brannon67 Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Boys and Girls, what do you think about the gas prices now? I heard that gas is going up somewhere between 10 and 20 cents by this weekend. Its amazing. I think its about time for TSTHTF. I can see a revolution coming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfox14 Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 I not a big believer in conspiracy theories except when it comes to the price of fuel. We are being raped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riffster Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 The government tries to pretend they have control over it sometimes. I am using Ethanol-free gasoline, at least I am getting pure gas for the same price and my bimmer seems to like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lagerfanny Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 You guys are lucky, I filled up this morning at your equivalent of $9.42 a gallon ! (based on todays rate of £1 = $1.57) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 It's a combination of the US government shutting down exploration, transportation and refining and the international marketplace doing its thing. In both cases it's "politics." The first three can be solved within five years or less with the federal government acting for the general public and loosening regulation; the second... that's a far more problematic situation. The bottom line is that "conservation" and "green" alternatives aren't working very well at this point in science. Anti-oil and gas interests are at work raising prices through current regulation. Short term is relatively easy with regs; long term had best see more research and development of alternatives. m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanvillRob Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Oh....I think I could go on forever on gas prices..... As a nation, we've chosen to not produce our own oil. We have plenty here, we just refuse to get it...then we complain that OPEC controls the price, we complain that we send BILLION$ upon BILLION$ to Arab countries, we complain that our actual unemployment rate is abuot 9%, and we complain that our enemies are well-funded by several oil-producing Arab states. We allow China to drill off the coast of Cuba, in actuality taking the oil that's off the coast of Florida, (it's the same oil!). China will more than double it's oil consumption as their population moves from bicycles to cars, so there ain't much chance the cost of oil will come down. And of course, the price of oil is set in US Dollars....so as we borrow more and more, ($16.4 TRILLION now!), we deflate the value of the dollar, so OPEC charges more for it's oil because the dollar buys less! When you hear of OPEC charging more for a barrel of oil, remember that you local gas station has to worry about it's NEXT load of fuel, so they HAVE to immediately raise the price per gallon because, to them. it doesn't matter what they paid for the gas in their tanks, they care about what it'll cost them to replace it...and THAT gas will cost them more. I went by a station on the way to work yesterday, and noticed that the price of regular jumped to $4.17/gallon. When I drove home yesterday, the same station was selling regular for $4.21/gallon. On my way to work this morning it was posted at $4.29! What do you think the price will jump to when the "driving season" hits? How about if/when Israel bombs Iran? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 So yesterday I filled up at Costco for $3.51, my wife texted me 2 hours and said it was $3.46 WOW a reduction....Jumped .20 this morning I don't know but my cost to run a company is going way up. Gas, Healthcare etc. and all I can do is pass it along. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanvillRob Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 So yesterday I filled up at Costco for $3.51, my wife texted me 2 hours and said it was $3.46 WOW a reduction....Jumped .20 this morning I don't know but my cost to run a company is going way up. Gas, Healthcare etc. and all I can do is pass it along. If you think about it.... every time doing business gets more expensive, (e.g. higher taxes, higher healthcare costs, higher fuel costs), since companies can't go down to the basement and print up more....they pass those costs on to the consumer. So, when people want to tax businesses more, (e.g. higher corporate taxes), they are actually asking for an increase in the cost of whatever they buy.... the consumer always pays the taxes for businesses! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabba2203 Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 What? How can this be? We should be drowning in cheap Iraqi Oil after the "Bush oil wars". What do you mean? \:D/ :-" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 If you think about it.... every time doing business gets more expensive, (e.g. higher taxes, higher healthcare costs, higher fuel costs), since companies can't go down to the basement and print up more....they pass those costs on to the consumer. So, when people want to tax businesses more, (e.g. higher corporate taxes), they are actually asking for an increase in the cost of whatever they buy.... the consumer always pays the taxes for businesses! Your right, I don't know why more people don't understand that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zigzag Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Largest US export is fuel. Check This Out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanvillRob Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 What? How can this be? We should be drowning in cheap Iraqi Oil after the "Bush oil wars". What do you mean? \:D/ :-" I agree.... Bush should have told them, "Once we kick Hussein's butt, we want cheap oil for the next 25 years! If you don't agree... good luck with Saddam." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zigzag Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 If you think about it.... every time doing business gets more expensive, (e.g. higher taxes, higher healthcare costs, higher fuel costs), since companies can't go down to the basement and print up more....they pass those costs on to the consumer. So, when people want to tax businesses more, (e.g. higher corporate taxes), they are actually asking for an increase in the cost of whatever they buy.... the consumer always pays the taxes for businesses! Obama is proposing a reduction of the corporate tax rate from 35% to 28% (more in line with international levels) and eliminating loopholes and deductions for big business. If congress had voted for the public option that Obama proposed, businesses would not be paying health insurance, either, and it would have forced insurance companies to lower their rates and the cost of health care would have been reduced. Your favorite news source Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heymisterk Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 I consider myself a sympathetic guy, but not on gas prices. Americans have been far too spoiled for far too long when it comes to energy prices. I don't want less regulation on gas and oil; gas and oil already have far too much influence on our current politics. The Deepwater Horizon disaster was due - in part - to a lack of regulatory oversight. Conoco/Phillips spent 21 MILLION dollars in lobbying in 2011 alone, dwarfing any "anti-oil and gas" lobby..such that there is any. The move to the Canadian oil sands, fracking, and drilling in more and more precarious places - both politically and geographically - is indicative of just how tough it is to tap new reserves. As the excellent book The End of Oil by Paul Roberts points out, we have failed to prepare for one inevitable fact: we cannot drill, frack, or tarsand our way out of this mess...but we continue to act as if we can. The truth is not always pleasant, but Americans had better get accustomed to driving less, and driving more efficiently. With all due respect, America needs to get realistic when it comes to energy. Do we want to build the Keystone XL Pipeline? Okay, but policy should dictate equal investment in wind, solar, hybrid, and energy efficiency spending. It is ludicrous to believe that nationwide energy policy is at the whim of environmentalists; rather, it is more often than not at the whim of Big Oil. And we keep allowing that with our poor choices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanvillRob Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Obama is proposing a reduction of the corporate tax rate from 35% to 28% (more in line with international levels) and eliminating loopholes and deductions for big business. If congress had voted for the public option that Obama proposed, businesses would not be paying health insurance, either, and it would have forced insurance companies to lower their rates and the cost of health care would have been reduced. Your favorite news source Ziggy....you're missing the point.... Obama want's more corporations to pay more taxes. If businesses pay more in taxes, whether it's because of eliminated loopholes or an increase in rates, they're still paying more in taxes...which means they have to charge more for their products/services, which means what? That we, as consumers, end up paying more.... it's the only place businesses can get money....so the extra taxes are paid by us... leaving us with less money to by other stuff, (that will also cost more!). And remember, when Obamacare was passed, the democrats had a fillibuster-proof senate and a majority in the house. Republicans could do NOTHING to stop anything they wanted to pass...hence Obamacare. Also, don't be fooled by "public option" meaning healthcare is "free". If 250,000,000 Americans now have health care coverage, and we pop that up to 350,000,000 people...SOMEONE has to pay.... and so, it'd mean higher taxes...so consumers will have less becaue they're paying more in taxes, and will have to pay more for stuff because businesses also have to pay higher taxes. There are no free lunches. Did you know that everyone in the US, (yes, even illegal aliens), has had access to free healthcare for many years now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zigzag Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Keystone Pipeline Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zigzag Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Ziggy....you're missing the point.... Obama want's more corporations to pay more taxes. If businesses pay more in taxes, whether it's because of eliminated loopholes or an increase in rates, they're still paying more in taxes...which means they have to charge more for their products/services, which means what? That we, as consumers, end up paying more.... it's the only place businesses can get money....so the extra taxes are paid by us... leaving us with less money to by other stuff, (that will also cost more!). And remember, when Obamacare was passed, the democrats had a fillibuster-proof senate and a majority in the house. Republicans could do NOTHING to stop anything they wanted to pass...hence Obamacare. Also, don't be fooled by "public option" meaning healthcare is "free". If 250,000,000 Americans now have health care coverage, and we pop that up to 350,000,000 people...SOMEONE has to pay.... and so, it'd mean higher taxes...so consumers will have less becaue they're paying more in taxes, and will have to pay more for stuff because businesses also have to pay higher taxes. There are no free lunches. Did you know that everyone in the US, (yes, even illegal aliens), has had access to free healthcare for many years now? Who is missing the point, D-ville? Obamacare is not really Obamacare without a public option. The spineless, gutless democrats knuckled under to the impotent Republicans to end up with what is now known as "Obamacare" which is, apparently, a watered down version of a bill Bob Dole (a Republican) tried to pass many years ago, and more closely resembles the Massachusetts/Romney healthcare. The whole point of the article on Obama's reduction of corporate taxes is that he actually wants to generate more taxes from businesses. The great squeal and deceit coming from Republicans is how US corporate tax rate is the highest in the world, and yet, the real numbers show that corporations pay far less due to loopholes/write-offs/deductions, a fact that I've been pointing out in this forum for years. My point is that the opportunities have been there for business to benefit during the Obama years, and the label that he has received for being anti-business is not exactly accurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Yes, "big oil" spends a lot on lobbying, but that's largely because they're playing against a stacked deck. "Environmentalists" don't need to spend so much cash because they've largely got laws on their side that allow manipulation of the system where one person can functionally destroy a window of time allowing an operation they don't like. Been there, watched it, wrote about it. Find out how you can become a pariah thanks to those uninterested in reality because the truth didn't fit their political perspective. Ten or 20 years later when the truth is revealed, note that they'll not apologize and will instead blame something other than themselves. The problem is that regardless the science and consequences, the deck is stacked against development of almost any natural resources from trees to pipelines to grass - yup, even the green stuff on hillsides. Long-term fossil fuels aren't going to last. Short term, though, we need to consider the degree to which we are willing to see our economy and culture go down the tubes into something else. Frankly I see the only solution is a non-political - perhaps even an anti-political - engineering oversight of a lot more development of current resources paired with a realistic push for alternative energy. Over the years I've seen so many promises of solar, wind, whatever, killed by poor science and businesses interested in getting their startup running more than realistic technology or business plan. I don't blame the current administration for their stupid funding of Solyndra because in ways they're just the most recently stupid and at the highest level. Everybody keeps dreaming of a magic bullet that ain't there. Oh - and assuming large scale development of a perfectly clean, perfectly safe energy source? Wanna know what happens to them when somebody learns that transmission lines will be needed to carry it? Also, add to the mix the gamesmanship of the world marketplace, derivatives, futures, etc... it's a gambling game with each player playing cutthroat. It ain't a simple world, and I don't see very many folks working for the greatest benefit of the most people - but instead for their own pockets or ideology and feelings of personal power. And that goes for everyone involved. m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanvillRob Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Who is missing the point, D-ville? Obamacare is not really Obamacare without a public option. The spineless, gutless democrats are responsible for what is now "Obamacare" which is, apparently, a watered down version of a bill Bob Dole (a Republican) tried to pass, and more closely resembles the Massachusetts/Romney healthcare. The whole point of the article on Obama's reduction of corporate taxes is that he actually wants to generate more taxes from businesses. The great squeal and deceit coming from Republicans is how US corporate tax rate is the highest in the world, and yet, the real numbers show that corporations pay far less due to loopholes/write-offs/deductions, a fact that I've been pointing out in this forum for years. My point is that the opportuniteis have been there for business to benefit during the Obama years, and the label that he has received for being anti-business is not exactly accurate. Don't feel bad.... you got spinless, gutless democrats....we got spineless, gutless rebublicans....together they're wrecking this country. The largest increase in tax revenue was with Reagan and Clinton, right? Reagan reduced taxes and the economy took off, Clinton reduced the deficit and rode the computer boom. Tax reduction didn't help Bush so much 'cause many things people bought with their new-found money are manufactured outside the US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heymisterk Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 It ain't a simple world, and I don't see very many folks working for the greatest benefit of the most people - but instead for their own pockets or ideology and feelings of personal power. . m Indeed it isn't a simple world, and people are indeed working for their own pockets and ideology, namely high-powered energy interests who only care about the bottom line. Sorry, but when and if I need to apologize, I will gladly do so. My own interest is a sustainable planet for my children and grandchildren; I don't see Exxon/Mobile, BP, or other such entities doing that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zigzag Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Agreed D-ville. m, I agree with your statement about "realistic" energy alternatives. I also believe that the issue with Solyndra was a mistake in judgment by Obama in not realizing that the Chinese would kick our butts in manufacturing using US technology, hence Obama's recent attempts to level the playing field in that arena. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamGuy Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 I just noticed it's $4.05 a gallon here in Oregon, and heard on the radio to get ready for $5/gal... As an environmental educator, I have a hard time embracing my neighbor to the north's "drill baby, drill" philosophy. It would be nice if people took fuel and energy conservation seriously so that perhaps we could find viable energy alternatives but I know how popular this sort of hippy rhetoric can be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surfpup Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 What amazes me is how little the increased cost of fuel has affected the way people drive. I still see most people flooring their accelerator from light to light. A few years ago I read an article about people who were competing to get the highest mileage out of their high-mileage compact cars. I started applying some of the same strategies to my own driving. By shifting at 2000 rpm and coasting in neutral whenever possible, I increased the around town mileage of my our car from 25 to 29 mpg. Wow, you say, four whole miles per gallon. Well, on the 16 gallon tank that is 64 more miles per tank of gas - a savings of about $8. Since we use a tank about every two weeks, that saved me $208 per year in fuel. Imagine if everyone did the same - a 16% improvement in fuel economy just by not racing from light to light. Now, I admit I feel like a dork sometimes accelerating that slowly, and I have gotten some ugly looks from people who zoom around me. Notably I am usually next to them at the next light and laughing all the way to the bank! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Ziggy... I'm probably closer to the Keystone XL by far than Mr. Turner's little hobby ranch that's bigger than most folks need to make a living out here. If one wishes a perfect environmental solution to anything, one needs to consider what sort of an environment one wishes to have. Mr. Turner's reflects a wealthy idealist's protection of his politics. If you're wealthy and want an idealized buffalo ranch as a vacation place, fine. I can't afford what Mr. Turner can afford, so I've gotta live in a lesser economic world with the realities of gas prices, food prices and functionally decreasing personal income. Mr. Turner need not have such concern and can afford whatever he might spend to protect his politics and perception of how he wants his piece of cowboy paradise to become part of the "buffalo common" described some years ago as the ideal for America to get rid of farms and ranches as we know them on the Northern Plains. The idea is that only the truly wealthy and the government should own such huge stretches of unproductive land. Yeah, it's reeeeally political. Anyway, the Keystone folks even have convinced most of the anti-everything ranchers of the safety of the pipeline itself and most I know would prefer Canadian oil to propping up Hugo Chavez or the Saudis or Iranians. Yeah, that's pollitical. But... cleanliness? Safety? The oil patch in western North Dakota currently is using trucking and train transport to pipelines miles away. Keystone XL would offer a far safer entry to the marketplace and lower transport cost. The problem is that again you have people with semi-hidden political agendas on both sides of the issue and the realities become obfuscated. Again, it ain't so simple as some advocates of one thing or another might wish you to believe. One might make as good a case as Mr. Turner's against hydroelectric production and get rid of the dams now providing electricity and flood control on the Missouri mainstream, for example. Then... wanna see some great flooding south of Memphis and some additional sorts of environmental "disaster" caused by people living there? Ever hear John Lee Hooker's piece on the flood at Tupelo? Seriously, everything we do affects the environment. The worst way to protect the environment is going along with either fear mongering or promotions from celebrities. m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zigzag Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Had a feeling you'd bite on that one, m. I'm trying to weigh the good v. the bad in these types of issues, and it is hard when everyone has an agenda. Out of that article, this is what grabbed my attention: "Tar sands oil production has already created more than 50 square miles of toxic waste ponds so massive they are visible from space. Even more important, tar sands oil extraction produces three times more greenhouse gas emissions than conventional oil and gas, putting even greater strain on our atmosphere and oceans, which have little absorptive capacity left. Ted TurnerCloser to home, the pipeline presents an immediate threat to drinking water for millions and to the livelihood of farmers and ranchers. To transport via pipeline, the thick tar sands crude must be mixed with toxic chemicals and then pumped at extreme temperature and pressure. This sets the stage for more pipeline failures and spills that create a highly toxic mess. The existing Keystone 1 tar sands pipeline has spilled more than 12 times in its first 12 months of operation. In July 2010, a spill of more than 800,000 gallons of toxic tar sands crude from the Enbridge pipeline contaminated more than 30 miles of water and shoreline along the Kalamazoo River in Michigan. This created public health problems, threats to groundwater, widespread fish kills, and destruction of wildlife habitat, contamination that is still being cleaned up at a cost exceeding $700 million. Downstream landowners like me are thinking this is a preview of coming attractions if Keystone XL is built." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.