Argument against high gas prices

Nomen Nescio wrote:

And don't forget that political BS promoting ethanol blends. Save the planet,
higher prices and lower gas mileage.


yeah.. government logic... force the use of a product because it
sounds good to people... an might get you re-elected. Oooops ...
now we discover that burning ethanol can produce some rather ugly
and dangerous by products.

"gatt" wrote in message Guys who bring
this up on or.politics are usually called socialists,
communists, or America-hating lieberals, and the advice they're given is
to invest in XOM. To me, that's tantamount to investing in organized
crime. At some point we're either going to force them to put the national
interest over record oil prices, or pull a Chavez and nationalize it.
I'm not being a big-government socialist when I say that the federal
bureaucracy could run the oil industry at lower user cost. (Not
necessarily more efficiently, but in ways that are less damaging to the US
economy, transportation industries, etc.)


If the market was truly working, then the oil companies would be increasing
capacity
before any predicted shortage due to summer/winter blends or recurirng
spikes in demand.
This way they would try to to get a competitive advantge over one another,
and have more gas on hand to sell at the higher price. Eventually the
recurring, predictable shortage would go away.

The problem is collusion and cartels. This is illegal, and not the way a
free market is supposed to work.
In my company's industry, because of competition, we can't pass on every
price increase from our suppliers straight to our customers. Our competitors
would take advantage.

Dave

On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 14:31:23 -0700, wrote:

How can there be a
refinery shortage if the capacity has been increasing, but deliveries
are flat?

How many refineries have been built in your county in the past thirty
years? None, right?

The refineries aren't where the demand is. Indeed, some of the
refineries are in Europe, especially in Holland. Whereas Europe used
to send us gasoline, now they need it themselves.

Other refineries are in the Caribbean. Did you factor those into your
"flat" deliveries?

U.S.-based refineries are only a part of the picture.

Blue skies! -- Dan Ford

Claire Chennault and His American Volunteers, 1941-1942
forthcoming from HarperCollins www.flyingtigersbook.com

On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 20:56:52 -0700, wrote:

You've seen how well the feds have run aviation lately,

Homeland Security.

Mail.

Welfare.

Medicare.

Sometimes it seems that the only thing the government does well is
invading countries, though occupying them seems beyond its capacity
also.

Blue skies! -- Dan Ford

Claire Chennault and His American Volunteers, 1941-1942
forthcoming from HarperCollins www.flyingtigersbook.com

On Wed, 6 Jun 2007 07:05:28 -0700, "dave"
wrote:

If the market was truly working, then the oil companies would be increasing
capacity

How can they do that if you won't allow a refinery to be built in your
neighborhood?

Someone said 20 years; it's actually 30 since a refinery was built in
the U.S. The only capacity increases since the late 1970s have been in
adding to existing refineries.

Now go figure how much the population has increased in 30 years, and
how much more each American drives today than 30 years ago.

Blue skies! -- Dan Ford

Claire Chennault and His American Volunteers, 1941-1942
forthcoming from HarperCollins www.flyingtigersbook.com

On Jun 6, 4:07 am, kontiki wrote:
wrote:

Really? Got a $100K I can have to invest in the oil companies? I
don't have it myself, so your suggestion does me no good.

You don't need $100k in order to be an investor you doofus. Sign up
for a Schwab/Etrade/Scottrade account for as littel as $500.

Sheesh... the education system is this country is as corrupt
as the government. Oh yeah... schools are run by the government.

Oooh, so if I invest a whole $500 in oil, I might make what, $500 if I
am lucky? Wow, big deal...

It takes money to make money in the stock market. If you don't
already have it, you have nothing to leverage to make any real money.
Talk about needing an education! By the way, I have a B.S.E.E. and
have taken economics courses on the time value of money, so I
understand that anything less than $100K invested in oil isn't going
to make enough money to really be worth crowing about. With the cost
of living rising as fast as it is, you need to be making at least 10%
on your money, and $100K will only earn about $10K annually at that
rate of return. Housing, transportation and medical are the biggest
rising cost factors and they aren't included in the consumer price
index, specifically so that the government can claim low inflation!

Is $500 big money to you?

wrote:


Oooh, so if I invest a whole $500 in oil, I might make what, $500 if I
am lucky? Wow, big deal...


Exactly. Do you expect them to just start paying you money while until
you save enough beer money to buy some shares? Sheesh go collect a
welfare check.

It takes money to make money in the stock market.

That's the general idea.

If you don't
already have it, you have nothing to leverage to make any real money.

Really? Wow I didn't know that!

Talk about needing an education! By the way, I have a B.S.E.E. and
have taken economics courses on the time value of money, so I
understand that anything less than $100K invested in oil isn't going
to make enough money to really be worth crowing about. With the cost
of living rising as fast as it is, you need to be making at least 10%
on your money, and $100K will only earn about $10K annually at that
rate of return. Housing, transportation and medical are the biggest
rising cost factors and they aren't included in the consumer price
index, specifically so that the government can claim low inflation!

Is $500 big money to you?


You are full of crap dude. I started with about $7K that I rolled over
from a 401K account from a previous job. I eventually rolled it into
a Roth and made modest contributions and investments over a period of
the last 7 years. Now the balance is over $80K and I didn't have to
break a sweat. And yes, I've taken the time to learn about investing
and researched stocks on my own. I've bought and sold shares in oil
companies over that time and made money. Its not rocket science.

You have a loser attitude.

On Jun 6, 9:39 am, kontiki wrote:
wrote:

Oooh, so if I invest a whole $500 in oil, I might make what, $500 if I
am lucky? Wow, big deal...

Exactly. Do you expect them to just start paying you money while until
you save enough beer money to buy some shares? Sheesh go collect a
welfare check.

It takes money to make money in the stock market.

That's the general idea.

If you don't
already have it, you have nothing to leverage to make any real money.

Really? Wow I didn't know that!

Talk about needing an education! By the way, I have a B.S.E.E. and
have taken economics courses on the time value of money, so I
understand that anything less than $100K invested in oil isn't going
to make enough money to really be worth crowing about. With the cost
of living rising as fast as it is, you need to be making at least 10%
on your money, and $100K will only earn about $10K annually at that
rate of return. Housing, transportation and medical are the biggest
rising cost factors and they aren't included in the consumer price
index, specifically so that the government can claim low inflation!

Is $500 big money to you?

You are full of crap dude. I started with about $7K that I rolled over
from a 401K account from a previous job. I eventually rolled it into
a Roth and made modest contributions and investments over a period of
the last 7 years. Now the balance is over $80K and I didn't have to
break a sweat. And yes, I've taken the time to learn about investing
and researched stocks on my own. I've bought and sold shares in oil
companies over that time and made money. Its not rocket science.

You have a loser attitude.

You have an arrogant attitude. I have more in my 401K than you do,
but that's not the point. I have a legitimate right to gripe about
over-inflated gas prices which are clearly a result of poorly managed
supply (not increasing demand). Investing money in the industry which
I don't have at my disposal (and no, 401K funds typically don't allow
you to target one or two stocks) as a way of saying "if you can't beat
them, join them" is BS. Also, trying to insult my education is
juvenile. You are what, 25? 28? You act like 17.

Dean

wrote in message
ups.com...
If you follow this link:
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/hist/a103600001m.htm

You will see that the gas deliveries in Mar 2007 are lower than they
were in Mar 1984. This is despite the claims by oil companies that
they have been constantly expanding their refining capacity, and the
reason for the over $3.00 a gallon pricing is due to refining
capacity. Sorry, but I just don't see the demand being much higher
now than it was in the early 80's from this data!

How much was China and India buying 23 years ago?

"kontiki" wrote in message
...
gatt wrote:
Guys who bring this up on or.politics are usually called socialists,
communists, or America-hating lieberals, and the advice they're given is
to invest in XOM. To me, that's tantamount to investing in organized
crime. At some point we're either going to force them to put the national
interest over record oil prices, or pull a Chavez and nationalize it.
I'm not being a big-government socialist when I say that the federal
bureaucracy could run the oil industry at lower user cost. (Not
necessarily more efficiently, but in ways that are less damaging to the
US economy, transportation industries, etc.)


The very best way to lower prices on anything is to open up
the marketplace... encourage entrepeneurs to enter the market.

Ummm...SUPPLY?