Gas & guns

The so called"free market" is out of control, the American consumer, our
government and yes, greedy corporations are digging a deep hole one which
I am not sure we can survive.

Without standards a society cannot continue and that applies to all parts
of life, economics, marriage, etc. I am not saying it's not here however we
continue to grow less concerned with maintaining a quality life and focus
on gaining money. Not a good trend in my senior citizen opinion.
 
So lets say they do continue to sell at $2.50. People line up every car, gas can and milk jug they can get their hands on, because they keep hearing how gas may hit $4 or $5. The gas station runs out of gas after a few hours of this, as demand is increased by many times. So now no one has gas anywhere. When gas comes in next week at $4 a gallon, the owners can't afford it because they sold their previous supply for a $1.50 a gallon less. And before you call that paranoid, it has appeared to happen in the south east at $4 a gallon.

How is this better than the price being high for a few weeks while people settle down and the refineries and pipes get running again?

My way, increasing price, there is a lot better chance there will be gas in teh tank at the end of the day. Those that really need it can still get it, at a higher price. The owner has the money to pay if the next tank comes in at $4 a gallon.

Furthermore, if these shops shut down because of no gas, what happens? Do they still have to pay employees? My guess is yes.
 
Rebar: I don't know how many times I have to restate what I think - but I think I've done enough in that regard. I really don't think you misunderstand what I am saying. I think you are just trying to misstate it, over and over, to make it sound less reasonable. It's a waste of my time to keep repeating, expanding etc, because you can always come back with a paraphrased distortion. I will engage in honest dialogue, but that takes two.
 
It's a waste of my time to keep repeating, expanding etc, because you can always come back with a paraphrased distortion.
Click to expand...
I'm trying to get you to see the basic contradiction in your argument. On the one hand, you claim to believe in the free market, on the other you think high prices means criminal intent. Unless all the oil companies got together to fix the price, for which there's not one bit of evidence, then whatever profit they make is 100% legal and in keeping with our free market system.

last time I looked we had a Republican President and both houses of Congress controlled by the Republicans
Click to expand...
To shift the blame for our current oil crisis to the republicans is utterly absurd. To answer my own question (since you won't), it's been over 30 years since a new nuclear plant or oil refinery has been built in America, despite demand for energy going through the roof. This is wholely the result of liberal/leftist enviromental policies. Bush has called for more of these:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7646880/
Today's prices are a direct result of liberal/left interference in the energy market and increased worldwide demand, not profiteering by oil companies.
 
Rebar: I will try one more time. Yes, I believe in the free market. However, price fixing, market allocation, and other forms of collusion are by definition not the free market!

One more time - because there are truely unusually high profit margins occuring for a *commodity* product that is controlled by a few companies, I *suspect* there are departures from the free market. Considering the magnitude of the problem and the concern of the citizens, I believe the government should investigate if that is indeed going on.

To shift the blame for our current oil crisis to the republicans is utterly absurd.
Click to expand...
Ok, *there's* a point we can agree on. I don't blame either Bush or the GOP for high oil prices, and am puzzled by those who do.

Today's prices are a direct result of liberal/left interference in the energy market
Click to expand...
But then the very next thing you say is that it's the Democrats that are to blame! Come on now, Rebar. :rolleyes: You are behaving as a textbook example of partisanship here.
 
I *suspect* there are departures from the free market.
Click to expand...
I guess that's where we differ. I don't suspect anything of the kind, just free market adjustments to the current highly volatile situation.
But then the very next thing you say is that it's the Democrats that are to blame!
Click to expand...
The fact is, the so-called "environmental" movement that steadfastly opposes any new development to our energy infrastructure, is strongly associated with the liberal/left ideology. And the party that caters to the liberal/left is the democratic party. If stating the truth is "partisan", I guess I'm partisan.
 
The fact is, the so-called "environmental" movement that steadfastly opposes any new development to our energy infrastructure, is strongly associated with the liberal/left ideology. And the party that caters to the liberal/left is the democratic party.
Click to expand...

Well, at least on nuclear power, there has been opposition to new development here for decades. I for one, think that at least today, when:
A. The nuclear plants in operation are all beyond their design lifetimes :eek:
B. Much safer nuclear plant designs have been developed over the years :)
C. We have an increasing need for energy, and are without a meaningful alternative. :confused:

...that we need to scrap many of the older plants and build new ones in the new designs. If they prove as robust in operation as they are in theory, we should expand nuclear power.

I think that the loudest opposition to nuclear has come from environmentalists, however, when I look at what's been going on in Nevada with their Yucca mountain, for decades (and they have a Republican governor, so I don't think Nevada is a bastion of the extreme left), I am terribly frustrated. They are just using any legal means possible to block the use of Yucca mountain, which is certainly the best site in the US to put this waste. It's just pure NIMBY. Can't say you support nuclear energy if you oppose a facility that the whole industry depends on. I guess what I am saying is, opposition to nuclear power does not come strictly from the left.
 
...that we need to scrap many of the older plants and build new ones in the new designs. If they prove as robust in operation as they are in theory, we should expand nuclear power.
Click to expand...
I agree that new nuclear plants would be even safer than the old ones. But the fear is that, once a plant is scrapped, environmentalists would block building a new one, so they're trying to keep the old ones working for as long as possible.
I guess what I am saying is, opposition to nuclear power does not come strictly from the left.
Click to expand...
OK, only 99% of it comes from the left then. And a lot of the NIMBY effect comes from liberal/left fear-mongering "China Syndrome" nonsense.
 
But the fear is that, once a plant is scrapped, environmentalists would block building a new one, so they're trying to keep the old ones working for as long as possible.
Click to expand...

Well, Dubya has recently provided Federal money for a sizeable research reactor to be built from a new design chosen from among a short list of candidates. I am glad he did this!
These include a $1.25 billion plan to fund the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP), at the DoE’s Idaho National Laboratory. The NGNP involves research, development, demonstration and commercial application of an advanced reactor — the current reference design is a high-temperature gas reactor — with an associated hydrogen production facility.

The bill authorises continuation and a funding plan for the DoE’s advanced fuel cycle initiative to develop more proliferation-resistant nuclear fuel and develop better methods to process and manage used nuclear fuel.

Funding for university-based nuclear engineering programmes also would double by 2007, if Congress appropriates the required money to meet targets in the Energy Policy Act.
Click to expand...
from: http://www.neimagazine.com/story.asp?sectioncode=132&storyCode=2030325
 
there we go with the left wing conspiracy theories again :eek:

I wonder how many new refinery projects the oil companies have proposed in the last 15 years that were blocked by the tree huggers?

and no evidence to back it up.......

I guess we agree to disagree once more.....

I dont expect the price to not go up with this disaster... However I will be sorely dissapointed with the oil companies if they still make record profits at the end of the year. Especially if they use any of the oil reserves that the taxpayers own....

is a free market really a free market?

thats all I have to say on this
 
I am a nuclear energy fan, we need to go nuclear in a big way, even more so then the French have done. There is no reason at all we can't get 100% of our electric from hydro and nuclear.
 
http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20050901041609990012&ncid=NWS00010000000001

As far as gas price spikes lately, the hurricane is to blame, due to damage of certain pipe lines that deliver the fuel to many states, as well as problems with loss of electricity in refinement plants.

I know the prices were still climbing steadily before the hurricane, and that is obviously based on other variables, but found this article interesting as to why prices jumped up by so much lately.

I hope I'm not drifting off topic or stating the obvious here. Just thought some people might want to check this article out, and this seemed like an appropriate place to post it.
 
there we go with the left wing conspiracy theories again
Click to expand...
Conspiracy? Hardly, the opposition to nuclear and refinery plants and opening new fields for drilling by the liberal/left is common knowledge. It would be a conspiracy to try and hide this link.
and no evidence to back it up.......
Click to expand...
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=12227

Add to that Bush's proposal to use closed military bases to get around the crushing environmental obsticles to building new plants, and I think that constitutes plenty of evidence to back up my statements.
However I will be sorely dissapointed with the oil companies if they still make record profits at the end of the year.
Click to expand...
If they make profits legally, why should you concern yourself how high those profits are? Again, that's not what someone who believes in free markets would say.
 
Right off the top of my head, I would reccomed looking up ANWR. We cannot drill on about 2000 acres, of about 1.5 million. Might screw with the Caribou migration.
 
IIRC, the porcupine caribou thrived around the areas where the original alaskan pipeline was built. They are very curious animals, and I believe they also liked to be near the warm pipes of hot oil. Their population did not die off, but rather increased. The pipes were also set up so that they would not interfere with migration of any animals.

Not to mention, the majority of alaskans want to drill for oil. It will create jobs and profit for the state.
 
Just to back up what I said...

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=93990&page=1

"Murkowski, who chairs the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, noted caribou herds actually increased after drilling and pipeline construction in Alaska in the 1970s."

"They rub up against the pipeline because it is warm and it is a opportunity for them to get warm in a hostile environment. And the caribou, as I say not being educated to the contrary, think this is a good thing," he said.
 
Well, if the oil companies/distributors are not in fact collaborating to artificially push up prices beyond what a free market would permit, I guess we can't do anything about it. Can't toss 'em in jail, and, unlike other commodities (like oranges), we really have little choice but to use oil and gas, and can only modestly and slowly alter consumption (not that it's not a good idea). I think it's that last part that bugs me, and other people - you have no choice but to buy, unless you want to lose your job, avoid food, and keep your kids out of school. Passing along cost increases is natural, but collusion or profiteering are not. Apparently, there are no federal laws against it, but many states have actually passed laws against so-called "price gouging".

As far as how well these folks are doing, the major integrated oil companies had an average increase in net income in 2004 of 97%. They're having an even bigger year in 2005. Independent oil refiners and marketers had an average increase in net income in 2004 of 190%. Again, they're doing even better in 2005.

A nice "Gas Gouging FAQ" from CNN/Money, with references to supporting articles with more detail may be found here:
http://money.cnn.com/2005/08/31/pf/gas_price_gouging/

And a nice article in Business Week on complaints to the Federal Govt by consumers on gas gouging may be found here:
http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D8CBV92G0.htm?campaign_id=apn_home_down&chan=db

Of course, everyone knows there couldn't actually be any profiteering or collusion going on... not here!
 
Of course, everyone knows there couldn't actually be any profiteering or collusion going on... not here!
Click to expand...

Oh, for sure it exist, too what degree not sure. I notice on this board
and others many people seem to feel it's ok or "that is just the way it is".

It appears to me in our modern society some view capitialism as they steal
from me and I steal from another. Perhaps it works however it would be a
poor quality life to me. :(
 
No, some of us just realize that just because you have attached yourself to something, does not mean that it has to be provided at a rate that you agree with. Or that someone else cannot profit from selling it. Or, to make it affordable to you, someone has to sell it at a loss. Or risk running out, essentially killing their livelihood.

Don't like the prices? Buy your own refinery. More affordable, buy your own gas station. Sell at what you think is a fair price. If it is a fair price, you will make money and outsell your competitors, and still have supply left. Of course, that is assuming that no one else is currently selling at the fair price to keep demand where it needs to be. If you think that you can sell at a much lower price and stay in business, I can't see a reason not to.

And I have yet to see one example from anywhere that shows me that the station owner raised their price stictly to make lots of money. In the places that the prices seem most unreasonable, there is also no gas. Doubt there could be a connection there. We are coming up on a holiday weekend, gas prices were already going to be elevated. Couldn't see a connection between a big travel weekend, and decreased supply of gas, as being a reason to raise prices.
 
It's amazing how many socialists we have here on TFL when it comes to talking about a "fair" price for gasoline.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top