T Nation

Rising Fuel Prices! WTF!?

As long as price raises do nothing but make 99% of Americans shake their head, curse the pump, and fill their gas tanks, the Oil Corps, from an economic standpoint, ought to raise their prices. Price raises so far have done virtually nothing to decrease volume sold. It doesn’t take Alan Greenspan to see that Oil Corps could easily justify raising prices.

As long as everyone keeps buying it, they’re going to keep raising the price. As of yet, very few people stop buying gasoline.

And it is not true that there are no alternatives. Wind, Solar, Geothermal, Biofuels, Hydroelectric, tidal, Nuclear, they’re all out there. And most of them come in personal-sized packages, if you want to spend a little extra capital to save on costs down the road.

If the U.S. took advantage of all them right now, they could put a serious dent in their fossil fuel consumption.

The reason that the U.S. is putting only a token effort in these alternative fuels is because oil is still so cheap. It’s cheaper to run off of oil than it is to pursue the alternatives.

[quote]tGunslinger wrote:

And it is not true that there are no alternatives. Wind, Solar, Geothermal, Biofuels, Hydroelectric, tidal, Nuclear, they’re all out there. And most of them come in personal-sized packages, if you want to spend a little extra capital to save on costs down the road.[/quote]

Most of these don’t come in personal sizes and the one’s that do are ineffectual (or aren’t as ubiquitously effective) at that size. Marginal improvements as well as the cooperative use of several of them can achieve equivalent performance, but as you said, up front costs are prohibitive.

[quote]jlesk68 wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
Could someone please logicaly explain why in the fuck gas is jumping up in price in 25-30 cent intervals? I mean, seriously? I just got back from the hardware store and gas is @ $3.25/gallon. Yesterday it was $2.98/gallon

What

The

Fuck.

Anticipation to the invasion of Iran.[/quote]

Maybe…more likely a bombing campaign to take out the nukes.

[quote]Ren wrote:
BigRagoo wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
Could someone please logicaly explain why in the fuck gas is jumping up in price in 25-30 cent intervals? I mean, seriously? I just got back from the hardware store and gas is @ $3.25/gallon. Yesterday it was $2.98/gallon

What

The

Fuck.

Don’t know but I hope the fuckers making record profits each quarter choke. There is no reason except greed.

Current reasons are refining problems (it was the crude supply last time). Or as I like to call it, insurmountable greed.

Does anyone know the last time a major oil company posted a LOSS? [/quote]

Does anyone know the last time a permanent cut in the Federal taxes was enacted on gasoline?

A big possible reason the price is rising because the Dems took over Congress. The oil companies are making their cash before they get raped.

[quote]Cunnivore wrote:

Since 1977, governments collected more than $1.34 trillion, after adjusting for inflation, in gasoline tax revenues - more than twice the amount of domestic profits earned by major U.S. oil companies during the same period.

Source:

"However, often ignored in this debate is the fact that oil industry profits are highly cyclical, making them just as prone to ?busts? as to ?booms.?

Additionally, tax collections on the production and import of gasoline by state and federal governments are already near historic highs. In fact, in recent decades governments have collected far more revenue from gasoline taxes than the largest U.S. oil companies have collectively earned in domestic profits."

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
How about everyone just takes two weeks off from work this summer (all at the same time), not go anywhere, don’t buy, consume, or contribute in any way to the economy to send a message.

On the other hand, that’s probably what we should already be doing to conserve resources. Let them try to talk about supply when demand drops for two straight weeks over the summer.[/quote]

What you wrote is straight from the Dem playbook:

The intelligent and productive deserve no reward and no profits. Everyone is here to be a slave to the others, our brother’s keepers. Those who produce gasoline are supposed to produce it because we NEED it, not because they want to make a profit, those greedy bastards!!

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Cunnivore wrote:

Since 1977, governments collected more than $1.34 trillion, after adjusting for inflation, in gasoline tax revenues - more than twice the amount of domestic profits earned by major U.S. oil companies during the same period.

Source:

"However, often ignored in this debate is the fact that oil industry profits are highly cyclical, making them just as prone to ?busts? as to ?booms.?

Additionally, tax collections on the production and import of gasoline by state and federal governments are already near historic highs. In fact, in recent decades governments have collected far more revenue from gasoline taxes than the largest U.S. oil companies have collectively earned in domestic profits."[/quote]

Point taken, but when was the last bust? That is all I am trying to find out.

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
What you wrote is straight from the Dem playbook:

The intelligent and productive deserve no reward and no profits. Everyone is here to be a slave to the others, our brother’s keepers. Those who produce gasoline are supposed to produce it because we NEED it, not because they want to make a profit, those greedy bastards!!

[/quote]
Ummm…no, my statement was about conservation…whether the dems believe in conservation too is another matter. Am I not allowed to save energy/resources for the greater good of humanity without being partisan?

If high demand and low supply raise fuel prices then logically not using as much should bring the price down…? Am I wrong? Thats what this thread was about.

Quit your partisan hackery. It doesn’t work.

[quote]Ren wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Cunnivore wrote:

Since 1977, governments collected more than $1.34 trillion, after adjusting for inflation, in gasoline tax revenues - more than twice the amount of domestic profits earned by major U.S. oil companies during the same period.

Source:

"However, often ignored in this debate is the fact that oil industry profits are highly cyclical, making them just as prone to ?busts? as to ?booms.?

Additionally, tax collections on the production and import of gasoline by state and federal governments are already near historic highs. In fact, in recent decades governments have collected far more revenue from gasoline taxes than the largest U.S. oil companies have collectively earned in domestic profits."

Point taken, but when was the last bust? That is all I am trying to find out.[/quote]

I believe roughly 15 years ago.

well, for the past 20 or so years, the industry has dropped to what looks like a low of $8billion in profit a year, with highs of around $40billion (in 2004 dollars). Volatile, yes, dire straits, hardly.

Quit crying…it is supply and demand.

Get over it.

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
What you wrote is straight from the Dem playbook:

The intelligent and productive deserve no reward and no profits. Everyone is here to be a slave to the others, our brother’s keepers. Those who produce gasoline are supposed to produce it because we NEED it, not because they want to make a profit, those greedy bastards!!

Ummm…no, my statement was about conservation…whether the dems believe in conservation too is another matter. Am I not allowed to save energy/resources for the greater good of humanity without being partisan?

If high demand and low supply raise fuel prices then logically not using as much should bring the price down…? Am I wrong? Thats what this thread was about.

Quit your partisan hackery. It doesn’t work.[/quote]

I must admit I’ve never seen humanity, though I HAVE seen individual humans. I also admit that the ‘common good’ has no meaning to me, since we don’t all have a common stomach or a common mind.

To me, these are phony concepts made up by evil people who use these trick words and phrases to shame people into compliance with THEIR agendas, usually to trick one person into serving/working for another. “How dare you want to keep your money, while Katrina victims are homeless?” or some other such stupidity.

(Please feel free to drive a Yugo or some other POS so Al Gore can fly around in his private plane.)

Its not your ‘conservation’ that I question but your moral premise: that individuals should work for the benefit of the community, there actually being no such thing. Its a made-up word.

[quote]tGunslinger wrote:
As long as price raises do nothing but make 99% of Americans shake their head, curse the pump, and fill their gas tanks, the Oil Corps, from an economic standpoint, ought to raise their prices. Price raises so far have done virtually nothing to decrease volume sold. It doesn’t take Alan Greenspan to see that Oil Corps could easily justify raising prices.
[/quote]

Nailed it on the head. Most people are still living under the mindset that we’re not running out of oil and refinery production. They will bitch and complain about and oil and gas prices, but not do a whole lot more than that.

Sales of SUVs may be down, but they’re not down that much. Sales of large trucks are actually up and they get just as bad gas mileage as the SUVs.

Have you seen the ridiculous sales figures for the new Toyota Tundra? It gets a whooping 15 mpg/city 18mpg/hwy. We still think of our automobiles as status symbols and not point A to point B reliable transportation.

I think they could easily take gas prices to $5-$6 (which they will) and it really wouldn’t significantly affect most people’s driving habits or automotive purchases. What it will do though is chew up people’s disposable income, which will cause future problems down the road. But Americans have never been all that good at planning a sustainable future for themselves. Politically, economically, financially or otherwise.

[quote]Marmadogg wrote:
Quit crying…it is supply and demand.

Get over it.[/quote]

“And there are fewer options around the world. State oil monopolies now control three-quarters of the world’s proven oil reserves, so Venezuela may still prove enticing even under Chavez’s new, tougher terms.”

--- from Foxnews

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
I must admit I’ve never seen humanity, though I HAVE seen individual humans. I also admit that the ‘common good’ has no meaning to me, since we don’t all have a common stomach or a common mind.

To me, these are phony concepts made up by evil people who use these trick words and phrases to shame people into compliance with THEIR agendas, usually to trick one person into serving/working for another. “How dare you want to keep your money, while Katrina victims are homeless?” or some other such stupidity.

(Please feel free to drive a Yugo or some other POS so Al Gore can fly around in his private plane.)

Its not your ‘conservation’ that I question but your moral premise: that individuals should work for the benefit of the community, there actually being no such thing. Its a made-up word.

[/quote]
See, now we can be reasonable, intelligent debaters. I agree with you about the phoney notion of “the good of humanity” because it injects what I feel is good which you may not agree with–its a rhetorical, sentimental and dangerous argument. (After all, what atrocious actions haven’t been done in the name of the “goodness of humanity”). That is the debate people should be having–not you’re EVIL because…

So I guess now I have to define my perception of humanity to you and you can tell me whether you think there is any “goodness” in it.

Humanity–the sum total of what makes us human; our ability to create, have emotion, rationalize, and act on our rationalizations. It spans all things done in the name of “beauty” to all wars ever fought.

The “goodness”, worth defending to me, are what make life worth living. Yes I am a sentimental artsy “communist”. I don’t thin that you should have these same perceptions–but you are free to if you wish.

I also want to clear up what you think regarding my “communistic” tendencies. Forget for a moment all you “know” about Marxian Communism and history. We all have heard it before…communism doesn’t work, etc.

When I speak about communism it isn’t within the framework of government but merely from a communal economic living perspective. Under this premise you cannot say it doesn’t work because it is absolutely self-inflicted and people choose this lifestyle for themselves–it isn’t forced on them. It can be both democratic and “fair”.

I would never force someone into that lifestyle because that would just destroy what the entire point of that lifestyle is all about.

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
How about everyone just takes two weeks off from work this summer (all at the same time), not go anywhere, don’t buy, consume, or contribute in any way to the economy to send a message.

On the other hand, that’s probably what we should already be doing to conserve resources. Let them try to talk about supply when demand drops for two straight weeks over the summer.

What you wrote is straight from the Dem playbook:

The intelligent and productive deserve no reward and no profits. Everyone is here to be a slave to the others, our brother’s keepers. Those who produce gasoline are supposed to produce it because we NEED it, not because they want to make a profit, those greedy bastards!!

[/quote]

HH, you’re not being consistent. If it’s OK for oil companies to exploit the market and increase the price during times of scarcity (it is), it is also OK for us to exploit the market and not buy from them when we can afford not to, to drive down the prices. That is very different from some kind of legislative action.

Not that I think it would work…

[quote]nephorm wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
How about everyone just takes two weeks off from work this summer (all at the same time), not go anywhere, don’t buy, consume, or contribute in any way to the economy to send a message.

On the other hand, that’s probably what we should already be doing to conserve resources. Let them try to talk about supply when demand drops for two straight weeks over the summer.

What you wrote is straight from the Dem playbook:

The intelligent and productive deserve no reward and no profits. Everyone is here to be a slave to the others, our brother’s keepers. Those who produce gasoline are supposed to produce it because we NEED it, not because they want to make a profit, those greedy bastards!!

HH, you’re not being consistent. If it’s OK for oil companies to exploit the market and increase the price during times of scarcity (it is), it is also OK for us to exploit the market and not buy from them when we can afford not to, to drive down the prices. That is very different from some kind of legislative action.

Not that I think it would work…[/quote]

Unfortunately its basically impossible to do that. Far too many rely on automobile transportation to earn a living. Add to that the fact that a lot of people cannot switch to more fuel-efficient / flex-fuel cars and you have an industry that has a permanent, guaranteed demand.

Add to this that unlike other industries, competitors have no motivation to lower their prices, which leaves us with oil companies that can tell us to bend over and there is nothing we can do about it.

But hey, we are talking about an industry that has not shown a loss for over 2 decades, and have recently had a taste of the ridiculous profits that can be made off the American public.

Do I think that we need to tax them into oblivion? No. But in the situations where there is a steady supply of crude but the bottleneck is in the refining process, well, questions need to be asked.

To the OP (and others), on the World News about 2 weeks ago, the headline was: 127 Isreali militants captured, oil prices expected to rise. Isn’t that clear enough? Damn, we have to pay for their incarcerations SOMEHOW! (sarcasm!)

It blew my mind when I saw this. How does capturing militants= rise in oil prices? Shouldn’t the shift go the other way? Please Zap, explain economy to us low-life freedom lovers.

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Marmadogg wrote:
Quit crying…it is supply and demand.

Get over it.

“And there are fewer options around the world. State oil monopolies now control three-quarters of the world’s proven oil reserves, so Venezuela may still prove enticing even under Chavez’s new, tougher terms.”

--- from Foxnews

[/quote]

There’s one thing I love about you HH, your avatar! Friggin’ classic! I wonder which one’s cock is bigger?

[quote]micromuscle wrote:
To the OP (and others), on the World News about 2 weeks ago, the headline was: 127 Isreali militants captured, oil prices expected to rise. Isn’t that clear enough? Damn, we have to pay for their incarcerations SOMEHOW! (sarcasm!)

It blew my mind when I saw this. How does capturing militants= rise in oil prices? Shouldn’t the shift go the other way? Please Zap, explain economy to us low-life freedom lovers.[/quote]

Israeli militants?