What a disappointment
-
It depends on what your budget looks like. I doubt the Goracle has a problem with his energy budget despite flying all over the world and living in a house that guzzles more power a month than the average household does in a year. :rolleyes: Getting a bit more down to earth, my current roundtrip commute is only 1 gallon of gas and my landlord pays the heating bill, so it only directly significantly affects me when I go on vacation.
Today's lesson is brought to you by the word "niggardly". Remember kids, don't attribute to racism what can be explained by Scandinavian language roots. -- Robert Royall
-
Hope this link isn't too late, but the democrats tried to stop oil speculation but were stopped by the republicans in the Senate. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080725/ap_on_go_co/congress_energy[^]
Since the democrats control the Senate, and can determine what gets voted on and what doesn't, that article is pure partisan BS. The democrats themselves pulled the measure, because they were unwilling to risk amendments that might have allowed off-shore drilling. Not to mention that this would only subject US speculators participating in the London markets to "some scrutiny", not speculators from any other country. The bill was a joke designed to trick us into believing they were doibng something, but in reality, since commodity speculation is an international business, it was worhtless political posturing. Just what I complained about to begin with. Don't let these idiots fool you. It was just more junk politics. We need to kick ALL the incumbents out, and start clean.
-
Great. The Republican solution is to open up more land for drilling and hope the oil companies feel grateful or something. The Democrat solution is to burn off our strategic reserves and when that doesn't work tax the oil co. profits and hope they feel sufficiently chastised or something. If congress owned a puppy, the capitol would smell like piss... :rolleyes:
Citizen 20.1.01
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master - that's all.'
Shog9 wrote:
and hope the oil companies feel grateful or something
Wrong. The price of oil has dropped by $20+ per barrel since Bush rescinded the Whitehouse ban on offshore drilling - the fact that someone in government decided to actually do something has already had an impact. And, yes, consumption has also slackened but the initial drop was within a day or days of the Bush announcement. Interestingly enough the Congressional ban expires in September and has to be reauthorized - the news will be fun since the Dems will try to attach the reauthorization to a spending bill.
Mike - typical white guy. The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.
-
We'd soon be limited to what we produce internally (who would export to us?), which is a rather small part of the total. And a substantial part of that would disappear onto the black market (where it would be sold to the highest bidder). In the end there would be no legal gas available at any price, much less $3. Price capping is always a failure, and always results in supply vanishing. Sorry, but that is the stupidest idea I've heard today.
Rob Graham wrote:
who would export to us?
Right, that's why Walmart has no suppliers. :rolleyes: You're implying oil companies, which are making a killing off of us, would prefer to make nothing than to make less. Less money is always better than no money. And we're their largest customer. So no, you're wrong. The price of oil would plummet because the oil companies would do what Walmart does to its suppliers.
My latest C# extension method: public static bool In<T>(this T value, params T[] values) { return values.Any(v => v.Equals(value)); } Example: bool valid = answer.In("Yes", "No", "Dunno");
-
Al Beback wrote:
Sure, but any country can (and should) place a cap on the price of a consumer good
No... they shouldn't.
Mike Mullikin wrote:
No... they shouldn't.
I meant that they should when it's a product that has no substitute and affects the whole economy. I don't care if Ferrari charges $200,000 for their cars as long as I can buy a Kia and accomplish the same objective. Unfortunately with gas, we don't have the same choices. It's either $4.17 at this pump or $4.27 at the other. Hurray for the free markets! And if tomorrow they decide to charge us $5.17, hurray for the free markets! :mad:
My latest C# extension method: public static bool In<T>(this T value, params T[] values) { return values.Any(v => v.Equals(value)); } Example: bool valid = answer.In("Yes", "No", "Dunno");
-
dan neely wrote:
my landlord pays the heating bill
When does it come time to renegotiate the rent?
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
I'm month to month, this spring I had my 1st raise in 3 years, from $425 to 450. Johnstown' shrunk significantly since the mills closed 20 some odd years ago, there's enough housing available that landlords don't have much leverage to push upwards. OTOH I'm starting to look for a bigger place so who knows what the situation'll be come winter.
Today's lesson is brought to you by the word "niggardly". Remember kids, don't attribute to racism what can be explained by Scandinavian language roots. -- Robert Royall
-
Shog9 wrote:
and hope the oil companies feel grateful or something
Wrong. The price of oil has dropped by $20+ per barrel since Bush rescinded the Whitehouse ban on offshore drilling - the fact that someone in government decided to actually do something has already had an impact. And, yes, consumption has also slackened but the initial drop was within a day or days of the Bush announcement. Interestingly enough the Congressional ban expires in September and has to be reauthorized - the news will be fun since the Dems will try to attach the reauthorization to a spending bill.
Mike - typical white guy. The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.
Mike Gaskey wrote:
The price of oil has dropped by $20+ per barrel since Bush rescinded the Whitehouse ban on offshore drilling - the fact that someone in government decided to actually do something has already had an impact. And, yes, consumption has also slackened but the initial drop was within a day or days of the Bush announcement.
How is that not entirely speculation? Or is that the point...? :~
Citizen 20.1.01
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master - that's all.'
-
Mike Gaskey wrote:
The price of oil has dropped by $20+ per barrel since Bush rescinded the Whitehouse ban on offshore drilling - the fact that someone in government decided to actually do something has already had an impact. And, yes, consumption has also slackened but the initial drop was within a day or days of the Bush announcement.
How is that not entirely speculation? Or is that the point...? :~
Citizen 20.1.01
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master - that's all.'
Shog9 wrote:
How is that not entirely speculation? Or is that the point...?
I'm pretty sure that's Mike's point. The good news is that every hedge fund manager that bet the ranch of the price of oil continuing up from 146 @ barrel, is frantically scrambling for enough cash to cover his markers. :-D
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
Shog9 wrote:
How is that not entirely speculation? Or is that the point...?
I'm pretty sure that's Mike's point. The good news is that every hedge fund manager that bet the ranch of the price of oil continuing up from 146 @ barrel, is frantically scrambling for enough cash to cover his markers. :-D
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Oakman wrote:
The good news is that every hedge fund manager that bet the ranch of the price of oil continuing up from 146 @ barrel, is frantically scrambling for enough cash to cover his markers.
Eh. Huh. Well, someone to toast at tonight's meal of hotdogs & Miller Highlife. :beer:
Citizen 20.1.01
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master - that's all.'
-
Mike Mullikin wrote:
No... they shouldn't.
I meant that they should when it's a product that has no substitute and affects the whole economy. I don't care if Ferrari charges $200,000 for their cars as long as I can buy a Kia and accomplish the same objective. Unfortunately with gas, we don't have the same choices. It's either $4.17 at this pump or $4.27 at the other. Hurray for the free markets! And if tomorrow they decide to charge us $5.17, hurray for the free markets! :mad:
My latest C# extension method: public static bool In<T>(this T value, params T[] values) { return values.Any(v => v.Equals(value)); } Example: bool valid = answer.In("Yes", "No", "Dunno");
-
Rob Graham wrote:
who would export to us?
Right, that's why Walmart has no suppliers. :rolleyes: You're implying oil companies, which are making a killing off of us, would prefer to make nothing than to make less. Less money is always better than no money. And we're their largest customer. So no, you're wrong. The price of oil would plummet because the oil companies would do what Walmart does to its suppliers.
My latest C# extension method: public static bool In<T>(this T value, params T[] values) { return values.Any(v => v.Equals(value)); } Example: bool valid = answer.In("Yes", "No", "Dunno");
No business sells product for less than cost. Refiners have to buy crude at market price. China and india would gladly buy what we won't. Clearly you never took a single course in basic economics, and know absolutely nothing about the subject.
-
What about food? Clothing? Medicine? Electricity? Natural gas? How much power are you willing to give to Uncle Sam?
Mike Mullikin wrote:
What about food? Clothing? Medicine? Electricity? Natural gas? How much power are you willing to give to Uncle Sam?
As much as it takes. Uncle Sam is not some evil alien. It's you and me. Uncle Sam is there too look out for our best interests; that's why we elect "him" and pay his salary. If all the clothing companies got together and decided to charge us $1000 for shorts, $1100 for jeans, $1200 for slacks, and $1300 for dress pants, I would expect Uncle Sam to step in and put a stop to the unethical, uncontrolled greed. It's either that, or "hurray for the free markets!" Take your pick.
My latest C# extension method: public static bool In<T>(this T value, params T[] values) { return values.Any(v => v.Equals(value)); } Example: bool valid = answer.In("Yes", "No", "Dunno");
-
No business sells product for less than cost. Refiners have to buy crude at market price. China and india would gladly buy what we won't. Clearly you never took a single course in basic economics, and know absolutely nothing about the subject.
Rob Graham wrote:
No business sells product for less than cost.
It costs Saudi Arabia $2 to pump out a barrel of oil. That's the cost.
Rob Graham wrote:
China and india would gladly buy what we won't.
At lower prices, right? Since, as you imply, there would be excess supply, prices would drop substancially.
Rob Graham wrote:
Clearly you never took a single course in basic economics, and know absolutely nothing about the subject.
I'm not interested in your opinion of me, so shove it up your ass.
My latest C# extension method: public static bool In<T>(this T value, params T[] values) { return values.Any(v => v.Equals(value)); } Example: bool valid = answer.In("Yes", "No", "Dunno");
-
Oakman wrote:
The good news is that every hedge fund manager that bet the ranch of the price of oil continuing up from 146 @ barrel, is frantically scrambling for enough cash to cover his markers.
Eh. Huh. Well, someone to toast at tonight's meal of hotdogs & Miller Highlife. :beer:
Citizen 20.1.01
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master - that's all.'
Shog9 wrote:
to toast
Oakman got it.
Mike - typical white guy. The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.
-
Mike Mullikin wrote:
What about food? Clothing? Medicine? Electricity? Natural gas? How much power are you willing to give to Uncle Sam?
As much as it takes. Uncle Sam is not some evil alien. It's you and me. Uncle Sam is there too look out for our best interests; that's why we elect "him" and pay his salary. If all the clothing companies got together and decided to charge us $1000 for shorts, $1100 for jeans, $1200 for slacks, and $1300 for dress pants, I would expect Uncle Sam to step in and put a stop to the unethical, uncontrolled greed. It's either that, or "hurray for the free markets!" Take your pick.
My latest C# extension method: public static bool In<T>(this T value, params T[] values) { return values.Any(v => v.Equals(value)); } Example: bool valid = answer.In("Yes", "No", "Dunno");
-
Obama's solution to energy problems: Under Obama's proposal for a windfall profits tax, the government would tax some of the profits from big oil corporations and use it to provide a $1,000 rebate to people struggling with high energy costs.[^] Tax and spend will fix everything... Oh, and while we're at it, lets pump oil out of the strategic reserve to drive down prices (which would require congress to change the law that established the reserve as high costs at the pump don't quite qualify as a trigger for releasing the supply). I'm really tired of politics and polemics instead of actual plans and programs.
Rob Graham wrote:
I'm really tired of politics and polemics instead of actual plans and programs.
He's a "liberal" Democrat, that's really all they're capable of. Politicians, in general, gravitate toward showy non-action. But a Democrat, especially when "liberal," is a politician's politician.
-
Christ. Why don't they take oil off the speculative market? Marc
Marc Clifton wrote:
Why don't they take oil off the speculative market?
It's not a speculative market - it's the futures (i.e. free) market that provides transparent price formation. Speculators aren't the ones driving the price of oil anyways - I've mentioned that several times on here already.
-
Rob Graham wrote:
It's a global commodity, with global speculation. No one country can unilaterally "take it off the speculative market".
Sure, but any country can (and should) place a cap on the price of a consumer good, especially one that's so tightly bound to its economy. What do you think would happen to the price of oil if the US were to pass a law that says that gasoline cannot be sold for more than $3/gallon (with annual adjustments for inflation)?
My latest C# extension method: public static bool In<T>(this T value, params T[] values) { return values.Any(v => v.Equals(value)); } Example: bool valid = answer.In("Yes", "No", "Dunno");
Al Beback wrote:
Sure, but any country can (and should) place a cap on the price of a consumer good,
Not. Communist.
Al Beback wrote:
What do you think would happen to the price of oil if the US were to pass a law that says that gasoline cannot be sold for more than $3/gallon
Your income would pay in order to keep the price low, that's what.
-
Rob Graham wrote:
No business sells product for less than cost.
It costs Saudi Arabia $2 to pump out a barrel of oil. That's the cost.
Rob Graham wrote:
China and india would gladly buy what we won't.
At lower prices, right? Since, as you imply, there would be excess supply, prices would drop substancially.
Rob Graham wrote:
Clearly you never took a single course in basic economics, and know absolutely nothing about the subject.
I'm not interested in your opinion of me, so shove it up your ass.
My latest C# extension method: public static bool In<T>(this T value, params T[] values) { return values.Any(v => v.Equals(value)); } Example: bool valid = answer.In("Yes", "No", "Dunno");
Al Beback wrote:
'm not interested in your opinion of me, so shove it up your ass.
That wasn't opinion, but rather observation of apparent fact. My opinion of you is based on statements like the one I just quoted. To wit: You are an ignorant jackass and not worth arguing with.
-
Great. The Republican solution is to open up more land for drilling and hope the oil companies feel grateful or something. The Democrat solution is to burn off our strategic reserves and when that doesn't work tax the oil co. profits and hope they feel sufficiently chastised or something. If congress owned a puppy, the capitol would smell like piss... :rolleyes:
Citizen 20.1.01
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master - that's all.'
Would you prefer we continue to send hundreds of BILLIONS of $$$ to foreign governments, or would it not be preferable to keep the $$$ here in the USA??? Which one do you think benefits the American consumer the most? The dollar is becoming worthless as a currency on the world market. There is probably more dollars overseas than we have here in the US!!
John P.