM

Ethanol becomes even more interesting in its use in fuel cells. Ethanol can leverage existing fuel stations, while decreasing pollution over internal combustion engines by something like 30%.

I think Ethanol (and G.M. seems to agree) that ethanol is our best bet for bridging us to a true 'hydrodgen economy':)

Bronco_Beerslug

08-16-2005, 10:45 AM

Well of course the National Corn Growers Association is all for ethanol - they stand to get millions (if not billions) in subsidies to produce the stuff.
I looked a several other sites and didn't find anything to refute their numbers.
Do you believe thay aren't stating facts?

Falconer

08-16-2005, 10:46 AM

Biodiesel Characteristics

• Very positive net energy gain, in the 3-4
to 1 ratio, much higher than ethanol’s

• High energy content: 120,000 BTUs per
gallon (ethanol has 80,000)

Bronco_Beerslug

08-16-2005, 10:59 AM

Biodiesel Characteristics

• Very positive net energy gain, in the 3-4
to 1 ratio, much higher than ethanol’s

• High energy content: 120,000 BTUs per
gallon (ethanol has 80,000)

Biodiesel may be OK for a limited part of energy consuming but not practical, it seems, for climate sensitive areas and has some downside too.

Ethanol isn't without some downside also though.
-----------------------------------------------------------

Q: What are the pros and cons of biodiesel?

Pros: When blended with standard transportation diesel, biodiesel helps to extend the energy capacity of the diesel. Biodiesel can also be used as a home heating oil. Because biodiesel is produced from natural sources, it generally releases as much carbon dioxide as it uses growing. A blend of 20 percent biodiesel will reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by 15 percent, and adding biodiesel also reduces the amount of particulates (PM), carbon monoxide (CO), and sulfur dioxide (SO2) released as emissions. Biodiesel is less combustible than petroleum, making it safer to store and transport. In addition, if biodiesel spills, it is biodegradable and breaks down roughly four times faster than petroleum diesel.

Cons: Use of biodiesel results in increased levels of harmful nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions when used in diesel engines, although not usually in residential heating equipment. Also, in and of itself biodiesel releases the same amount of hydrocarbon (or soluble carbon) emissions when burned as regular diesel. Furthermore, pure biodiesel has a high "clouding" point, meaning that liquid biodiesel begins to thicken into a solid at low temperatures. Because of its higher clouding point, biodiesel is more difficult to store and transport in cold climates, which adds to its cost.
http://www.cecarf.org/Programs/Fuels/FuelFacts/Bio-Fuels%20Facts.html#Biomass

Rascal

08-16-2005, 11:15 AM

I fully support the rapid induction of ethanol so don't get confused by may statements...a huge plus is that it will replace MTBE which is far from biologically safe and is affecting our water supply.

W*GS

08-16-2005, 11:37 AM

Do you believe thay aren't stating facts?

The NCGA is a special-interest group attempting to keep secure their gravy train of subsidy dollars.

W*GS

08-16-2005, 11:41 AM

Dirty as well as dear?
Jan 15th 2004 | SHERIDAN, WYOMING
From The Economist print edition

Is the politicians' favourite fuel bad for the environment and your pocket?

It's the one topic all presidential candidates agree on in the run-up to the Iowa caucuses: ethanol production is a very good thing and should be handsomely subsidised. Forget that this grain alcohol has always been something of an economic and environmental joke. It comes from corn (or maize), which is mostly what Iowa is famous for.

The current subsidy to the industry is worth around 50 cents a gallon—or around $1.4 billion a year. The fig-leaf covering this largesse is the idea that ethanol is a clean fuel. In the 1980s, it was touted as an alternative to leaded petrol. It got another push from the 1990 Clean Air Act; to cope with the requirement for cleaner emission standards, states made the petrol industry add more oxygenates to their fuel to make it burn better. Ethanol emerged as the main such additive.

Meanwhile, the economics of ethanol production have taken a turn for the better. Efficient enzymes have led to more cost-effective fermentation, and genetically modified high-starch corn has a better yield (and so needs less processing in the plant and fewer herbicides in the field). Today there are 75 plants distilling a record 2.8 billion gallons, with a dozen more facilities under construction.

But is ethanol really that green? A debate has been stirred up by David Pimentel, an entomologist, who argues that each gallon of ethanol takes 29% more energy to make than it eventually produces. In 2002 the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), which administers the subsidies, released a report claiming the opposite: “Corn-ethanol yields 34% more energy than it takes to produce it, including growing the corn, harvesting it, transporting it, and distilling it into ethanol.”

This might have seemed the end of the matter. But Mr Pimentel claims that the USDA study is flawed. It omits about half the inputs in corn production, including the cost of water to grow the stuff, and by using averages it avoids pointing out that some ethanol plants are extremely ungreen. It may indeed be energy-efficient to distil ethanol in eastern Minnesota, which has lots of rain and is home to the nation's cheapest corn. But in dryer Nebraska around 80% of the corn has to be irrigated, normally by natural-gas powered pumps, and much of the water comes from the fast-dropping Ogallala aquifer.

Other scientists are now trying to poke holes in Mr Pimentel's numbers. But do not expect the scientific debate about the highly subsidised crop to make a blind bit of difference to the politicians. The hand-outs for ethanol will rise again if a new energy bill goes through Congress.

Copyright © 2005 The Economist Newspaper and The Economist Group. All rights reserved.

Bronco_Beerslug

08-16-2005, 11:42 AM

The NCGA is a special-interest group attempting to keep secure their gravy train of subsidy dollars.
I know who they are but are they lying?

The article you listed is before the updated figures by the USDA which states that the costs of growing corn ARE figured in the total costs.

Spider

08-16-2005, 05:13 PM

When you have 44 thousand pounds on the wagon you need power ..... I am all for a alternitive fuel but dont de-nut my 4 and a quarter kitty cat to do it .......

Raider Bill

08-16-2005, 06:08 PM

That little problem of the second? law of thermodynamics throws a monkey wrench into many of these alternative fuels.

Cracking Hydrogen from Water requires electric current. This just pushes the fossil fuel usage back one step to the power plants.

Spider

08-16-2005, 06:27 PM

That little problem of the second? law of thermodynamics throws a monkey wrench into many of these alternative fuels.
Sure does ........

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-16-2005, 07:48 PM

Simple analysis of the cost of oil:

Cost under Clinton: $20/barrel (gas $1.00/gal)
Cost of "war fear": $10/barrel
Cost of extra Oil Co. profits: $10/barrel

Notice that this adds up to $40/barrel (gasoline cost of ~$1.45/gal)
The rest comes from the dollar's unprecedented decline against other
standard currencies, which has been 40%. That raises the expected
price of oil to $67/barrel and the expected cost of gas to $2.40/gal.

Now, some say we can't attribute this to Bush. OK, that's true.
We can only attribute 58% of the cost of gasoline and 70% of the cost of oil directly to his actions.

W*GS

08-17-2005, 08:42 AM

Simple analysis of the cost of oil:

"Simplistic" is more like it.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN

08-18-2005, 06:00 AM

Oil Companies' Profiteering to Blame for Gas Price Spike, Says FTCR

SANTA MONICA, California - August 15 - The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights (FTCR) noted today that recent world profits by the oil industry shows profiteering is to blame for the recent 20 cent run-up at the pump during the last three weeks.

FTCR's research has exposed manipulation of domestic refining capacity and inventories by American oil companies as the reason behind gasoline price spikes, not the traditional scapegoats of Big Oil: OPEC, government regulation, litigation, and environmental standards.

"In a commodities market, domestic oil companies know that the lower the inventories they keep, the higher the profits, because perceived shortages mean a speculative run-up in prices," said Jamie Court, president of FTCR and author of Corporateering: How Corporater Power Steals Your Personal Freedom and What You Can Do About It (Tarcher/Penguin.) "Big Oil rigs summer time driving season for big profits by keeping inventories low. Since Capitol Hill is complicit, it's up to states to enact laws that restrict profiteering through reforms like an excess profits tax, public utility regulation of refineries, and price controls. Big Oil may have Americans over a barrel now, but $3 per gallon gasoline should spur statehouses to take matters into their own hands. Every summer should not be open season for oil companies to gouge American motorists."

Recent financial statements show oil companies making new world record profits on top of last year's banner world record profits. Exxon Mobil's second quarter earnings jumped 35 percent over last year, Royal Dutch Shell rose 34 percent, ConocoPhillips shot up 51 percent.

http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/energy/gasprices/

http://www.commondreams.org/news2005/0815-03.htm