Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 77

Thread: Who is really responsible for the high prices you pay for gasoline?

  1. #1
    Elite Member tkdgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    5,469

    Post Who is really responsible for the high prices you pay for gasoline?

    Who Is Really Responsible For The High Prices You Pay For Gasoline?

    By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Monday, May 12, 2008 4:20 PM PT
    For the last 28 years, Democrats in Congress and a few Republicans have again and again opposed our drilling for oil in Alaska's ANWR area when we knew it contained at least 10 billion barrels of oil we could be using now.

    For the past 31 years, Congress repeatedly prevented us from building any new oil refineries that we now badly need.


    More recently, congressional Democrats defeated and discouraged any bill that would let us drill in the deep sea 100 miles out. However, it's somehow OK for China to drill there.


    As a further indictment of our Congress, since the 1980s it has continually stopped all building of nuclear power plants while France, Germany and, yes, Japan, plus 12 other major nations, did build plants and now get 20% to 80% of their energy from their wise and safe nuclear plant investments.


    From 1990 to 2000, U.S. crude oil demand rapidly accelerated by 7.41 quadrillion BTUs, according to Department of Energy data. And our rate of foreign oil dependency dramatically increased while our domestic oil production steadily declined.


    Under the eight Clinton years alone, U.S. oil production declined 1,349,000 barrels per day, or 19%, while our foreign imports increased 3,574,000 barrels per day, or 45%.


    During this time, President Clinton vetoed ANWR drilling bills that would have clearly made Alaska our No. 1 state in the production of our own vitally needed oil supply, not only for all Americans but also for national defense emergencies.


    So were Democrats and members of Congress together merely short-sighted, with only a few having any real business experience?
    Or were they just ignorant about economics the fact that the law of supply and demand determines the price of all commodities such as oil, steel, copper and lumber?


    Or were they simply and utterly irresponsible and incompetent in their actions that led us to become dangerously dependent on increasing oil imports from foreign countries? We think it was "all of the above."


    The unintended consequence of the Congress members' poor judgment and meddling micromanagement of U.S. energy policy is that they actually hurt most the very people they always profess to be able to help the average American consumer, lower-income workers and those in the inner city who can't afford an extra $100 a month to drive to and from their jobs.
    Democrats kowtowed to the wishes of their environmental supporters over the basic needs of 300 million American citizens.


    It is a national disgrace that all they now know how to do is relentlessly criticize, complain and condemn. They always attempt to blame, investigate and scapegoat someone else, in this case U.S. oil companies, when Congress is the true villain of ineptness for constantly blocking and obstructing every effort for us to become more productive and less dependent on foreign oil.


    Do those now in Congress really think Middle America's voters are so gullible that they will believe that its latest best and brightest answer to increasing our supply of oil and gas is to slap a 25% windfall penalty tax on oil companies and remove all other incentives for oil companies to drill and explore for oil?


    The right time to release oil from, or stop adding to, our Strategic Petroleum Reserve is not now. That will do nothing to increase our ongoing oil supply needs and will have limited affect on oil prices while increasing our national security risks.


    Only after we first announce to the world a bold new change in our policy by proclaiming that we intend to begin drilling in ANWR and selected outer sea areas, plus adopt new conservation programs, will the release of oil from our reserves have a major impact on breaking the price of oil.
    If our congressional leadership can't muster the courage to begin reversing past mistakes now and allow our companies to drill in ANWR and off-limits offshore areas, and build essential refineries and safe nuclear power plants, what will an even-more-discredited Congress do in 2009, 2010 and 2011, when millions of new city dwellers in China and India will be driving the cars their countries are now producing, thereby materially increasing their already huge demand for oil and gas?


    It's wake-up time for America. Maybe we should investigate the blame-throwing investigators in Congress.

    IBDeditorials.com: Editorials, Political Cartoons, and Polls from Investor's Business Daily -- Who Is Really Responsible For The High Prices You Pay For Gasoline?
    -----------------------------------------------

    A government big enough to give you everything you want,
    is strong enough to take everything you have. ~Thomas Jefferson

  2. #2
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    how about you leave protected wildlife refuges the fuck alone and redirect those hundreds of billions in oil profit to renewable energy instead of suppressing discoveries to make wealthy assholes even more fucking wealthy.
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  3. #3
    Elite Member tkdgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    5,469

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grimmlok View Post
    how about you leave protected wildlife refuges the fuck alone and redirect those hundreds of billions in oil profit to renewable energy instead of suppressing discoveries to make wealthy assholes even more fucking wealthy.
    So the government should interfere in free enterprise? That's socialism, Grimm. It will never happen in the United States. At least I hope not in my lifetime. And it isn't the oil companies that are deciding the price of oil. Its OPEC.

    FYI, oil companies ARE investing tons in alternative energies. But don't punish companies because our government is too damn stupid to actually try to solve a problem. If you think the US economy is bad now, how do you think companies would react if your idea were put in place?

    It is our fault as a country that we've are being held by the balls of foreign energy dependence. And all because we're afraid of the minimal risk of harming the environment? Bullocks.

    A government big enough to give you everything you want,
    is strong enough to take everything you have. ~Thomas Jefferson

  4. #4
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    The government interferes with free enterprise all the time, look at all the fucking bailouts corporations get at the hands of the taxpayer, or all the corporate welfare that is flying around. How about the Wall street life support right now? That's stupid line is such crap. The government interferes eveyr fucking day with regulations and handouts, bailouts and welfare. Thinking otherwise is, frankly, dim. Your government engages in socialism when it's a benefit, which these days is all the damn time because the "self regulation capitalism" nonsense DOES NOT WORK AND NEVER HAS. No industry is going to regulate itself away from cheap, easy money.

    The oil industry is making money hand over fist, and they are redirecting a TOKEN drop to the illusion of renewable energies. How many discoveries have they silenced, or bought and pulled a cloak over? The problem is, they have the technology and infrastructure for oil/gasoline and it would take all those profits to change it to something else. They will not do that because people need to make MONEY.

    And it's not minimal risk to the environment.. oil extraction never is. ESPECIALLY IN A NATURE PRESERVE. Wtf is the point of a PRESERVE if you don't PRESERVE the environment in it?
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  5. #5
    Gold Member memebot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Where the Wild Things Are
    Posts
    1,082

    Default

    Crude oil is a commodity in the global market. Increasing production in the US would not lower the price of gas, because no manufacturer is going to sell a high demand product at less than market value.

    I live in Canada's oil producing province and we pay as much for gas, if not more than everyone else in the country. We currently pay $1.27 a liter, where a liter is 0.26 gallons...you do the math. How much are you paying where you live?

  6. #6
    A*O
    A*O is offline
    Friend of Gossip Rocks! A*O's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Being Paula
    Posts
    30,395

    Default

    We have been spoilt for too long with super cheap gas. The price rises may slow down but we are never going back to the days of limitless cheap gas so people need to stop whining and amend their lifestyles accordingly. I think forcing people to THINK about their fuel consumption via their pockets and the wider environmental issues is probably a useful wakeup call for many of them.
    I've never liked lesbianism - it leaves a bad taste in my mouth
    Dame Edna Everage

    Just because you're offended doesn't mean you're right.

  7. #7
    Elite Member MohandasKGanja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Wherever my kids are
    Posts
    25,723

    Default

    Two other problems:

    1. The oil thought to be under ANWR is purely speculative. If it turned out to be 25% of what was estimated, it would be a case of "Whoops. I guess we goofed!"

    2. The oil companies are not being prevented from building refineries. When oil was cheap, it wasn't profitable for them to spend the money to build them. Now that they are making $10 billion profit every three months, the question is, do they finally consider it highly profitable to build more refineries? Especially with the risk that the bubble market in oil futures will go back down again (according to Lehman Brothers).

    3. Investor's Business Daily is the most reactionary conservative paper out there. Everything is the Government's fault, and never Big Business'. The truth lies somewhere in between, however.

  8. #8
    Elite Member tkdgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    5,469

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grimmlok View Post
    The government interferes with free enterprise all the time, look at all the fucking bailouts corporations get at the hands of the taxpayer, or all the corporate welfare that is flying around. How about the Wall street life support right now? That's stupid line is such crap. The government interferes eveyr fucking day with regulations and handouts, bailouts and welfare. Thinking otherwise is, frankly, dim. Your government engages in socialism when it's a benefit, which these days is all the damn time because the "self regulation capitalism" nonsense DOES NOT WORK AND NEVER HAS. No industry is going to regulate itself away from cheap, easy money.

    The oil industry is making money hand over fist, and they are redirecting a TOKEN drop to the illusion of renewable energies. How many discoveries have they silenced, or bought and pulled a cloak over? The problem is, they have the technology and infrastructure for oil/gasoline and it would take all those profits to change it to something else. They will not do that because people need to make MONEY.

    And it's not minimal risk to the environment.. oil extraction never is. ESPECIALLY IN A NATURE PRESERVE. Wtf is the point of a PRESERVE if you don't PRESERVE the environment in it?
    Cite me a specific reference where the modern US government has forcefully tapped into a companies profit for the welfare of the people.

    If the Europeans can drill safely in the North Sea, why the hell can't we do it safely off our own coasts? You do realize that China is operating off shore rigs 100 miles off our own coasts because our own government won't allow the same drilling it extends to other countries? We've fucked ourselves.

    And grabbing profits from the oil companies won't help. It isn't their fault. Its ours.

    Quote Originally Posted by memebot View Post
    Crude oil is a commodity in the global market. Increasing production in the US would not lower the price of gas, because no manufacturer is going to sell a high demand product at less than market value.

    I live in Canada's oil producing province and we pay as much for gas, if not more than everyone else in the country. We currently pay $1.27 a liter, where a liter is 0.26 gallons...you do the math. How much are you paying where you live?
    $3.90 in Michigan.
    Last edited by Tati; May 13th, 2008 at 11:12 AM.

    A government big enough to give you everything you want,
    is strong enough to take everything you have. ~Thomas Jefferson

  9. #9
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tkdgirl View Post
    Cite me a specific reference where the modern US government has forcefully tapped into a companies profit for the welfare of the people.
    They do the opposite: they use taxpayer dollars to bail out badly run and incompetent corporations.. like airlines, or financial companies. You know, the ones that turn around and use said taxpayer dollars (forwarded by the government) to pay their failed CEO's hundreds of millions in unearned compensation. Is that not socialism? Bout time it went the other way I think.

    Besires, all the idiotic ballyhoo about "socialism" is some bullshit leftover McCarthyite nonsense that grown ups should know better than to spout in hysteria.
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  10. #10
    Elite Member tkdgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    5,469

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MohandasKGanja View Post
    Two other problems:

    1. The oil thought to be under ANWR is purely speculative. If it turned out to be 25% of what was estimated, it would be a case of "Whoops. I guess we goofed!"

    2. The oil companies are not being prevented from building refineries. When oil was cheap, it wasn't profitable for them to spend the money to build them. Now that they are making $10 billion profit every three months, the question is, do they finally consider it highly profitable to build more refineries? Especially with the risk that the bubble market in oil futures will go back down again (according to Lehman Brothers).

    3. Investor's Business Daily is the most reactionary conservative paper out there. Everything is the Government's fault, and never Big Business'. The truth lies somewhere in between, however.
    Absolutely not true. In fact, it was Reagan, who are the bemoaning of environmentalists, shut down US oil refineries. Not a single new one has been built since. And when is proposed, it gets shot down by the very same environmental lobby.

    As for ANWAR, speculative is hardly the case. More and more research and thermal imagining has shown there to be enough reserves there to have an impact on our own supply. And with the advancement of horizontal drilling, the actual amount of surface drilling is lessened, thus limited the impact on the environment.

    If and when gas hits $7 a gallon, and people are losing their jobs because companies can not operate due to high fuel prices, food prices continue to rise, tell me, will you STILL be against drilling in ANWAR? I'd be willing to be the majority of Americans will put their interests over the slight risk of harming the environment.

    Call IBD what you will, but facts are facts. If Bill Clinton had approved drilling in ANWAR, we might not be in the mess we're in today, or at the very least, not as bad.

    A government big enough to give you everything you want,
    is strong enough to take everything you have. ~Thomas Jefferson

  11. #11
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    We'll tell that to the entire province of Alberta, awash in oil sands.
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  12. #12
    Elite Member tkdgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    5,469

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grimmlok View Post
    We'll tell that to the entire province of Alberta, awash in oil sands.
    There was a report on ABC a year or so ago, I think John Stossel did it, that spotlighted the oil sands in Alberta. They had scientists on that said if the technology improves to get that oil, there's enough oil there to supply the world ALONE for over 2000 years (or some shit crazy number like that).

    I'd like to see the US and Canadian governments get together and offer some incentive / reward for the first company that can produce a cost effective way to harvest the oil with minimal impact to the environment.

    That oil sand would put an end to OPEC as we know it.

    A government big enough to give you everything you want,
    is strong enough to take everything you have. ~Thomas Jefferson

  13. #13
    Elite Member Just Kill Me's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    sucking on a blow pop and playing with electrodes
    Posts
    15,550

    Default

    Record breaking profits made by oil companies... democrats or republicans; I don't give a fuck. How is it that they can make so much fucking money and justify their costs that are passed onto the consumer?
    Exxon didn't make all that money last year without oil... how did it happen? It's a good time to buy stock, yall! Or sell it if you have it.
    KILLING ME WON'T BRING BACK YOUR GOD DAMNED HONEY!!!!!!!!!!

    Come on, let's have lots of drinks.

    Fuck you all, I'm going viral.

  14. #14
    Elite Member lurkur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    5,351

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tkdgirl View Post
    There was a report on ABC a year or so ago, I think John Stossel did it, that spotlighted the oil sands in Alberta. They had scientists on that said if the technology improves to get that oil, there's enough oil there to supply the world ALONE for over 2000 years (or some shit crazy number like that).

    I'd like to see the US and Canadian governments get together and offer some incentive / reward for the first company that can produce a cost effective way to harvest the oil with minimal impact to the environment.

    That oil sand would put an end to OPEC as we know it.
    This kind of sums up the problem in your line of thinking. Think in the long term. And across more than one facet. You're thinking "cost effective" in the short term and "impact to the environment" in the short term as well. Basically there is no fucking way 2000 years worth of oil could be harvested (and subsequently consumed because that's the whole point) with minimal impact to the environment. Look what has happened to the environment in the last two centuries, hell the last two decades. And now there are more people than ever and China ia in a position to suck down oil as greedily as any capitalist pig feeds at the trough

    A trough, BTW, whose slop consists of corporate welfare and the government actually intervening far more than you would ever imagine, so there is no need to preserve the illusion of "free enterprise." And I can't believe anyone is still advocating for that after everything we've seen when there is no regulation on corporations whose sole existence is to make a profit, not to bolster the everyday American citizen.

    Ripping up the earth to get more oil isn't going to solve the PROBLEMS (it's not just one problem, i.e., 'high gas prices', but a multi-fucking-tude), it's going to make the rich oil people richer for a few more decades while everyone else gets screwed now, and will get screwed later even more when the environment crumbles and the masses have nowhere to go and no one is willing to help.

  15. #15
    Elite Member Fluffy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    5,600

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tkdgirl View Post
    There was a report on ABC a year or so ago, I think John Stossel did it, that spotlighted the oil sands in Alberta. They had scientists on that said if the technology improves to get that oil, there's enough oil there to supply the world ALONE for over 2000 years (or some shit crazy number like that).

    I'd like to see the US and Canadian governments get together and offer some incentive / reward for the first company that can produce a cost effective way to harvest the oil with minimal impact to the environment.

    That oil sand would put an end to OPEC as we know it.
    No it wouldn't. Extracting the oil from oil sands is not the same thing as drilling for oil in an oil field. It takes TWO TONS of oil shale to make 1 barrel of oil. TWO TONS! It is a very time and energy consuming process to extract anything from those oil sands.

    Quote Originally Posted by tkdgirl View Post
    Absolutely not true. In fact, it was Reagan, who are the bemoaning of environmentalists, shut down US oil refineries. Not a single new one has been built since. And when is proposed, it gets shot down by the very same environmental lobby.
    No, oil prices made it economically unfeasible. Plenty of investment bankers can tell you that.

    Quote Originally Posted by tkdgirl View Post
    As for ANWAR, speculative is hardly the case. More and more research and thermal imagining has shown there to be enough reserves there to have an impact on our own supply. And with the advancement of horizontal drilling, the actual amount of surface drilling is lessened, thus limited the impact on the environment.
    ANWAR ain't that big of an oil field. You make it sound as it ANWAR is the King of Kings when it comes to oil fields except the King of Kings of oil fields is Ghawar located in Saudia Arabia. I doubt ANWAR even comes close to Cantarell.

    Quote Originally Posted by tkdgirl View Post
    If and when gas hits $7 a gallon, and people are losing their jobs because companies can not operate due to high fuel prices, food prices continue to rise, tell me, will you STILL be against drilling in ANWAR? I'd be willing to be the majority of Americans will put their interests over the slight risk of harming the environment.
    Yes I would. You're not even beginning to think of the sheer logistics of what it takes to extract that oil and get it to market. You like to compare ANWAR to the North Sea oil fields. That's not an apple to oranges comparison. It's more like an apple to mustard seed comparison.

    The North Sea was the last great batch of oil fields found. Nothing has been found recently that compares to that. Not even ANWAR.

    The North Sea oil fields are similar to other deep sea drilling where oil can be loaded onto tankers quite easily. ANWAR is not in the sea! Not only would any drilling company have to drill in the changing Artic climate, but then the oil would have to be transported by pipeline out of the oil fields to tankers. I'm sure you've heard about the problems with the current Alaskan pipelines, so I don't think I need to elaborate on that. But even still, building an oil pipeline isn't easy. You have to have an accurate assessment of the possible flow of oil for a number of years in order to make drilling and pumping that economically feasible. If you pump the oil to quickly or if the reserves were overestimated, you can pump all the recoverable oil out in a year. Hence, the economically unfeasible pipeline.

    Quote Originally Posted by tkdgirl View Post
    Call IBD what you will, but facts are facts. If Bill Clinton had approved drilling in ANWAR, we might not be in the mess we're in today, or at the very least, not as bad.
    No. Not even close. If Americans had implemented an energy policy 30 YEARS ago, we wouldn't be in this mess. By the time Clinton was in office, the path to the result we're seeing currently was well paved.

    The United States oil production peaked in the early 70s. THAT is FACT. Drilling in ANWAR is smokescreen for the larger issue--oil consumption that has constantly grown in the United States (and now the world), never dwindled and expected to just be a given in the American lifestyle. Yet the rate of new oil fields has dropped dramatically since the 70s. It's not that hard to see how we got to today.
    Last edited by Fluffy; May 13th, 2008 at 12:41 AM.

Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Mischa Barton: I'm responsible for DUI
    By sharon_b in forum Latest Gossip
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: January 27th, 2008, 02:32 AM
  2. Angelina Jolie Says She is Still a Responsible Mom
    By yoyoma in forum Gossip Archive
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: June 26th, 2007, 01:49 PM
  3. Bush is loving the high gas prices
    By Mr. Authority in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: April 25th, 2006, 01:48 PM
  4. Sharon Stone: 'I'm responsible for higher actress wages'
    By MaryJane in forum Gossip Archive
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: March 8th, 2006, 04:41 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •