Moderator: Andrew
Angiekay wrote:
When our gas was $2 a gallon, their's was $6....could you imagine $9 for a gallon of gas?!
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/ ... 00,00.html
AlteredDNA wrote:Oil prices dropping because of less demand
Oil prices fell below $127 a barrel Wednesday, extending a decline of more than $3 in the previous session on a growing sense that record-high costs have cut demand for gasoline and other fuel. The summer driving season in the U.S. began with the just-ended Memorial Day weekend, and some analysts are predicting that data will show a lackluster start. U.S. Energy Department data covering the weekend won't be released until next week. But even ahead of those figures, other statistics indicate Americans are driving less because of bloated prices at the pump. The Schork Report, edited by Stephen Schork, cited the latest statistics from the Federal Highway Administration, noting that "estimated vehicle miles traveled ... on all U.S. public roads for March 2008 fell 4.3 percent, or 11 billion miles, compared with March 2007".
STORY_TELLER wrote:AlteredDNA wrote:Oil prices dropping because of less demand
Oil prices fell below $127 a barrel Wednesday, extending a decline of more than $3 in the previous session on a growing sense that record-high costs have cut demand for gasoline and other fuel. The summer driving season in the U.S. began with the just-ended Memorial Day weekend, and some analysts are predicting that data will show a lackluster start. U.S. Energy Department data covering the weekend won't be released until next week. But even ahead of those figures, other statistics indicate Americans are driving less because of bloated prices at the pump. The Schork Report, edited by Stephen Schork, cited the latest statistics from the Federal Highway Administration, noting that "estimated vehicle miles traveled ... on all U.S. public roads for March 2008 fell 4.3 percent, or 11 billion miles, compared with March 2007".
Time to take the business out of oil. Regardless of how it's happening, the oil companies are posting record profits. They can't on one hand say "it's not our fault" while keeping the profit on the other.
I propose a huge windfall tax on the oil companies followed by quarterly "economic stimulus checks" mailed back to the tax payers.
Seven Wishes wrote:"Abysmal? He's the most proactive President since Clinton, and he's bringing much-needed change for the better to a nation that has been tyrannized by the worst President since Hoover."- 7 Wishes on Pres. Obama
RedWingFan wrote:THERE ARE NO BIG OIL COMPANIES IN THE US! Exxon Mobile is a puny 14th in the world.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/print/020589.php
STORY_TELLER wrote:AlteredDNA wrote:You're kidding, right?
Not in the slightest.
Seven Wishes wrote:"Abysmal? He's the most proactive President since Clinton, and he's bringing much-needed change for the better to a nation that has been tyrannized by the worst President since Hoover."- 7 Wishes on Pres. Obama
RedWingFan wrote:STORY_TELLER wrote:AlteredDNA wrote:You're kidding, right?
Not in the slightest.
Congratulations, you're a socialist!
STORY_TELLER wrote:AlteredDNA wrote:You're kidding, right?
Not in the slightest.
RedWingFan wrote:STORY_TELLER wrote:AlteredDNA wrote:You're kidding, right?
Not in the slightest.
Congratulations, you're a socialist!
STORY_TELLER wrote:No, what I am is against the oil companies from retaining record breaking profit, not gross, PROFIT on the backs of middle and lower class people who have no choice but to buy their product. In the decades that have past since the first oil crisis under Carter, have we moved to get our country off oil? Car companies created a line of electric cars that worked and refused to put them out on the market. They wouldn't even let private individuals buy the models they made. They scuttled them and piled them up in the desert.
Oil is not a product that we can take or leave. It's not the next TV, it's not the next version of Windows, it's not a house. It is a monopolized product. Our national infrastructure depends on it. It's not a luxury, it's a necessity and that makes it a national security issue.
Time for government to take it out of private hands.
AlteredDNA wrote:STORY_TELLER wrote:AlteredDNA wrote:You're kidding, right?
Not in the slightest.
Wow...ok...
1) How much, exactly, is TOO much profit?
2) How much, exactly, is TOO much to charge for gasoline?
3) Who should / would determine these figures?
conversationpc wrote:What makes you think the government taking over the oil companies would do anything at all to solve the energy problems we have?
STORY_TELLER wrote:No, what I am is against the oil companies retaining record breaking profits, not gross, PROFITS on the backs of middle and lower class people who have no choice but to buy their product.
STORY_TELLER wrote:In the decades that have past since the first oil crisis under Carter, have we moved to get our country off oil?
STORY_TELLER wrote:Car companies created a line of electric cars that worked and refused to put them out on the market.
STORY_TELLER wrote:They wouldn't even let private individuals buy the models they made. They scuttled them and piled them up in the desert.
STORY_TELLER wrote:Oil is not a product that we can take or leave. It's not the next TV, it's not the next version of Windows, it's not a house. It is a monopolized product.
Seven Wishes wrote:"Abysmal? He's the most proactive President since Clinton, and he's bringing much-needed change for the better to a nation that has been tyrannized by the worst President since Hoover."- 7 Wishes on Pres. Obama
conversationpc wrote:The portion of Anwar, which was set aside specifically for oil exploration, cannot be explored because of the government. There are huge deposits of oil shale that could be developed that aren't.
conversationpc wrote:We could be doing nuclear power instead of relying on oil, as does a large percentage of Europe, but our government gets in the way.
STORY_TELLER wrote:conversationpc wrote:What makes you think the government taking over the oil companies would do anything at all to solve the energy problems we have?
Because the profits wouldn't go into private pockets allowing a select few to buy 15 mansions at a clip off our collective backs. The profits should either be returned to the tax payer or go into the national coffers to pay for services. Individual income and property taxes on the population should reflect the windfall.
The prices at the pumps might stay high, but we'd see the costs reduced on the opposite end.
The_Noble_Cause wrote:conversationpc wrote:The portion of Anwar, which was set aside specifically for oil exploration, cannot be explored because of the government. There are huge deposits of oil shale that could be developed that aren't.
Doesn't Anwar only contain six months worth of oil?
Seven Wishes wrote:"Abysmal? He's the most proactive President since Clinton, and he's bringing much-needed change for the better to a nation that has been tyrannized by the worst President since Hoover."- 7 Wishes on Pres. Obama
RedWingFan wrote:STORY_TELLER wrote:No, what I am is against the oil companies retaining record breaking profits, not gross, PROFITS on the backs of middle and lower class people who have no choice but to buy their product.
WHO ARE YOU TO TELL ANY COMPANY WHAT PROFITS THEY CAN MAKE? You're drunk on class envy politics.STORY_TELLER wrote:In the decades that have past since the first oil crisis under Carter, have we moved to get our country off oil?
Making their product obsolete should be the oil companies top priority?STORY_TELLER wrote:Car companies created a line of electric cars that worked and refused to put them out on the market.
The market will determine what gets made and what doesn't get made when the market demands it. Hybrids are just now kicking into high gear with gas @ $4 a gallon. With the same technology and gas @ $2 a gallon. They weren't selling because it wasn't worth the initial cost of the hybrid.STORY_TELLER wrote:They wouldn't even let private individuals buy the models they made. They scuttled them and piled them up in the desert.
Why would they go through the extra safety regulations and make them legal to drive and sell to sell a few thousand cars they'd lose their ass on? The current global warming hoax wasn't started til years after Carter left office. So you can't use "to save the planet as an excuse."STORY_TELLER wrote:Oil is not a product that we can take or leave. It's not the next TV, it's not the next version of Windows, it's not a house. It is a monopolized product.
It is monopolized, by the environmentalist lobby and the US government. Here are a couple of brilliant columns about the recent hearings on the subject. Exxon and other American oil companies have to buy almost all their crude from overseas.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/ ... 020571.php
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/ ... 020589.php
RedWingFan wrote:Why would they go through the extra safety regulations and make them legal to drive and sell to sell a few thousand cars they'd lose their ass on? The current global warming hoax wasn't started til years after Carter left office. So you can't use "to save the planet as an excuse."
The_Noble_Cause wrote:conversationpc wrote:The portion of Anwar, which was set aside specifically for oil exploration, cannot be explored because of the government. There are huge deposits of oil shale that could be developed that aren't.
Doesn't Anwar only contain six months worth of oil?
So let's follow in their footsteps when it comes to energy, but when it comes to healthcare, forget about it?
Nuclear sucks.
Once the ore runs out you have to switch over to plutonium.
No thanks.
STORY_TELLER wrote:Who are you? An oil company exec? A stock holder?
The_Noble_Cause wrote:RedWingFan wrote:Why would they go through the extra safety regulations and make them legal to drive and sell to sell a few thousand cars they'd lose their ass on? The current global warming hoax wasn't started til years after Carter left office. So you can't use "to save the planet as an excuse."
Note of trivia: One of Ronald Reagan's first acts of office included removing Jimmy Carter's solar panels from the White House roof.
Seven Wishes wrote:"Abysmal? He's the most proactive President since Clinton, and he's bringing much-needed change for the better to a nation that has been tyrannized by the worst President since Hoover."- 7 Wishes on Pres. Obama
conversationpc wrote:STORY_TELLER wrote:Who are you? An oil company exec? A stock holder?
Millions of ordinary people own stock in the oil companies through their pension plans, 401k, etc.
STORY_TELLER wrote:conversationpc wrote:STORY_TELLER wrote:Who are you? An oil company exec? A stock holder?
Millions of ordinary people own stock in the oil companies through their pension plans, 401k, etc.
I stand by my statements.
conversationpc wrote:Red herring alert!!!
conversationpc wrote:Europe is better off in how they produce their electricity than the U.S. is. This is in no way comparable to the healthcare debate, where socialized medicine is the norm.
STORY_TELLER wrote:Who are you? An oil company exec? A stock holder?
Seven Wishes wrote:"Abysmal? He's the most proactive President since Clinton, and he's bringing much-needed change for the better to a nation that has been tyrannized by the worst President since Hoover."- 7 Wishes on Pres. Obama
AlteredDNA wrote:STORY_TELLER wrote:conversationpc wrote:STORY_TELLER wrote:Who are you? An oil company exec? A stock holder?
Millions of ordinary people own stock in the oil companies through their pension plans, 401k, etc.
I stand by my statements.
Would you feel the same way if you paying, say, $1.00 - $1.20 per gallon? Lower?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests