Oil is coming down, I guess we've accomplished our task, last one out turn off the lights!
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Max H Herr on -
Paul . . .
I certainly hope not! But, you're right, as soon as some of the pressure comes off the pocketbook, all things seem to be solved. $4/gallon seems to be the breaking point. If Big Oil wants to continue to line its pocketbook with our hard-earned dollars at the expense of energy self-sufficiency, then they need to hold the line on US gasoline prices in the $3.75 - $4.00 range.
For those of us who can remember $0.299/gallon "gas war" prices at the four stations on the major intersection corners in the 1960s (when the usual price was about $0.329/gallon), $3.75 is still painful, but understandable. More than drilling for more new oil in ANWR, Congress needs to lift the artificial, government-imposed restriction on the price of domestic oil which is the real reason foreign imports have grown to 70% of demand.
In the face of rapidly escalating crude oil prices, as ExxonMobil was on its way to more than $11,000,000,000 in profits for the 2nd Quarter of 2008, how could Big Oil be making such phenomenal profits if they are "simply passing on the cost:" to consumers as they repeatedly suggest? Congress is unwilling to ask that hard question!
-
Permalink Reply by Paul on -
Hey Max,
Thanks. Although there are artificial effects boosting the price, the oil companies were not the responsible parties. They reacted according to the laws. The congress wrote the laws, and just because they didn't understand what they were regulating, we ended up where the laws pushed us.
So Exxon made $11b so what! Government made $30b in the same time, and they get $$$ from all the oil companies! So please help us to direct venom at the correct players.
-
Permalink Reply by Max H Herr on
-
My only disagreement with your comment is one of semantics. Government does not "make" $30,000,000,000 when they collect taxes and other revenue. That revenue does not cover their expenditures (nearly that much went to Iraq alone in the same time period). "Take in" is the more appropriate concept. So there's really a huge difference between the "taking in" of the US Government, and the "making" of ExxonMobil.
But . . . don't misunderstand my philosophy. Exxon is entirely within its right to make as much profit as they can. What we need the Government to do is to take a lesson from Exxon and figure out how not to continue to operate at a loss. If you or I operated our businesses the way the Government operates, we'd be having this discussion face to face in one of our fine Federal Penitentiaries!
-
Permalink Reply by Lou De Frog on -
Max
I think the confusion has developed because the Government is a non-profit business and it is not following the rules for a non-profit.
If we apply the same rules to Government as we do to non-profit businesses, it would take in one dollar and have to ensure that it's administration costs are less than .80 cents or it would lose its status as a non-profit.
-
Permalink Reply by Clifton on -
The way they get away with great profits from the way it was explained to me is in the fluctuation in price in crude. As soon as whole sale goes up it is almost instantly passed on to the consumer. When crude goes back down the price is slow to respond in dropping thus increasing profit margins for as long as possible. Its the fluctuation in prices that they abuse and make record profits on. They show they make pennies on the dollar but they make much more with this strategy they pull off every time.
I checked this theory on my own and found that within 24 hours of wholesale price increase the pumps reflect that fairly accurately. When the whole sale comes down it takes upwards of 7-14 days to respond. Infact I saw a calcualtion that shows that gas should average 3.25 but it will take months to get there unless of course a scare or speculators drive the price of crude back up which then will jump the prices up within 24 hours again. This is what is lining the pockets of big oil. Pisses me off.
-
Permalink Reply by BurgessKJ on -
NOT, We will go forward, because the oil price will rise again, and supplies will continue to become more scarce within our lifetime.
Besides, the Sun is FREE, and budget bargains are forever!
-
Permalink Reply by BurgessKJ on
-
Actually, the SLIGHTLY cheaper gas may be a direct ploy against the advance of alternative energy. Boone said that our efforts, even just the rumour of us planning to accomplish something, would cause gas prices to plumet.
The basic facts that the economics support, even demand renewable energy, not to mention the positive environmental impact this solution will provide.
-
Permalink Reply by Todd McKissick on -
First off, let's clear the air on one thing. Congress pushed laws that were lobbied to them. Who spent all that lobby money? I'll simply repeat a quote I can't remember which oil exec said which is, "The DC lobby game has a 100:1 ROI". That means for every dollar they spend pushing for a law, they end up with 99 dollars profit. Is there any doubt why their history shows more lobbying than advertising? This is how they get the royalty rights 'accidentally' removed from the energy bill 8-10 years ago AFTER the bill was passed and then can't find how the 'typo' happened.
The current price lowering is definitely planned. I just don't know the whos and hows yet. If you look at the history of price rises, you'll see that they go high and shock us, then ease off a bit to quell the outrage. When the air clears, they rinse and repeat.
The key point to keep in mind is that we are in a three pronged war against oil (4 if you count national security / war costs). IMHO, the peak oil condition is more impending than we are led to believe. The global warming issue may or may not be real, but the pollution side definitely is so let's get over the GW argument. Lastly, the economic crisis we're in just doesn't support a further raping of the American Public. We're currently spending a larger percentage of our 'two income family' money for all the necessary things to survive reasonably today than families spent from their 'single income' money. Energy is taking it's role as the biggest player in that movement. I'm not saying that Exxon's profits are too high as much as they are part of an oligopoly that isn't being pressured to fight the rise. I would put more blame on the falling dollar buying us ever less oil value for our hours worked. The real profiteers there are the central banks which profit directly from our country's financial problems.
Since this isn't really a political site, I propose we concentrate on a solution that we can use that avoids all those battles. I'm talking about getting the people directly involved in actually making products and services that cut the cord regardless of DC's and Big Energy's actions. I say it's not only possible but it's getting us back to our roots of helping each other out. Call it a barn raising of sorts where a group volunteers briefly for short term personal gain (simply feeling good) and long term community gain. How can we do this?
(BTW: Paul, Interesting choice of tags on this article.)
-
Permalink Reply by Max H Herr on
-
Todd . . . absolutely correct on all accounts. Especially that about the falling value of the good ole American greenback. Notice how the value of our money began to really decline when it started to look like Monopoly (R) money?
Exxon is entitled to make as much profit as they want . . . it's the basic tenet of free enterprise. But when they lie about where it comes from (i.e., "We're just passing the cost along."), that's cause for concern. But as long as the 100:1 ROI continues to work its magic, and the Congress is in bed with Big Oil (the Democrats need to cut the 'high road' crap and admit that they take lobbyist contributions and campaign money from Big Oil, too), not much in the way of meaningful reform will ever emerge.
After all, the only job of a politician, once elected, is to get reelected. Everything else they do screws up life for some or all of us.
-
Permalink Reply by Robert E. Levy on -
Hey!
This is soley temporary as the world wide enconomy is tanking and slowing the production of goods and services. Secondly, the only to win in the middle east is to collapse their economies by greatly lessening the world demand. And lastly, we will need oil for the next couple of hundred years out for manufacturing. Buring this resource in gas tanks is very short sighted.
I deeply believe that solar trough technology is the best solution as it uses off the shelf technology and coal and gas fired plants located in NV, AZ and NM can run off the steam generated.
Rob
-
Permalink Reply by Max H Herr on
-
Robert . . .
Somehow, and I think Rush Limbaugh might be to blame, the discussion has been perverted in such a way that people think the argument is to end the use of oil. You're correct that we cannot simply turn off the spigot and go in another direction. There are many things totally unrelated to the use of gasoline and diesel to power personal transportation needs that cannot easily be converted to alternatives (like the production of plastics, aircraft fuel, lubricants [although the synthetic industry is making solid inroads], and other industrial uses).
The argument is, and should remain, severing the tie to FOREIGN sources of oil/energy. Converting personal transportation and electricity generation to renewables (solar anything, wind, veggie-fuels) is fundamentally at the core of the "umbilical" cord.
The kooks, like Limbaugh, work hard to divert attention from the real issue with words and phrases that masquerade as "gospel" but are fundamentally lies.
Featured Discussion
Twitter Feed
© 2009 Created by PickensPlan
Badges | Community Guidelines | Report an Issue | Privacy | Terms of Service
