Thousands Complain to Feds on Gas Gouging

[Bronco_Beerslug]

No doubt this has happened. I'd start with the guy in Georgia that raised his prices over $6 a gallon when other stations started running out.

------------------------------------------------------
By H. JOSEF HEBERT, Associated Press Writer 24 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Soaring gasoline costs prompted thousands of complaints Thursday to federal officials about alleged price gouging and demands by some members of Congress for an investigation into gasoline markets.

The Energy Department reported more than 5,000 calls to its price gouging hotline from motorists around the country, although officials emphasized there was no way to immediately determine how many of the allegations were valid.

Department spokesman Drew Malcolm said the reports were being turned over to the Federal Trade Commission.

The states with the most complaints were North Carolina, Georgia, New York, Pennsylvania, Texas, Illinois, Tennessee, New Jersey, Michigan and South Carolina.

Meanwhile, attorney's general from a number of states held a telephone strategy session to discuss the rapidly escalating gas prices and possible investigations into gouging. Prosecution for price gouging is generally a state matter unless it involves some form of collusion or other activity in violation of federal antitrust laws.

Gas prices jumped 35 cents to 50 cents a gallon overnight in some areas pushing to well over $3 a gallon after Hurricane Katrina shut down nine Gulf Coast refineries, disrupted gasoline pipelines to the Midwest and East and stopped 90 percent of the oil production in the Gulf of Mexico.

"If we get consumer complaints about (gasoline) prices, we'll look at those complaints to find evidence of anticompetitive conduct," said John Seesel, the FTC's associate counsel for energy issues.

But Seesel said the FTC has no jurisdiction over an individual gas station operator raising his price, no matter how high, unless there is some collusion among retailers. A number of states, however, have anti-gouging statutes. Following FTC policy, he declined to say whether any investigation were underway.

On Thursday, Attorney General Troy King of Alabama initiated a private telephone conference with a number of his colleagues from others states to discuss strategy in response to the rising gas prices and reports of huge overnight spikes by some gasoline retailers. No details about the private discussion were available.

There have been isolated cases of unusually huge price jumps, including a gas station in Georgia that briefly charged $6 a gallon when competitors ran out of gas. In Michigan, there was a price jump of nearly $1 a gallon overnight, although prices then receded, according to Rep. Fred Upton (news, bio, voting record), R-Mich., who drove around his district on Thursday to gauge prices.

"Prices are averaging $3.19. It's as high as $3.58 from $2.61 on Tuesday," said Upton in a telephone interview. "My sense is the supply and demand equation does not fit a 60-cent (a gallon) increase in the last 36 hours."

"In Illinois, prices are reported to have shot up 50 cents per gallon overnight and the state attorney general received more than 500 reports of price gouging," nine Democratic members of the
House Judiciary Committee wrote the FTC, asking the agency to step up its review of gas markets.

"These increases go far beyond anything justified or relating to the market disruptions caused by Hurricane Katrina," wrote Rep. John Conyers (news, bio, voting record) of Michigan, the committee's ranking Democrat, and the other members.
http://tinyurl.com/9hxhf

[Spider]

Everyone that Priced gouged , over this should do time .......

[Bronco9798]

Everyone that Priced gouged , over this should do time .......

I agree with you on that. I just filled up. I paid 2.99

I'm lucky compared to some people.

[Spider]

I agree with you on that. I just filled up. I paid 2.99

I'm lucky compared to some people.
Yeah , we have American refugees , Fellow Americans That needs us more then ever , and we have Gas Stations taking advantage of this ..... In the time of need , some peole go with Greed .....pisses me off to no end .....

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Check out this gas sign in Georgia:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v47/dallas59/Post%20pics/More%20pics/20050901091409990001.jpg
Soon to be displayed in a neighborhood near you.

[clarker]

Check out this gas sign in Georgia:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v47/dallas59/Post%20pics/More%20pics/20050901091409990001.jpg
Soon to be displayed in a neighborhood near you.Is that real? Man that is sad.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Is that real? Man that is sad.

Yes, it's real.

Some stations in the south were gouging panic buyers for more than $5 per gallon the day after the hurricane.

[clarker]

Yes, it's real.

Some stations in the south were gouging panic buyers for more than $5 per gallon the day after the hurricane.That is crazy. Are you sure that it hasn't been that price for awhile now. I think that is against the law. They should complain to the government.

[enjolras]

That is crazy. Are you sure that it hasn't been that price for awhile now. I think that is against the law. They should complain to the government.

That's reflective of a pretty huge run-up.

I'm still not sure what price gouging really means.. after all, if other stations are running out of gas then the price of gas (as a commodity) SHOULD increase. For one, raising the price goes a long ways to ensuring that those that TRULY value gas as a neccesity actually get it. That's the very definition of a market (unless there is collusion, which I've seen no evidence of).

It sucks, but blame SUV's and our horribly inefficient system of choosing trucks (sorry Spide:) ), rather than rail for the majority of our transport. We burn something like 80 million barrels of oil every single day... now its time to pay the piper.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

That is crazy. Are you sure that it hasn't been that price for awhile now. I think that is against the law. They should complain to the government.

It was on CNN, MSRNC, etc.

Other people on the OM have posted about it as well.

The stations were jacking the price up after the hurricane.

The governor of one of those states said he would prosecute price gougers.

[clarker]

It was on CNN, MSRNC, etc.

Other people on the OM have posted about it as well.

The stations were jacking the price up after the hurricane.

The governor of one of those states said he would prosecute price gougers.That is good. I mean if the supply is low and the demand high, the price of something is going to go up. That is just how it works.

But to take advantage of this is just sick.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

When is Bush going to call on big oil to do their part, by foregoing profits during a national disaster and emergency and help America?


Democratic National Committee Chairman
Howard Dean, noting gas prices were rocketing past $3 a gallon in many parts of the country, said everyday Americans had made sacrifices while Bush's "pals in big oil" reaped record profits.

"While he's asking ordinary Americans to do more, he ought to show some real leadership and call on his friends in Big Oil to join in the sacrifice and stop gouging American families at the gas pump," Dean said in a statement.
http://tinyurl.com/78ta4

[RaiderH8r]

When is Bush going to call on big oil to do their part, by foregoing profits during a national disaster and emergency and help America?



http://tinyurl.com/78ta4
That sounds like a good idea on its face but market forces should be allowed to take their course. Capping prices will lead to widespread hording and will do nothing to curtail consumption which is what is needed. However, the current situation is that gas retailers (which operate much like franchise owners and have their own say in what to charge/gal) purchased the gas in the ground already and have not been subject to a higher price. So to jack prices in what they paid $2 for to make a 500% profit instead of a 100% profit is bothersome to say the least.

[Crushaholic]

They should complain to their state attorney general office about gas gouging. They have a better shot at getting something accomplished that way. I believe every state has different penalties for price gouging, so it would depend on the state.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Reporting on CNBC.
Georgia has suspended all state gas taxes. SC has gas rationing in a lot of places.
Kentucky and Tenn reporting physical altercations at gas stations in both those states.

[24champ]

I agree with you guys, price gouging is f*** up and those that do should be penalized. However the supply is low and they need to control the demand right?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I agree with you guys, price gouging is **** up and those that do should be penalized. However the supply is low and they need to control the demand right?
By law, prices can't be changed to the degree they increase your profit margin by a large amount. So these stations that raised their prices to $5 and $6 when other stations started running low need to be held accountable.

[Mile High Shack]

By law, prices can't be changed to the degree they increase your profit margin by a large amount. So these stations that raised their prices to $5 and $6 when other stations started running low need to be held accountable.

kinda like after 9/11, some gas stations raised it up to 4.00/gallon then (back when gas was about 1.40)

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

When is Bush going to call on big oil to do their part, by foregoing profits during a national disaster and emergency and help America?


Hilarious! Hilarious! Hilarious! Hilarious!

That's a good one, dude!

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Big Oil's bigtime looting

PRESIDENT BUSH yesterday told ABC-TV, "there ought to be zero tolerance of people breaking the law during an emergency such as this, whether it be looting or price-gouging at the gasoline pump or taking advantage of charitable giving or insurance fraud."

Zero tolerance is meaningless when the White House lets the biggest looters of Hurricane Katrina walk off with billions of dollars.

We are not referring to the people you currently see in endless footage, crashing through storefronts and wading through chest-high water with clothes, food, and pharmaceuticals. Some folks are disgusting in their thuggishness, but a great many others are simply desperate, having now gone three days without food or water. The latter are living out one of the most famous hypothetical problems in moral reasoning -- should a husband steal a cancer drug he cannot afford for his dying wife?

No such sympathy is to be extended to big oil. The nation has on its hands a disaster so profound that we have not even begun to seriously count the bodies in the floodwaters. It brings us as close as we may get in our lifetime to places like Bangladesh.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/09/02/big_oils_bigtime_looting/

[RunByDesign]

"In a thinly disguised attempt to act as if it cared about the people wading in the water, Chevron has pledged $5 million to relief efforts. ExxonMobil and Shell have pledged $2 million apiece. British Petroleum and Citgo have pledged $1 million each.

This is nothing next to their wealth. Of the world's seven most profitable corporations, four are ExxonMobil, Royal Dutch Shell, BP, and Chevron. ExxonMobil is the world's most profitable company, making $25.3 billion last year. It and the other three corporations had combined profits last year of $72.8 billion. ExxonMobil is also the world's most valuable company, with a market value, according to Forbes magazine, of $405 billion. The combined market value of ExxonMobil, BP, Royal Dutch Shell, and Chevron is nearly $1 trillion.

And that was last year. A month ago, ExxonMobil, Chevron, and ConocoPhillips announced record second-quarter profits of $7.6 billion, $3.7 billion, and $3.1 billion, respectively. Royal Dutch Shell's quarterly profits of $5.2 billion were up by 34 percent over the same period last year. Other well-known companies like Sunoco also had record second-quarter earnings.

If ExxonMobil were to maintain its current pace of profits, it would cross the $30 billion barrier for 2005. The company's chief financial officer, Henry Hubble, bragged in classic corporatese, ''Our disciplined project management and operating practices deliver the benefits of strong industry conditions to our shareholders."

$2 million from the World's richest company...ain't that grand? ::)

What'll that buy? A 2 week supply of toilet paper for the inhabitants of the Super Dome?

Nice. :unamused:

[RunByDesign]

What'll that buy? A 2 week supply of toilet paper for the inhabitants of the Super Dome?

Nice. :unamused:

I'll tell ya what it'd buy my neck of the woods:

@$3.00 a gallon, it'd buy 74 tanker trucks full of gas.

Thanks.

[RunByDesign]

I'll tell ya what it'd buy my neck of the woods:

@$3.00 a gallon, it'd buy 74 tanker trucks full of gas.

Thanks.

@4.00 a gallon, it'd buy 56 trucks full.

@5.00 a gallon, it'd buy 45 trucks full.

Cheapskate f****ing vampires.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

"In a thinly disguised attempt to act as if it cared about the people wading in the water, Chevron has pledged $5 million to relief efforts. ExxonMobil and Shell have pledged $2 million apiece. British Petroleum and Citgo have pledged $1 million each.

This is nothing next to their wealth. Of the world's seven most profitable corporations, four are ExxonMobil, Royal Dutch Shell, BP, and Chevron. ExxonMobil is the world's most profitable company, making $25.3 billion last year. It and the other three corporations had combined profits last year of $72.8 billion. ExxonMobil is also the world's most valuable company, with a market value, according to Forbes magazine, of $405 billion. The combined market value of ExxonMobil, BP, Royal Dutch Shell, and Chevron is nearly $1 trillion.

And that was last year. A month ago, ExxonMobil, Chevron, and ConocoPhillips announced record second-quarter profits of $7.6 billion, $3.7 billion, and $3.1 billion, respectively. Royal Dutch Shell's quarterly profits of $5.2 billion were up by 34 percent over the same period last year. Other well-known companies like Sunoco also had record second-quarter earnings.

If ExxonMobil were to maintain its current pace of profits, it would cross the $30 billion barrier for 2005. The company's chief financial officer, Henry Hubble, bragged in classic corporatese, ''Our disciplined project management and operating practices deliver the benefits of strong industry conditions to our shareholders."

$2 million from the World's richest company...ain't that grand? ::)

What'll that buy? A 2 week supply of toilet paper for the inhabitants of the Super Dome?

Nice. :unamused:


Welcome to George W. Bush's America.

[TomServo]

blah blah blah. that station in GA. didnt want to sell gas.they were trying to discourage pple from buying gas. who is to blame for the spike? US! if pple didnt panic and rush to fill up there wouldnt have been a price spike.
i personally know four pple that are just a family of four or less and yet they own and drive expeditions and suburbans. i dont think they should drive metros or yugos but damn. driving a bigass lincoln navigator when a v-6 minivan will do.......its our own damn fault for driving up demand.

[Spider]

blah blah blah. that station in GA. didnt want to sell gas.they were trying to discourage pple from buying gas. who is to blame for the spike? US! if pple didnt panic and rush to fill up there wouldnt have been a price spike.
i personally know four pple that are just a family of four or less and yet they own and drive expeditions and suburbans. i dont think they should drive metros or yugos but damn. driving a bigass lincoln navigator when a v-6 minivan will do.......its our own damn fault for driving up demand.
:spit: go figure huh ...... Everybody knws somebody that owns a surburban , Everybody knows somebody that has some gasguzzler , and without fail someone ( normaly the poster ) has enough forsight to see there was a crisis comming , and did their part right ........ I Drive a vehicle that gets around 4 miles to the gallon , and guess what , you would die without that vehicle in about a years time give or take few months .......

[TomServo]

thats right. back w/gas hit 2$ a gallon i tried to give them hard time about their 12 mpg land yaughts(sp) they just shrugged and said "so what?" i just say w/anyone complains @ gas pricesjust look around at all the pple driving f150s or silverados.
just beacause a person canafford a bigass suv doesnt mean they should drive it.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

just beacause a person canafford a bigass suv doesnt mean they should drive it.

If the President of the United States isn't willing to say this to America, then who will?

And to think that there were actually people in America who thought putting two oil men in the WH would be a good idea.

[TomServo]

even al gore in the white house made no difference. i Love 60's musclecars but i dont want pple commuting in them. even if we drilled anwar 4 years ago we still have no way to refine it.

[Spider]

thats right. back w/gas hit 2$ a gallon i tried to give them hard time about their 12 mpg land yaughts(sp) they just shrugged and said "so what?" i just say w/anyone complains @ gas pricesjust look around at all the pple driving f150s or silverados.
just beacause a person canafford a bigass suv doesnt mean they should drive it.
ok .... you are talking about people that live in a city , fair enough , in a city like Denver an SUV is realy more of a status symbol then a need , I need to keep in mind when debating this , not everyone understands the rual part and realy are not addressing that part , see living in Casper while it is getting better , you still need big horses ......... See I am guilty of not stepping out of my box on this issue ;D ........

[W*GS]

If the President of the United States isn't willing to say this to America, then who will?

The President of the US isn't the National Father, and we aren't children. We can figure things out for ourselves - we don't need the President to do it for us.

Sheesh, you want the President to tell you to brush your teeth at least twice daily, and to be "regular"?

[TomServo]

back to the MPG thing my brother drives a Lincoln navigator as his commuter!! he'd be way better off in a corvette Owell.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

back to the MPG thing my brother drives a Lincoln navigator as his commuter!! he'd be way better off in a corvette Owell.

Well, remember what Snarl said:

"The American way of life is non-negotiable."

:D

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

They fix oil prices, don't they?

There is so much propaganda, faith-based economic theorizing and simple ignorance and naiveté surrounding the question of soaring gasoline and oil prices in this country!

For heaven's sake, of course there is collusion, monopolistic behavior and price fixing in the oil industry. It's the way this particular industry operates.

Start with the OPEC, that gang of producers, largely in the thrall of the major oil companies, which sets production quotas for most of the major oil producing nations.

Then move to the large companies. There used to be seven. Now there are far fewer mega companies, thanks to mergers like Exxon/Mobil and BP/Amoco.

Even when they were seven those companies aren't really functioning as independent, competitive enterprises, and it's only gotten worth with increasing concentration. Because refineries, offshore drilling platforms and pipelines are gigantic multi-billion-dollar capital projects--a typical refinery can cost upwards of $5 billion to construct--most are joint projects involving several oil companies, while others lease the use of them. In such a situation, all those elements of a business which are normally closely-held trade secrets important to maintaining competitive advantage--inventories, crude reserves, pricing, production rates, relative mix of heating oil, low and high-octane gasoline, etc.--are common knowledge.



It's not like a typical business--say automobiles or television sets--where companies keep those kinds of numbers secret or, if they collude, have to do it by meeting in secret and agreeing on higher prices. The executives of the oil industry never have to get together, whether over a game of golf or in a back office. They know all about each other's operations without ever talking. Collusion, not competition, is a way of life in this industry.

There is simply no way to use a competitive model to explain what happened to gasoline prices after the Katrina storm hit New Orleans. At best, 10 percent of production was shut down, according to reports. That's 10 percent of 1/4 of U.S. demand--a tiny amount. Even if it were 10 percent of total demand because of reduced import capability at the Louisiana port, we're talking about 10 percent, while gas prices rose 25-35 percent and even more in some areas. Not often mentioned in the same articles on this phenomenon was the fact that the world price of oil actually fell by almost 10 percent over the same period.

When the world oil price rises, I notice, as I'm sure most readers also notice, that the price at the pump is up the next day--sometimes the same day that a report comes out. Yet oil from places like Saudi Arabia and Kuwait takes months to go from the wellhead to retail gas stations in the U.S. Even oil from Venezuela takes weeks to become gas at the station in the U.S. What other product do you know of where the retail price in stores jumps immediately when the price of raw materials that goes into it goes up? Does bread go up at the store the day that wheat prices kick up on the Chicago Merc? Does candy in the store go up when the price of sugar rises on the Comex? Of course not! Just gasoline and home heating oil. So if more expensive crude oil doesn't actually physically get to the pump for months, and the price at the pump goes up immediately, who's pocketing that money in the meantime? Hint: It's not your local gas station owner. Just check out the stock prices of the oil companies, and you'll have the correct answer.

In a competitive model, the kind Milton Friedman likes to celebrate, companies like Sunoco and Exxon would keep their retail prices as low as possible until costs forced them to raise prices--something that simply doesn't happen. Indeed, it's a one-way arrangement: When the per barrel price of crude falls, the price at the pump hangs at its high level, sometimes for weeks, but if crude goes up, so does the pump price. Consumers can't shop for bargains, because all gas stations behave the same way. For the most part, though, it's not the stations that are doing this gouging--many of them aren't even independent businesses, but are owned by the major companies--but rather the oil companies themselves. The money that results from this collusive, monopolistic behavior, in other words, is accruing to the oil companies and their stockholders.

The beauty of this arrangement, from the oil industry's perspective, is that nobody can be fined or jailed for it. Under U.S. anti-trust law, it's not illegal to have collusive results. The government would have to prove collusive intent, and as long as the oil executives don't actually sit in a room or a teleconference, and expressly conspire to collude on raising prices or cutting production, that simply cannot be done.

If Congress and the White House were serious about combating price rigging,coordinated production slowdowns and artificial scarcities, they would be changing the anti-trust laws so that the objective existence of anti-competitive pricing and production alone would be illegal, not just deliberate conspiring to fix prices. A simple step would be just to make all the competitive information regarding production and pricing of oil and oil products, all the way from wellhead to pump, public. After all, if the oil companies all know everything about each other's internal pricing and production, there's no justification for keeping that information from the public. Instead we have the opposite situation of course: secret meetings by our oil-industry-subsidized vice president and executives of the oil industry, where real collusive decisions were made.

Oil and energy are too crucial to the economy and to people's daily lives to allow them to remain the private domain of oil company executives and the oilmen--Bush and Cheney to name two--who run this blood-and-oil administration.

http://counterpunch.org/lindorff09242005.html

[W*GS]

Oil and energy are too crucial to the economy and to people's daily lives to allow them to remain the private domain of oil company executives and the oilmen--Bush and Cheney to name two--who run this blood-and-oil administration.

Should the US nationalize the oil industry?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

LMAO at the idea that W*GS thinks he has a right to talk about solutions to America's energy problems when he's on his knees for an administration whose policy is "government of the oil companies, by the oil companies, and for the oil companies."

[W*GS]

LMAO at the idea that W*GS thinks he has a right to talk about solutions to America's energy problems when he's on his knees for an administration whose policy is "government of the oil companies, by the oil companies, and for the oil companies."

Ooookaaaaay...

Should the US nationalize the oil industry?

[W*GS]

LMAO at the idea that W*GS thinks he has a right to talk about solutions to America's energy problems

I have the perfect right to talk about anything I want.

You're saying that I don't, based on your rather twisted opinion of what you think my political beliefs are.

So much for LABF not having censorious desires...

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Waiting for the Petrodollars to Trickle Down

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/16/business/worldbusiness/16view.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1129478669-yiX0/Ud5eZq0MI8xVQUA5A&oref=login

By EDUARDO PORTER
Published: October 16, 2005

REMEMBER petrodollars, those oil riches that sloshed around the world after the price of crude soared in the 1970's and 1980's? Well, they're back.

As oil prices have charged ahead, the United States and other oil importers have transferred hundreds of billions of dollars to oil exporting countries like Saudi Arabia and Venezuela. What these countries do with their new wealth could have substantial implications for the American economy.

The petrodollar stash is enormous. According to estimates by the International Monetary Fund, oil export revenues of Middle Eastern countries will reach nearly $400 billion this year.

On an inflation-adjusted basis, that is double the amount of those revenues in 1980, when oil prices surged after Ayatollah Khomeini came to power in Iran, and more than three times the figure of 1974, when the price of crude spiked after the Arab oil embargo.

This time around, it's not just Arab countries that are making a lot of money from oil, but also countries like Mexico, Russia and Canada. Ted Carmichael, chief Canadian economist at J. P. Morgan in Toronto, estimates that the 19 big energy exporters will reap $781 billion this year, compared with $549 billion in 2004 and $324 billion in 2002. What ultimately happens to this windfall - whether oil exporters decide to spend it or salt it away - will help determine how the pain caused by expensive energy is distributed throughout the American economy and the rest of the world.

At first glance, the implications are straightforward. If energy exporters spent the bulk of their newfound treasure on things like new oil exploration gear and fleets of limousines, for instance, much of the money would make a round trip, financing imports from the industrialized oil importing countries from which it came.

If, on the other hand, oil exporters saved their stash by, say, building up reserves invested in United States Treasury bonds, they would be effectively draining the money away from investment and consumption in the industrial world, delivering a potentially big blow to demand and employment.

But there's a twist to the story. Pumping tens of billions of dollars in savings by oil exporters into American government bonds and similar assets would help keep the lid on interest rates in the United States, adding support for the housing market and bolstering consumer spending by already over-stretched Americans. "Oil exporters could spend the money directly or help others increase spending, for example, by giving loans," said Hossein Samiei, head of the commodities unit in the I.M.F.'s research department.

So far, oil exporting countries have set much of the money aside. Russia's current account surplus - the broadest measure of its balance of trade - will swell to $102 billion from $60 billion last year, the monetary fund says. The surplus in Middle Eastern countries will rise to $218 billion this year from $57 billion in 2003, according to the I.M.F., almost double China's daunting surplus.

Economists reckon that this pile of savings has softened the impact of higher oil prices in the industrialized world, helping keep interest rates low. According to the I.M.F., more expensive energy will have only a modest impact on global growth, which should slow slightly to 4.3 percent this year from 5.1 percent in 2004.

Still, the situation is fluid. The monetary fund has said that Middle Eastern countries seem more cautious than in the 1970's, when they spent lavishly on public works and made many ultimately unproductive investments. But there are other profligate spenders among oil exporters, places like Venezuela and Nigeria.

"Oil exporters have a lot of useful ways to spend the money," said Kenneth Rogoff, a professor of public policy at Harvard University and a former chief economist at the I.M.F.

And the Middle East's apparent frugality may just reflect the difficulty of spending such a large windfall quickly.

Michael Dooley, an international economist who works as an adviser for Deutsche Bank, said: "In the past, what has happened is that when oil prices stabilize, oil producers find ways of spending money quickly. There is a lag of a couple of years between the increase in revenues and consumption."

Some of the money is already being consumed. For instance, while exports from OPEC members to the United States increased $20 billion in the first seven months of the year compared to 2004, American exports to the nations of OPEC, the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, grew $6.5 billion in the same period.

As more of the oil money is spent, the American economy may be left in a precarious position. Maurice Obstfeld, a professor of economics at the University of California, Berkeley, said, "If oil exporters lower their current account surplus, we will have to reduce our current account deficit."

This dynamic has a positive side. American exporters will get vibrant markets for their goods and services. But the nasty part is that a reduction in savings will mean higher interest rates.

IN the 1970's, Middle Eastern oil kingdoms squandered much of their new wealth. Much of what they saved was recycled via London and New York banks into sovereign loans to Latin American countries, which generally misspent the money, too. This set the stage for a string of financial crises in the 1980's when interest rates rose sharply as monetary policy was tightened to stave off inflation. "Last time the money was recycled, it was considered a good thing," Jeffrey Frankel, a professor of economics at Harvard, said. "It gave us a debt crisis a few years later."

This time around, the financial world looks mostly like a safer place. Developing countries in Latin America and beyond are managing their accounts much more prudently. But as the new petrodollars slosh through the global financial system, there remain some weak links, which are likely to suffer after the oil money reaches them. Debt-engorged American consumers and their expensive houses come to mind.

[enjolras]

Ooookaaaaay...

Should the US nationalize the oil industry?

While we're bumping here... it's a legitimate question.

So LABF: Should the US nationalize the oil industry?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

While we're bumping here... it's a legitimate question.

So LABF: Should the US nationalize the oil industry?

No - just regulate it (same applies to big business in general.)

A good place to start would be to kick the two oil men squatting in the WH (and their Big Oil cronies) to the curb and to do away with the practice of allowing Big Oil to write our nation's energy policies.

I guess to "binary thinkers" like W*GS, it's either/or, i.e., laissez faire or nationalization.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Ooookaaaaay...

Should the US nationalize the oil industry?
No, the U.S. should move away form oil and gas ASAP by moving to alternate and renewable energies as fast as we possibly can by offering billions in incentives to individuals and companies. If we would have taken the same amount of resolve and financial spending we wasted on nation building these last few years and put it towards new energies to wean ourselves from the stranglehold big oil and gas have on us we would be well on the way to a new industrial economy in the U.S. and finally freeing ourselves from our Middle East dependence.

By lessening demand for oil and gas by doing the above, the price would fall dramatically.

[patteeu]

By law, prices can't be changed to the degree they increase your profit margin by a large amount. So these stations that raised their prices to $5 and $6 when other stations started running low need to be held accountable.

That's a bad law. It must have been passed either by democrats or by Republicans who were pandering to democrats.

Enjolras already said it:

I'm still not sure what price gouging really means.. after all, if other stations are running out of gas then the price of gas (as a commodity) SHOULD increase. For one, raising the price goes a long ways to ensuring that those that TRULY value gas as a neccesity actually get it. That's the very definition of a market (unless there is collusion, which I've seen no evidence of).

If that law is measuring profit margin by taking sales price minus the price that gas cost the station, it isn't taking into account the price the station might have to pay to replace that gas in it's tank. It's very possible that in the immediate aftermath of the hurricane that replacement gas was not available at ANY price.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

That's a bad law. It must have been passed either by democrats or by Republicans who were pandering to democrats.

A law which protects consumers from price gouging is "bad?"

Only to a member of the anti-democracy, pro-aristocracy, pro-corporate oligarchy right like you.

If people like you had their way, America would be a feudal society and the middle class would be reduced to serfs.

[W*GS]

No - just regulate it (same applies to big business in general.)

"Regulate it" means what? Two words can't do your idea justice - or can they?

[W*GS]

No, the U.S. should move away form oil and gas ASAP by moving to alternate and renewable energies as fast as we possibly can by offering billions in incentives to individuals and companies.

Why not compensate for the costs (political, environmental, etc.) of our addiction to fossil fuels by instituting a 'carbon tax', and let the market work from there?

By lessening demand for oil and gas by doing the above, the price would fall dramatically.

Granted, our demand is far too high - aided by far-too-cheap gas and oil. I like the idea of a ~$4/gallon gas tax.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Why not compensate for the costs (political, environmental, etc.) of our addiction to fossil fuels by instituting a 'carbon tax', and let the market work from there?


Granted, our demand is far too high - aided by far-too-cheap gas and oil. I like the idea of a ~$4/gallon gas tax.

If we had time to let the market work that would be fine but I don't believe we do. I believe that a major event(s) may leave this country totally exposed if we don't move off oil as fast as possible. The result could be economic chaos.
It's in our best interests (economically and for the security of the country) to
develop alternate and renewable energy NOW.

We could start by building coal generation power plants which would eliminate the need for heating oil for power plants and individual companies and homes.
Coal is readily available and CHEAP compared to oil and and natural gas. We have enough in Wyo, ND and Montana alone to power the country for over 200 years.
Using anti-pollution controls (scrubbers, baghouses, NOx, injection systems, etc...) coal generation is much cleaner than just 10 years ago.

[patteeu]

A law which protects consumers from price gouging is "bad?"

Only to a member of the anti-democracy, pro-aristocracy, pro-corporate oligarchy right like you.

If people like you had their way, America would be a feudal society and the middle class would be reduced to serfs.

I described why it is bad, but your weak spin, outright lies, and ignorant misrepresentations are noted.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I described why it is bad, but your weak spin, outright lies, and ignorant misrepresentations are noted.

Your ignorance might be in play here. There is no federal law on gas gouging but there are state laws. BUT, coming soon, a federal law will be on the books courtesy of the republican controlled congress.

[patteeu]

Your ignorance might be in play here. There is no federal law on gas gouging but there are state laws. BUT, coming soon, a federal law will be on the books courtesy of the republican controlled congress.

I didn't say anything about federal or state laws. I don't see any justification for your suggestion that ignorance played a part in my statement.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I didn't say anything about federal or state laws. I don't see any justification for your suggestion that ignorance played a part in my statement.

You stated that any gas goughing laws had to be at the hands of democrats instead of actually checking to see the origin of the laws.

[patteeu]

You stated that any gas goughing laws had to be at the hands of democrats instead of actually checking to see the origin of the laws.

So how did you get federal out of that? Is it your belief that there are only democrats and Republicans at the federal level?

You're right that I didn't check into what the laws were or who passed them. I didn't hide that fact. My democrat/Republican comment was an editorial comment on my part that reflects my opinion that price gouging laws, in general, are more in step with the socialism of the democrat party than the capitalism of the Republican party. Nonetheless, I allowed for the possibility that the law was passed by Republicans who were betraying the party's traditional capitalistic principles.

[RaiderH8r]

High natural gas and oil prices are PRECISELY what the environmentalists want. Their policies and attitudes toward extraction industries is a means to curbing consumption which is one of the top priorities of all hippies. Bureaucratic rules and regulations in conjunction with an offshore moratorium on natural gas E&P in the gulf have resulted in lowered supplies of natural gas. Meanwhile, the push towards getting the nation off of coal power and into clean burning natural gas has dramatically increased demand without providing the means or opportunity to increase supply.

Meanwhile, Slug proposes coal extraction, and coal powered industry to supply energy. The infrastructure has changed, homes heat more with gas now. Businesses use "clean burning" gas in an effort to please hippie groups. The culpability for the current energy situation lies solely with the environmentalist and radical left. Hold them accountable.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

High natural gas and oil prices are PRECISELY what the environmentalists want. Their policies and attitudes toward extraction industries is a means to curbing consumption which is one of the top priorities of all hippies. Bureaucratic rules and regulations in conjunction with an offshore moratorium on natural gas E&P in the gulf have resulted in lowered supplies of natural gas. Meanwhile, the push towards getting the nation off of coal power and into clean burning natural gas has dramatically increased demand without providing the means or opportunity to increase supply.

Meanwhile, Slug proposes coal extraction, and coal powered industry to supply energy. The infrastructure has changed, homes heat more with gas now. Businesses use "clean burning" gas in an effort to please hippie groups. The culpability for the current energy situation lies solely with the environmentalist and radical left. Hold them accountable.
Yeah, the current energy situation is completely the fault of liberals Hilarious!

Thank goodness for those radicals that want to breath clean air and drink clean water :) for without them we wouldn't have the technology now to produce electricity from coal in the clean mode instead of the dirty mode we have been for decades.

The energy infrastructure is basically the same as it was 20 years ago with the exception of co-gen power plants out pacing coal fired and nuclear plants in new construction (that has ended now). The U.S. has over 600 coal fired plants that produce over half of the country's power. There are about 150 new plants in the planning stages now.

Like I said, eliminating heating oil and replacing that industry with coal fired generation DECREASES the demand of oil and gas so those two fuels will fall dramatically in price.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

High natural gas and oil prices are PRECISELY what the environmentalists want.

:bs:

High prices are precisely what Big Oil wants, and high prices are precisely what Big Oil gets from their puppet GeeDubya.

The oil companies manipulate supply, e.g., deliberately limit refining capacity in order to drive prices up, and then they blame the environmentalists.

[RaiderH8r]

:bs:

High prices are precisely what Big Oil wants, and high prices are precisely what Big Oil gets from their puppet GeeDubya.

The oil companies manipulate supply, e.g., deliberately limit refining capacity in order to drive prices up, and then they blame the environmentalists.
Environmental protests and litigation and redundant policies regarding siting, emissions, environmental impact statements, transmission lines, regulation of transmission, NEPA requirements and the hundreds of other bureaucratic and regulatory measures that must be undertaken in order to engage in any resource extraction endeavor have minimal to no impact on the current energy situation or future energy production? The litigation and public hearings that must be held at every step of the way has little to no impact on the expediency of construction of refining facilities? That refineries, instead of engaging in the lengthy and very costly aforementioned process, that comes on top of the capital used to build the facility, have not instead chosen to continually expand current refining facilities to meet demand? And that curbing fuel usage and consumption is not part of the environmental agenda? That it might just be possible that environmentalist and extreme policies supported by many within that movement have had the effect of higher prices due to a continued stranglehold on E&P and refinement through the aforementioned legal, regulatory, and bureaucratic process?

I expect the forthcoming tirade to place sole culpability on "Corporations" and other evil entities that you seem more than willing to hold to account while ignoring the fact that the environmental movement itself has become a religion to many who are willing to impose their beliefs on the whole with no regard for the consequences or impacts of their policies or actions.

[REB]

I was reading an article out at msnbc this morning about how the British and the Germans pay over $6 a gallon, Australia over $4 and I think Spain and some other European countries around $5 and they can't believe that the people who consume the most energy in the world bitch about 2-3 bucks a gallon. They also said though that about 20% of our gas price per gallon is tax where theirs is I think it said 60%. It said that European governments tax fuel at a high amount to try to curb use and conserve energy.

REB

1-2-3-:Broncos:!!!!!!!

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I was reading an article out at msnbc this morning about how the British and the Germans pay over $6 a gallon, Australia over $4 and I think Spain and some other European countries around $5 and they can't believe that the people who consume the most energy in the world b**** about 2-3 bucks a gallon. They also said though that about 20% of our gas price per gallon is tax where theirs is I think it said 60%. It said that European governments tax fuel at a high amount to try to curb use and conserve energy.

REB

1-2-3-:Broncos:!!!!!!!

Yeah, that's because the Europeans didn't build their transportation infrastructure around the automobile like America did. They have superior mass transit systems and built their roads for small cars.

And gas isn't $2 anywhere in the country that I know of (about $2.50 to $3.50 in most places). There is good reason to bitch about high gas prices too ... <a href="http://tinyurl.com/dk3k9">Inflation Surges By Largest Amount In More Than 15 Years</a>

[RaiderH8r]

Yeah, that's because the Europeans didn't build their transportation infrastructure around the automobile like America did. They have superior mass transit systems and built their roads for small cars.
And almost all Europeeing countries aren't 3000 miles east to west and 2000 miles north to south. European countries were designed around the horse and buggy.

[W*GS]

Yeah, that's because the Europeans didn't build their transportation infrastructure around the automobile like America did. They have superior mass transit systems and built their roads for small cars.

How many Americans don't live in urban/suburban areas? What's the average length of a car trip? And no, European roads weren't built for small cars - they generally don't see the need for an Expedition or a Hummer.

We Americans would do well to downsize our cars into something more in line with our genuine use of them, as opposed to keeping up with the neighbors.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

How many Americans don't live in urban/suburban areas?
Millions and millions.
What's the average length of a car trip?
I don't know, time wise probably about an 45 minutes to an hour or so (commuting to work). I drove Cheyenne, Brush, Ft. Collins, and Colo. Springs for a lot of years.
And no, European roads weren't built for small cars - they generally don't see the need for an Expedition or a Hummer.
Why are they so narrow then :)

We Americans would do well to downsize our cars into something more in line with our genuine use of them, as opposed to keeping up with the neighbors.

I definitely needed a 4X4 for my commutes as I had to be there every day.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Environmental protests and litigation and redundant policies regarding siting, emissions, environmental impact statements, transmission lines, regulation of transmission, NEPA requirements and the hundreds of other bureaucratic and regulatory measures that must be undertaken in order to engage in any resource extraction endeavor have minimal to no impact on the current energy situation or future energy production? The litigation and public hearings that must be held at every step of the way has little to no impact on the expediency of construction of refining facilities? That refineries, instead of engaging in the lengthy and very costly aforementioned process, that comes on top of the capital used to build the facility, have not instead chosen to continually expand current refining facilities to meet demand? And that curbing fuel usage and consumption is not part of the environmental agenda? That it might just be possible that environmentalist and extreme policies supported by many within that movement have had the effect of higher prices due to a continued stranglehold on E&P and refinement through the aforementioned legal, regulatory, and bureaucratic process?

I expect the forthcoming tirade to place sole culpability on "Corporations" and other evil entities that you seem more than willing to hold to account while ignoring the fact that the environmental movement itself has become a religion to many who are willing to impose their beliefs on the whole with no regard for the consequences or impacts of their policies or actions.

Switch off the Fox News or the Rush Limbaugh for a second and educate yourself:

FTCR: Internal Memos Show Oil Companies Intentionally Limited Refining Capacity to Drive Up Gasoline Prices

9/7/2005 9:00:00 AM

To: National Desk

Contact: Jamie Court, 310-392-0522 ext 327; Tim Hamilton, 360- 495-4941, both of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights; Web: http://www.consumerwatchdog.org

SANTA MONICA, Calif., Sept. 7 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights (FTCR) today exposed internal oil company memos that show how the industry intentionally reduced domestic refining capacity to drive up profits. The exposure comes in the wake of Hurricane Katrina as the oil industry blames environmental regulation for limiting number of U.S. refineries.

The three internal memos from Mobil, Chevron, and Texaco (available at http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/energy/fs/ show different ways the oil giants closed down refining capacity and drove independent refiners out of business. The confidential memos demonstrate a nationwide effort by American Petroleum Institute, the lobbying and research arm of the oil industry, to encourage the major refiners to close their refineries in the mid-1990s in order to raise the price at the pump.

"Large oil companies have for a decade artificially shorted the gasoline market to drive up prices," said FTCR president Jamie Court, who successfully fought to keep Shell Oil from needlessly closing its Bakersfield, California refinery this year. "Oil companies know they can make more money by making less gasoline. Katrina should be a wakeup call to America that the refiners profit widely when they keep the system running on empty."

"It's now obvious to most Americans that we have a refinery shortage," said petroleum consultant Tim Hamilton, who authored a recent report about oil company price gouging for FTCR. (Read the report at http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/energy/rp/ ) "To point to the environmental laws as the cause simply misses the fact that it was the major oil companies, not the environmental groups, that used the regulatory process to create artificial shortages and limit competition."

The memos from Mobil, Chevron and Texaco show the following.

-- An internal 1996 memorandum from Mobil demonstrates the oil company's successful strategies to keep smaller refiner Powerine from reopening its California refinery. The document makes it clear that much of the hardships created by California's regulations governing refineries came at the urging of the major oil companies and not the environmental organizations blamed by the industry. The other alternative plan discussed in the event Powerine did open the refinery was "....buying all their avails and marketing it ourselves" to insure the lower price fuel didn't get into the market. Read the Mobil memo at http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/energy/fs/5105.pdf

-- An internal Chevron memo states; "A senior energy analyst at the recent API convention warned that if the US petroleum industry doesn't reduce its refining capacity it will never see any substantial increase in refinery margins." It then discussed how major refiners were closing down their refineries. Read the Chevron memo at http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/energy/fs/5103.pdf

-- The Texaco memo disclosed how the industry believed in the mid-1990s that "the most critical factor facing the refining industry on the West Coast is the surplus of refining capacity, and the surplus gasoline production capacity. (The same situation exists for the entire U.S. refining industry.) Supply significantly exceeds demand year-round. This results in very poor refinery margins and very poor refinery financial results. Significant events need to occur to assist in reducing supplies and/or increasing the demand for gasoline. One example of a significant event would be the elimination of mandates for oxygenate addition to gasoline. Given a choice, oxygenate usage would go down, and gasoline supplies would go down accordingly. (Much effort is being exerted to see this happen in the Pacific Northwest.)" As a result of such pressure, Washington State eliminated the ethanol mandate - requiring greater quantities of refined supply to fill the gasoline volume occupied by ethanol. Read the Texaco memo at http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/energy/fs/5104.pdf

FTCR is nonprofit, nonpartisan consumer group. For more information visit, http://www.consumerwatchdog.org .

http://www.usnewswire.com/

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Bush oil prices = more wood stoves

The traditional wood-burning stove, which had been relegated to the corners of antique shops and rustic cabins, has suddenly become a hot item as the BFEE continues its never-ending onslaught on the budgets of hundreds of millions of poor and middle class American families.

Since few families can afford $1,500 or more on fuel to heat their homes this winter, they are turning back to the wood pellet stove to stay warm for a tenth the price of the BFEE gouge.

Factories are scrambling to meet the spike in demand after Bush went wild with his energy rape of defenseless people who don't control a superpower military.

"We're seeing a tremendous increase in wood pellet stove purchases," said Leslie Wheeler, who's busier than Ollie North selling Hillary targets at an NRA fundraiser for Tom DeLay.

Story (sans satirical paraphrasing) here:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051018/lf_nm/bizfeature_woodstoves_dc

[W*GS]

The traditional wood-burning stove, which had been relegated to the corners of antique shops and rustic cabins,

They aren't that much of a relic.

has suddenly become a hot item as the BFEE continues its never-ending onslaught on the budgets of hundreds of millions of poor and middle class American families.

Your "satirical paraphrasing" is more than a little overdone.

There aren't "hundreds of millions of poor and middle class American families", unless you count all individual Americans as a "family".

This sort of clumsy mistake casts doubt on all your other claims involving numbers.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

http://www.liberalcartoons.com/.images/cal01.jpg

...when Big Oil didn't write its own legislation.

[RaiderH8r]

Switch off the Fox News or the Rush Limbaugh for a second and educate yourself:

FTCR: Internal Memos Show Oil Companies Intentionally Limited Refining Capacity to Drive Up Gasoline Prices

9/7/2005 9:00:00 AM

To: National Desk

Contact: Jamie Court, 310-392-0522 ext 327; Tim Hamilton, 360- 495-4941, both of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights; Web: http://www.consumerwatchdog.org

SANTA MONICA, Calif., Sept. 7 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights (FTCR) today exposed internal oil company memos that show how the industry intentionally reduced domestic refining capacity to drive up profits. The exposure comes in the wake of Hurricane Katrina as the oil industry blames environmental regulation for limiting number of U.S. refineries.

The three internal memos from Mobil, Chevron, and Texaco (available at http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/energy/fs/ show different ways the oil giants closed down refining capacity and drove independent refiners out of business. The confidential memos demonstrate a nationwide effort by American Petroleum Institute, the lobbying and research arm of the oil industry, to encourage the major refiners to close their refineries in the mid-1990s in order to raise the price at the pump.

"Large oil companies have for a decade artificially shorted the gasoline market to drive up prices," said FTCR president Jamie Court, who successfully fought to keep Shell Oil from needlessly closing its Bakersfield, California refinery this year. "Oil companies know they can make more money by making less gasoline. Katrina should be a wakeup call to America that the refiners profit widely when they keep the system running on empty."

"It's now obvious to most Americans that we have a refinery shortage," said petroleum consultant Tim Hamilton, who authored a recent report about oil company price gouging for FTCR. (Read the report at http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/energy/rp/ ) "To point to the environmental laws as the cause simply misses the fact that it was the major oil companies, not the environmental groups, that used the regulatory process to create artificial shortages and limit competition."

The memos from Mobil, Chevron and Texaco show the following.

-- An internal 1996 memorandum from Mobil demonstrates the oil company's successful strategies to keep smaller refiner Powerine from reopening its California refinery. The document makes it clear that much of the hardships created by California's regulations governing refineries came at the urging of the major oil companies and not the environmental organizations blamed by the industry. The other alternative plan discussed in the event Powerine did open the refinery was "....buying all their avails and marketing it ourselves" to insure the lower price fuel didn't get into the market. Read the Mobil memo at http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/energy/fs/5105.pdf

-- An internal Chevron memo states; "A senior energy analyst at the recent API convention warned that if the US petroleum industry doesn't reduce its refining capacity it will never see any substantial increase in refinery margins." It then discussed how major refiners were closing down their refineries. Read the Chevron memo at http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/energy/fs/5103.pdf

-- The Texaco memo disclosed how the industry believed in the mid-1990s that "the most critical factor facing the refining industry on the West Coast is the surplus of refining capacity, and the surplus gasoline production capacity. (The same situation exists for the entire U.S. refining industry.) Supply significantly exceeds demand year-round. This results in very poor refinery margins and very poor refinery financial results. Significant events need to occur to assist in reducing supplies and/or increasing the demand for gasoline. One example of a significant event would be the elimination of mandates for oxygenate addition to gasoline. Given a choice, oxygenate usage would go down, and gasoline supplies would go down accordingly. (Much effort is being exerted to see this happen in the Pacific Northwest.)" As a result of such pressure, Washington State eliminated the ethanol mandate - requiring greater quantities of refined supply to fill the gasoline volume occupied by ethanol. Read the Texaco memo at http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/energy/fs/5104.pdf

FTCR is nonprofit, nonpartisan consumer group. For more information visit, http://www.consumerwatchdog.org .

http://www.usnewswire.com/
"I expect the forthcoming tirade to place sole culpability on "Corporations" and other evil entities that you seem more than willing to hold to account while ignoring the fact that the environmental movement itself has become a religion to many who are willing to impose their beliefs on the whole with no regard for the consequences or impacts of their policies or actions."

And boy did I call it. Your rhetoric has become all too predictable. And you have still failed to address a single issue I raised in my original post.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

"I expect the forthcoming tirade to place sole culpability on "Corporations" and other evil entities that you seem more than willing to hold to account while ignoring the fact that the environmental movement itself has become a religion to many who are willing to impose their beliefs on the whole with no regard for the consequences or impacts of their policies or actions."

And boy did I call it. Your rhetoric has become all too predictable. And you have still failed to address a single issue I raised in my original post.

Actually, he did address your original post and what you accuse him of you're guilty of.

The culpability for the current energy situation lies solely with the environmentalist and radical left. Hold them accountable.

[W*GS]

...when Big Oil didn't write its own legislation.

Just Big Labor and Big Law.

Besides, why did Clinton accept that payoff (errr, "donation" to his library) from the Saudis? Was it to keep quiet about what he knew about OBL, and that the Saudi government was full of al-Qaeda supporters?

How many millions did it take to keep Clinton quiet about the war the terrorists were waging on us during his watch, and why did he sell us out?

[RaiderH8r]

Actually, he did address your original post and what you accuse him of you're guilty of.
Let's see, the House recently passed legislation to streamline the bureaucratic and regulatory process for new refinery construction. The radical left and environmental movement in particular feverishly attempted to thwart that legislation. As they do with all resource extraction legislation. As they did when the Energy Bill was up for consideration each and every time over the past 10+ years. Every time, without exception, the radical left and environmental movement has done all within their power to stop any and all E&P within this country with no regard to the fall out of their policies or actions. Not once were my points in this regard addressed with anything more than the aforementioned, and predicted, tirade.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Let's see, the House recently passed legislation to streamline the bureaucratic and regulatory process for new refinery construction. The radical left and environmental movement in particular feverishly attempted to thwart that legislation. As they do with all resource extraction legislation. As they did when the Energy Bill was up for consideration each and every time over the past 10+ years. Every time, without exception, the radical left and environmental movement has done all within their power to stop any and all E&P within this country with no regard to the fall out of their policies or actions. Not once were my points in this regard addressed with anything more than the aforementioned, and predicted, tirade.

Like I said, you stated the current energy problems were ALL the fault of environmentalists when you were shown how big oil and gas conspired to lower refining capacity to increase profits.

No way am I in favor of eliminating environmental laws to construct the most polluting, poisonous industrial plants and give more incentives on top of that to big oil and gas. They were just given over 12 billion in incentives in the new energy package.

Our money is BETTER spent for renewable and alternate energies like I've stated over and over. Hopefully, when we get Bush and big oil out of the WH we get someone in that understands this.

[RaiderH8r]

Like I said, you stated the current energy problems were ALL the fault of environmentalists when you were shown how big oil and gas conspired to lower refining capacity to increase profits.

No way am I in favor of eliminating environmental laws to construct the most polluting, poisonous industrial plants and give more incentives on top of that to big oil and gas. They were just given over 12 billion in incentives in the new energy package.

Our money is BETTER spent for renewable and alternate energies like I've stated over and over. Hopefully, when we get Bush and big oil out of the WH we get someone in that understands this.
In the meanwhile shall we use the horse and buggy? Or do the hippies enjoy a nice cold can of STFU and quit whining about prices?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Like I said, you stated the current energy problems were ALL the fault of environmentalists when you were shown how big oil and gas conspired to lower refining capacity to increase profits.

:thumbsup:

Precisely.

In other words, his claim was exposed as another right-wing fairy tale, and he isn't man enough to admit it.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

In the meanwhile shall we use the horse and buggy?

Getting Big Oil out of the WH would be a better idea.

Or do the hippies enjoy a nice cold can of STFU and quit whining about prices?

:laugh:

So you're saying the only people in America who are upset about energy costs right now are "hippies?"

And are you saying that, rather than "whine," Americans should just quietly bend over and say "thank you, Mr. Bush, may I have another?"

The desperation of your spin is proportionate to, well, Dim Son's shrinking approval ratings.

:D

[RaiderH8r]

Getting Big Oil out of the WH would be a better idea.



:laugh:

So you're saying the only people in America who are upset about energy costs right now are "hippies?"

And are you saying that, rather than "whine," Americans should just quietly bend over and say "thank you, Mr. Bush, may I have another?"

The desperation of your spin is proportionate to, well, Dim Son's shrinking approval ratings.

:D
::) No, I said that hippies should STFU. Not all who are upset/complaining about energy prices are hippies. But all hippies are upset/complaining about high energy prices.

Simple explanations for simple minds.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

::) No, I said that hippies should STFU.

Riiiiiight, Mr. Nazi.

Every right-thinking 'murican knows that "hippies" (just like people who make their living in the entertainment industry) shouldn't be allowed to participate in the political discussion.

Not all who are upset/complaining about energy prices are hippies. But all hippies are upset/complaining about high energy prices.

rofl

All hippies?

So you've personally interviewed every single "hippie" in America?

Did you give each one personalized instructions on how to keep silent while getting anally raped by Bush's Big Oil cronies?

Simple explanations for simple minds.

Yep - you definitely deliver in that department. :laugh:

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Just a year ago SHELL was shutting down refineries...

Shell to Demolish Profitable Refinery

http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=114-04062004

Evidence Shows Shell to Demolish Profitable Refinery, Drive Up Gas Prices; Consumer Group Seeks Intervention of Bush, Kerry, CA Attorney General 4/6/2004

To: National and State Desks, Consumer Reporter
Contact: Jamie Court, 310-392-0522, ext. 327 or Tim Hamilton, 360-495-4941, both for the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights

SANTA MONICA, Calif., April 6 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights today released internal Shell documents showing the oil refiner is set to close and demolish its Bakersfield refinery despite the fact the site had the biggest refinery margins, or profits per gallon, of any Shell refinery in the nation as of yesterday.

Shell had claimed it was not economically viable to keep the refinery open and has refused to put it up for sale. Bakersfield supplies 2 percent of the state's gasoline and only 13 refineries feed California's tight gasoline supply (down from 37 in 1983).

An April 5th internal Shell document released today by FTCR shows that Bakersfield's refining margin at $23.01 per barrel, or about 55 cents profit per gallon, topped all of Shell's refineries in the nation. That means, for example, that margins are 36 cents per gallon higher in Bakersfield than in Port Arthur, Texas. The internal document comments under the category of refinery margins "Wow."

"Only an oil company that wants to short the market and artificially drive up the price of gasoline would demolish a highly profitable refinery rather than sell it," said Jamie Court, president of FTCR and author of the book Corporateering (Tarcher/Putnam). " Shell has deceived the public about Bakersfield and must be forced to keep this refinery open or sell it to a competitor. This evidence should also spur a national moratorium on all further domestic refinery closures."

http://www.questionsquestions.net/docs04/refinery.html

And they are still trying to get prices EVEN HIGHER.

Shell Oil President Says: No New Refineries Needed!

By Chris Kulczycki
Daily Kos
Monday 10 October 2005

Shell Oil Co. President John Hofmeister said consumer preferences for higher-mileage vehicles could slow oil and gasoline demand in coming years and lessen the urgency to build significant numbers of new refineries in the United States, according to Kevin G. Hall of Knight Ridder News Services:
"Hofmeister told Knight Ridder Newspapers that efforts by President Bush and Congress to provide incentives to build new refineries are welcome, but a key assumption - that the demand for gasoline will continue to increase - could be flawed. Hofmeister said the growing consumer demand for cars and trucks that get better gas mileage could change the outlook for future gasoline use."
Is he looking a gift horse in the mouth, and/or telling Bush that the Republican energy plan is flawed?
"I would submit the likelihood of consumption patterns changing is higher, rather than lower," Hofmeister said, suggesting the change would take some of the pressure off the need to build new refineries.
US refinery capacity was 17.9mbd in 1981 coming from about 300 refineries. Today it's 17.1mbd from 148 plants. US consumption is nearly 21mbd; imported fuel makes up the difference. So why is it that no new refineries have been built in the US since 1976? Is it really due to those pesky environment regulations that Republicans like to blame? Or do the oil companies agree with Hofmeister?
Hofmeister questions the long-term demand forecasts, pointing to the recent bout of record-high oil and gasoline prices that he thinks could mark a turning point.
"That really shifts the attention of the automotive industry to look for more fuel-efficient alternatives," Hofmeister said.
But could it be that Hofmeister wants to limit refinery capacity to keep prices up? Green Car Congress points out that:

http://www.truthout.org/issues_05/101105EC.shtml

[W*GS]

The FTCR is nothing more than yet another group that wants the government to take over the economy.

http://www.consumerwatchdog.org

They claim to support consumers, but their core ideology is nationalization and socialism.

Figures LABF loves 'em.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Quotes

"He's the CEO president, but it's like he's the CEO of Enron and WorldCom."

- CNBC's Jim Cramer on President Katrina

http://atrios.blogspot.com/

[ak1971]

Quotes

"He's the CEO president, but it's like he's the CEO of Enron and WorldCom."

- CNBC's Jim Cramer on President Katrina

http://atrios.blogspot.com/

I cant wait to see Jim Cramers head explode on live TV. The guy is an idiot and a shill for hedge funds , all politics aside.