Argument against high gas prices

"Matt Barrow" wrote

Or do you just puke back the MSM/Public School drivel?

Seems like you are the one fixated on blaming the Publik Skools for all of
the problems in our country.

You need to see some help about this problem.
--
Jim in NC

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

There's nothing predatory about it. We have about the cheapest gas in
the developed world, by far.

Nonsequitor. We also have some of the greatest freedoms and civil rights in
the world but by and large we wouldn't allow that to be used as justfication
for infringement upon them.



-c

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...

Ah, yeah. All the people talking about it all the time aren't really
concerned.

Sure they are talking about it. But when push comes to shove they still
drive the same way they did when gas was 1.50/gal.

No they don't. For instance: General aviation. Pretty soon, only the
wealthy will be able to afford it. That will hurt the folks making $25,000
teaching them to fly, and the businesses that are struggling to make ends
meet, but it sure won't hurt the super wealthy.

At 10gph, I'd fly a hell of a lot more if fuel was 1.50/gallon. To me this
seems abundantly obvious.


-c

gatt wrote:
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...

Ah, yeah. All the people talking about it all the time aren't
really concerned.

Sure they are talking about it. But when push comes to shove they
still drive the same way they did when gas was 1.50/gal.

No they don't. For instance: General aviation. Pretty soon, only
the wealthy will be able to afford it. That will hurt the folks
making $25,000 teaching them to fly, and the businesses that are
struggling to make ends meet, but it sure won't hurt the super
wealthy.
At 10gph, I'd fly a hell of a lot more if fuel was 1.50/gallon. To
me this seems abundantly obvious.




They did this past holiday weekend. The downward trend in GA since the 70's
is not inline with the price of gas. Something else is at work there and
until the aviation community figures out what it is the trend will continue.

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

The economy is suffering? The DJIA is in record territory.

Hey, how about you quit sucking the gub'mint peepee

Excuse me? I'm sorry, I guess I expected better from this forum. But in
case anybody else is interested, check this out:

"The latest spike in fuel costs is putting the squeeze on Puget Sound
transportation companies, which are passing along the cost to customers if
they can.
As of April 19, a gallon of regular gasoline cost on average about $2.09
along the West Coast, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. That's an
18-cent-per-gallon increase from a year ago. The U.S. average was $1.81 a
gallon, an increase of about 24 cents from a year ago. "

$2.09 a gallon! The horror. Of course, the article is old: April 2004.
What I'd like to know (from somebody who isn't a stock holder making
generalizations about "sucking the gub'mint peepee") is,

How come gas prices have nearly doubled since April 2004. What? Did a war
break out? A sudden oil crisis? Did the worldwide demand for oil suddenly
double? Did Katrina wipe out half the world's refineries?

What happened? What excuse are we all going to accept for the cost of fuel
doubling since 2004 while oil industries make record profits (and complain
about how expensive it is to build refineries) and people continue to
pretend that it doesn't somehow effect the entire economy?

(and, yes, half of fuel taxes goes into the general toilet...I

That's right. Blame the government. LOOK OVER THERE, EVERYBODY, AND PRETEND
WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE PRICE OF A BARREL OF OIL!

-c

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

This, one can thnk for mental midgets like "gatt" and a couple generations
of publik skool grauites. For this, Walter Williams must explain it using
terms and concepts a ten yeaar-old can grasp...sometimes.

Wow. Well, I was hoping for an intelligent debate that might dampen my
convictions a little, but instead I got attacked personally by somebody who,
by noticeable coincidence, is an oil industry investor.

Go figure. And rants about "publik skools" and the government to boot.
Unfortunately I'm not longer surprised by this sort of ad hominem behavior
from oil industry types, and it has only deepened my conviction that they
are greedy and intellectually dishonest.

If I want to be attacked by anti-American oil whores I'll go to Yemen.
*plonk*

-c

"BDS" wrote in message
et...

"gatt" wrote

Ah. Okay, so everybody's hollering about the price of gasoline because
there's nothing better to do. Thanks for clearing that up.

They complain, but they don't curtail their use much, if at all. What
does
that tell you?

Not as much as this. The sun doesn't rise and fall on recreational gas
users:
"Meanwhile, the cost of diesel fuel continues to head upward, with a gallon
costing on average $2.11 along the West Coast this week. The U.S. average
was about $1.72 a gallon. In West Coast states, diesel has increased about 9
cents a gallon in the past week and about 51 cents a gallon from a year ago.

Trucking companies are feeling the pinch.

"It's eating them alive," said Jim Tutton, vice president of the Washington
Trucking Associations, a Federal Way-based trade group that represents about
900 members, with 70 percent of them in the Puget Sound region.

Long-haulers are feeling more pain, but rising fuel prices also hurt
short-haulers, said Ed Vander Pol, president of Oak Harbor Freight Lines, an
Auburn-based trucking company with about 500 trucks rolling in five Western
states.

Vander Pol said his fuel costs for January and February of this year were $1
million. That was about $35,000 more than the company spent during first two
months of 2003, based on the same amount of revenue. Vander Pol said his
company is tacking on an 8 percent fuel surcharge, the highest he has ever
charged.

"With the margins we have, there's no way we can swallow that. We have to
pass it on," said Vander Pol, whose trucks haul clothing for retailers, such
as Gap, and also haul tires, building materials and other products for other
customers.
http://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/s...26/story2.html


The oil industry is making record profits in the history of the world.
All anybody is asking them to do is not make so much so that America
isn't the
loser.

Their shareholders love them for it.

"All anybody is asking them to do is not make so much so that America isn't
the loser."

I find your prioritization of shareholders over Americans illuminating.

-c

"Ken Finney" wrote in message
...

I'm not very familiar with larger FBOs, but smaller FBOs have pretty much
been a disaster zone since 1947. What was that line from "The Grapes of
Wrath"? "People shouldn't have to live like that." "Them aren't people,
them's Okies." Just substitute "FBOs" for "Okies".

Ah.

So basically you're suggesting that FBO owners aren't people. Interesting
forum to make such an observation.


-c
(But, I think everybody getting used to those sorts of comments when you
challenge big oil and their pricing schemes.)

On Jun 7, 3:15 pm, "gatt" wrote:
"JGalban via AviationKB.com" u32749@uwe wrote in messagenews:735c640ba893b@uwe...

I don't defend Enron, but am also not entirely sympathetic to those who
"lost their whole retirement nestegg". I saw a lot of news stories
about
these unfortunate folks, but never heard a reporter ask them the obvious
question. "Why would a sane person invest their entire retirement nestegg
in
one company's stock?".

Because they trusted the company they'd worked for for so long, before Enron
bought it, and none of them expected that the company would be acquired and
destroyed by felons.

That's a pretty lame investment strategy. All of us learn from
an early age not to put all our eggs in one basket. Blind trust in a
corporation seems rather naive. Who exactly are you trusting? A
corporation is not a person.

Sort of like how my father trusted United before they furloughed him a year
before his retirement and then annihilated his pension. (But don't worry,
the taxpayers will handle that burden. )

Your father didn't have a choice. A company pension plan is not
the same as a 401K. The Enron folks had numerous choices for
investment of their savings. Enron stock was just one of them.

Enron employees were not required to buy Enron stock in their retirement
plans. They did so because of one reason. Greed.

Is that why people buy XOM stock? Greed?

If you put your whole nestegg into XOM hoping to make a quick
killing, rather than choosing a well diversified portfolio that will
generate a safer, more modest return, yes. You have no one to blame
but yourself. You might as well take your life savings and drop it on
the roulette table in Vegas.


Enron was most definitely a scam, but common sense goes a long way
towards
minimizing the effect of any one bad apple on one's retirement portfolio.

How is that relevant to corporate corruption?

It is only relevant to comments such as your previous one about your
neighbor the electrician. I have a relative that was a 25 yr. Enron
employee who did not lose his life savings. Before the collapse, his
coworkers made fun of him for not shifting his entire portfolio to
Enron stock and making easy money.

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

They did this past holiday weekend. The downward trend in GA since the
70's is not inline with the price of gas. Something else is at work there
and until the aviation community figures out what it is the trend will
continue.

Yeah, but, I still want to know why the cost of gas has doubled since 2004.
No new war, Katrina didn't wipe out -that- much...

Doubled. It's fishy.

I just want to know why. But when I ask the question, I get attacked
personally for it. That tells me all I need to know right there.

-c