| Author | Message | ||
     Skyguy |
Roadthing, I stand by my point of gasoline costing so much because of the profits being made. When the profit of just one corporation (Exxon) hits the 30 billion mark in a quarter (I think I got that right) the price of fuel has little to do with supply and demand. It has to do with excessive profit. Me and my tiny little brain are incapable of seeing it any other way. | ||
| Mikej |
Buying in smaller quantities only hurts the cost of doing business, 20 transactions instead of 5-10, and it only really hurts the local retailer since the bigger distributor still ships by the tanker load. As noted by RT, the egg consumption didn't go down, simply the number of purchases and quantity of eggs purchased at each transaction. The 2 per day man was still eating 2 per day, 14 per week, or two dozen every 12 days. The wholesaler and the chicken farm were still producing at the same rate, the consumption didn't go down according to the story, so there would be no excess production. Plus the cost of buying those eggs went up for the consumer for now the consumer was stopping at the store everyday for those 2 eggs a day, instead of using that time for other stuff. This probably led to longer lines in the store and cost the consumer even more time. I still remember sitting in a gas line 20 or so years ago to buy my $5.00 limit of gas so I could get to work the next day, purchasing in smaller quantities only cost me time. Please, if you want to tell stories, factor in the math to show a reduction in consumption due to the added time cost for consumers, thereby giving credence to the story line of excess production. 'scuse me now while I step back into place in the choir.  ps, we've got 6 eggs left out of the dozen we bought a week ago, guess I'd better scramble or boil them up before they go bad. I don't eat 2 per day, but an egg salad sandwich is starting to sound pretty good for tomorrow's lunch, just have to stop at the store and get a loaf of bread and stand in line to pay for it. Maybe I"ll get some frozen orange juice too and ponder the commodities and futures market some, got no money to invest, but got time to ponder what I'd do if I did.  Lowflier, You keep your suppositories to yourself, rumor has it that eating a dozen eggs in one sitting can have similar effect, but I don't have the numbers to compare the cost of a suppository to a dozen eggs. Probably makes more economic sense to buy the sup's, but the eggs taste better if you don't think of where they came from, which brings us back around to suppositories in some manner, so with that I'll bow out of this thread before I run out of gas.  | ||
| Skyguy |
One does not have to be a conspiracy guy to understand that if there are enough like minded people running any show the results will appear to look like a conspiracy. | ||
| Road_thing |
You are comparing apples to suppositories. Don't make me tell you where you can put those apples!  | ||
| Blake |
"Do some research. You'll see that the in the top 1% wealthy familes. Their money came from oil." Rackafeller, big time Democrat... oil money, right? Bill Gates and Sam Walton made their fortunes in oil?  News flash! Virtually all the big oil industry corporations are publicly traded entities. If you think there is a fix in the industry then buy some stock or an energy related mutual fund. When a coroporation's return on investment drops below what one can reasonable expect, long term from conservative stock or bond market investment, there is little reason to invest in said corporation. Folks had no real problem when big oil was loosing money. Now that they are making a meager 8% return on investment, folks are outraged. Call me silly, but when I see corporations making record profits, that to me is a good thing. On account of it is corporations who hire and pay folks to work. You don't like profitable businesses? You want the government to mandate who gets what? Congratulations, you are a communist! There is no room for gloom and doom or conspiracy theories in a non-monopolized capitalist society. When the price of oil rises further due to increased demand and lagging production, then guess what? Some enterprising folks will find more competitive sources of energy including fossil fuels. Others will find more/better ways to conserve energy (hybrid cars, better insulated homes). Good grief, all the socialistic/commie minded conspiricay folks sure are funny. Capitalism is the economic equivalent to nature's law of natural selection; only the strong survive. Impose unatural constraints on that and everyone suffers. EVERYONE! | ||
| Blake |
And, there are plenty of reasons why high oil prices are actually beneficial to our economy. Higher energy prices will dilute the advantage of outsourcing manufacturing to China. When energy prices and not labor cost begin to dominate production costs, we are at an advantage. Our amazing efficiency will become a significant advantage. Am I wrong? | ||
| Road_thing |
Roadthing, I stand by my point of gasoline costing so much because of the profits being made. Skyguy, I think you're looking at it out of sequence. Try this: Gasoline is expensive now because crude oil, from which gasoline is made, is expensive now. Crude oil is expensive now because world consumption is growing faster than world supply. Large profits are being made because: 1) The oil industry made investments in long term exploration and development projects back when the price of oil was low. 2) The investments were calculated to return acceptable profits at the then-prevailing price of oil, and using the price projections that were believed to be accurate at the time. Current prices are much higher than what was projected at the time the investment decisions were made, because of the changed supply/demand situation which now exists. In a very real sense, industry "bought low" and now they're "selling high." Exactly what every stock or commodity trader tries to do every day. If that looks like a conspiracy, well, so be it. It's the way business works. As Brucelee pointed out above, nobody seems to mind when oil prices go down. But if you'll look back at the historical oil price chart I posted a couple of days ago, and refer to the period from 1973 (the first Arab oil embargo) until the early 1980's, you'll see that the price of oil rose dramatically. As a result, the industry "geared up" in a big way, hiring geologists, engineers, etc. and driving the drilling rig count in the US to a high of around 4500. When prices crashed in '86, the rig count dropped to less than a thousand and, between 1986 and 1999, over half a million US jobs were lost due to the contraction in the industry. Check it out:  The public outcry over this debacle was, shall we say, less than deafening. But a lot of oil companies went bankrupt because they had made investments based on forecast rising prices that didn't materialize. That's where the historically poor return on investment so correctly pointed out by Brucelee comes from. That was the flip side of what we're seeing now, in terms of profit. But that's what happens in a free market sometimes. If anybody thinks the price free-fall in '86 was engineered by the oil industry, I'd love to hear their explanation of how and why it happened. Same thing goes for today's rising price environment. Industry can't control prices; the market (ie, supply/demand) does that. In the industry, the survivors are certainly enjoying the current high prices. But we've been here before, and it didn't go the way we wanted it to; it may not end well this time, either. rt | ||
| Brucelee |
People ALWAYS hate capitalism when they are on the wrong side of it. Witness the cry in Europe about its dangers. Fact is, they are simply getting their economic asses kicked. Same for the individual. When I make tons of the money in the stock market, hey, that was MY doing. When the market tanks, THEY did it to me. Let the good times roll! | ||
| Brucelee |
Conspiracy theorists HATE facts such as in long term graphs that show, for example, oil is an average long term investment at best. They also hate reality, wherein they are shown that THEY are actually part of the problem. | ||
| Lowflyer |
You can't successfully argue logic with people who think primarily with their emotions. You also can't argue with, "I made bad economic choices therefore I am entitled to help from the government." Here's the ironic side of evading taxes while floating around in Africa. Suppose a civil war, famine, disease, etc... breaks out, as it so often does in that part of the world, and one needs evacuating (which all $$6-figure white dudes will), where would one such tax-evader go? Why, he would go to the American Embassy, if one exists there, where he would assert his inalienable rights as an American 'by God' citizen, of course. Just wait until you see what kind of help you get from any African government should you or your business fall victim to disaster. I say good friggin' luck with that.  | ||
| Skyguy |
Lowflier, The company I am going to work for in Africa has a boatload of Masi warriors guarding the camp and balloon operations. They are not armed with spears...... For good reason. Going there is not without it's risks. One time in the last twelve years they have had to "bug out". They expect all members of their twelve pilot crew and all of it's support people to be comfortable with weapons and the potential risk of doing business down there. Sounds like adventure to me! As for help from the goverment? I don't expect it here or there. I love to argue/debate all kinds of issues. It is not uncommon for me to take a side opposite my beliefs. I get a kick out of this board and the people that frequent it. Smart bunch of folks! BTW I really do dislike the way things are going in this country. Kind of sucks because I love this place and all it has to offer. Meanwhile the Chinese have been working a long term plan so you folks better stock up on expendables! | ||
| Lowflyer |
"They are not armed with spears." If you have ever been shot at by those dudes, you'd feel better if they were protecting you with the spears.  | ||
| Thansesxb9rs |
That is the great thing about the US, there is no one telling me what I can and cannot drive. Yes I do pay a premium for driving a pickup but I am willing to pay it, if you can't afford to put gas in your vehicle then maybe a downsize is in order. I for one will pay the higher price and not bitch about it because then some legislation will come thru saying I have to drive a hybrid lawn mower. To many people in the US live beyond their means and do not understand why they are so broke. The middle class has hurt it's self, the rich did not put a gun to all of our heads and say get as much debit as you can so you look like you have more then you do. All I can say is if you are paying more debit on your credit card then you do in what gas costs you per month it is your own fault and quit trying to blame it on the government or the big oil companies. Again I am proud and greatful that I live in a country where if I choose I can ruin mylife with debt or save it for a rainy day and that my spending is only controlled by me. Why do so many people complain about the price of gas but are willing to pay $1 for 12oz of water, makes me laugh. Seems like more and more Americans jump on the band wagon and start blaming the government or big business and do not take responsibility for their own choices. | ||
| Honu |
  | ||
| Honu |
The above pics are oil money being reinvested in the U.S.A. to a tune of 900 million dollars plus at one facility. It will employee over two thousand people to build at decent salaries and another 25 permanent employees to operate the units. At least the money goes back into the economy!!! (Message edited by Honu on March 22, 2006) | ||
| Skyguy |
Honu, Now reinvestment I understand! Seems like it has been awhile since any money has gone back into the U.S. market. Then again I blame the tree huggers for that. skyguy (reformed asshat, reformed tree hugger) | ||
| Patrickh |
Blake, Since you are from Texas, I will take for face value your assertion that oil companies earn an 8% ROI. As a matter of example, I would state that my company would would be out of business if our return on investment was only 8%. We actually control our total dollars to return at least 20 points. Anything less than that requires some big-wig to approve the margin loss. Fuel giants are subject scrutiny because the average person uses gas everyday. Most fossil fuel companies are publically traded. If you want in on this "profitability" then you should buy in. | ||
| Brucelee |
If you really believe that the oil companies are in control and are a monopoly, then it would make sense for you to invest every cent you have in their stocks, right? Well, before you do, read this article. Granted, this was written in 2004, but the fundamentals hold true today. Note for you conspiracy theorists, this will •••• you off or you won't believe it. Read and enjoy! http://home.entouch.net/dmd/costofoil.htm | ||
| Buellzebub |
up here in the canuckistan oil patch there was a saying that was popular during the last oil recession... it went like this. "Please let there be another oil boom, I promise i will not pi$$ this one away" words to live by if your a patch puppy | ||
| Chainsaw |
... I stand by my point of gasoline costing so much because of the profits being made. Industry average is a profit of 7.3 cents per gallon at $2.60 per gallon. Thats a 2.8% profit margin. It costs McDonalds about 15 cents for a large Coke, and it sells for ~$1.79. That's a 92% profit margin. Which company is Evil? | ||
| Chainsaw |
...taxes in Denver account for 44 cents per gallon. The State and Feds make more off each gallon sold than the guys that made the gas! | ||
| Fullpower |
my son burns 6 gallons an hour practicing in the old 327 powered ice racer. between the 2 of us we ran 30 plus gallons through the race cars over the weekend. plans are to build up a 383 inch stroker for next season. | ||
| Blake |
Lots of great information to ponder being offered here.  I had to wince the other day while watching a Discovery-Times (NY Times Cable Channel) documentary about global warming where in one segment they were interviewing a Norweigan fisherman who was opposed to any future use of nearby arctic ocean shipping lanes for the transport of petroleum products. He was very concerned about an Exxon Valdez type scenario and expressed his conviction that the oil industry/shipping should stay clear of his coastline and fishing grounds. His points and concerns were certainly valid. So why did I whince? His big diesel powered fishing boat might have had something to do with it. | ||
| Lowflyer |
That sort of reminds me of a guy that started a thread to complain about gas prices once. The dude makes his living by wasting propane.  | ||
| Ryker77 |
Congratulations, you are a communist! in theroy communism is better. But in reality government corruption followed by lazy citizens makes it fail. Just like our current system. My point about oil familes is that in the past they used govenment taxes to gain a larger base and increase the demand. Had taxes been used in a different format. Then there would have been less urban sprawl. Less commuters. If you want to complain.. Ask big brother why we can't drive this 60mpg can in the USA. http://www.vwvortex.com/artman/publish/volkswagen_news/article_1697.shtml | ||
| Bomber |
Back in '74, during a really bad gas shortage -- some media "sports" announcer wag suggested that the Indy 500 be cancelled to save fuel -- then, some bright spark did the math, compared the energy spent on the race, the likely number of attendees, the cost to power the broadcast equipment and TV sets to simialr casts for the Super Bowl the wag sat down and shut up ;-} | ||
| Ryker77 |
But we were the ones who bought the big cars and houses in suburbia 50 miles from our jobs. But if 30 years ago federal and state tax money was not used to build super highways and instead used to build mass transit. Or used to design effective city communities. By design better roads allow people to commute longer distances at higher speed and still make it to work in under an hour. Take a look at Atlanta and the local counties. Those rural counties that are on 1-75, 575, and I20 are the fastest growing. Untill traffic gets soo thick people will continue to buy houses in those areas. Its starting to change as some parts of the city are being rebuilt. Many people are tired to the commute. But not because of the cost just the time and hassle. If the cost to commute was greater then change would be quicker. | ||
| Brucelee |
"in theroy communism is better. But in reality government corruption followed by lazy citizens makes it fail. Just like our current system" Well, most economists would disagree with you on "in theory communism is "better", irrespective on how you may want to define what "better" is. If by that you mean that more intelligent economic decisions are made by communist systems, well you would be dead wrong on that score. Moreover, there is no evidence that communism was done in by "corruption" although there was plenty of that to go around. Fundamentally, capitalism works because individuals and those who freely associate with others, based on their own self-interests, tend to make more timely and more intelligent decisions than those "politboros, committees, etc. I can't see the IPOD being developed in the Soviet Union, can you? Simply put, capital is employed much more intelligently under a free market economy than under a "planned" one. Capital that goes towards unproductive ideas quickly becomes someone else's. This discipline makes one much more careful and smart about how they deploy capital. Notice I said more intelligently, not perfectly. Perfection only exists on forum boards, in Congress, in the media, and of course in our fine universities! Rock on! (Message edited by brucelee on March 23, 2006) | ||
| Bomber |
30 years ago the tax money was spent pretty much the way the electorate wanted -- while mass transit works very well in a densely populated urban area, it doesn't work well at all in an area that is sparsly populated (I imagine there's a good rule of thumb equation that mass transit folks use, but I don't know what it is) now, if you are saying the gubmint should have decreed how the electorate decide on thier mode of transport, where to live/work, and how THEIR money should be spent, well, I find that interesting from a group that burns gas to fun, and generally sounds like Patirck Henry more than Karl Marx but, hey, that's just me | ||
| Blake |
Bruce, I think what he means is that "Utopia" is better. I would agree. We all agree that it ain't in the cards right now. "But if 30 years ago federal and state tax money was not used to build super highways and instead used to build mass transit. Or used to design effective city communities." Make that more like 60 years ago and I am with you! How friggin ridiculous is it that we need 8-lane highways so that folks can drive their own vehicles to and from their place of employment?! It is one of the biggest goofs in American government history. Sure was great for the auto industry though. Sure did screw up a bunch of our cities. |
