A gallon of gas

[ddmoit]

Does it really cost more than it used to?

In 1947 (http://www.tvhistory.tv/1947%20QF.htm) , a gallon of gas cost 23 cents on average.

Right now, a gallon of gas is averaging over $4.

But, let's go back to that 1947 quarter that was used to buy a gallon of gas. It's not the same as today's quarter. A 1947 quarter was made of 90% silver (the rest was copper). At today's (http://www.coinflation.com/) (4/7/08) silver prices, a 1947 quarter is worth $3.23 just for the silver content alone.

So, yeah, a gallon of gas costs a little more today than it did in 1947 - about 75 cents more as measured in today's dollar. Perhaps that's the amount that represents the greater demand for gas in the world (or maybe it's just taxes).

The rest of what we perceive as an increase is just the insidious effect of inflation perpetrated by the Federal Reserve.

[Sponsored Links]

[ceramictec]

about 75 cents more as measured in today's dollar.whomever made this number juggling per year equalization thing trying make us feel at ease isn't working.

[ddmoit]

Hey Brian,:)

All those words up there are mine. I wasn't really trying to ease any minds. I just want any anger over the price of gas to be directed at the true culprits.

The oil companies, environmentalists, speculators, SUV drivers, and A-rabs can't hold a candle to our own, home-grown money debasers.

[opiethetileman]

I am about ready to go take over an oil compnay just like RAMBO to help everyone out. i can see it now the 50 cal mounted on the roof top.

[Davestone]

Yeah that is pretty intriguing.We always talk about the value of a dollar in years past, but a quarter?Let's get to it...We used to get gas in Kentucky in 1972 for a quarter a gallon,it was .29 where we lived, and i remember a quarter would buy a loaf of bread.You could actually get 5 loaves for a dollar sometimes.Now today a loaf of bread is $2.00 (or you can get 5 loaves for $10.00)haha,and a gal of gas is $4.00,hmmm...back when a gal of milk was .50,and a gal of gas was .39,now gas is $4.00 and milk is $4.00...remember gas wars when the price would actually go down? Now it goes up.During those gas wars there weren't any investors setting the prices, it was the people selling the gas, the gas stations themselves, i know cause i worked there.

[kate42]

it was the people selling the gas, the gas stations themselves, i know cause i worked there.

Sorry Stoner, I have to disagree with uyou on this one.

From 1963 - 1982 I worked as a bookeeper and eventually had my own gas station. The oil companies offered great rebates to the service stations to keep prices down. The more gas you pumped, the greater your rebate.

[Jim Farrell Tiler]

we are paying $8.14 a us gallon here

[jball]

Just returned from a vacation in Mexico. Full service gas is about 70 cents per liter, which is $2.65 per gallon. I know we pay a lot in taxes, but not $1.40 per gallon. Seems that the OPEC impact to the world economy is greater on the US than others.....And yes I understand that the Mexican oil business is a gov business, but even that blatantly corrupt government provides gas cheaper than we can get it here. :sick: Not a conspriacy theorist, but it would appear that we are getting throroughly hosed by OPEC!

[ddmoit]

Jeff,

OPEC controls less than half of the oil sold in the world. They are a cartel, but don't wield all the powers that we typically associate with a monopoly.

Mexico (and Canada) are not part of OPEC. I don't know for certain, but I suspect that gas stations in Mexico are selling gas below the market price with government subsidies.

Politicians love to point the finger at OPEC (and other scapegoats), but nobody is screwing the American consumer more than the Federal Reserve right now - which is pretty much the point of my thread.

[cx]

Well, I can recall a time last year when gas was at the wildly inflated price of some three dollars a gallon and we were working out in the southern New Mexico "outback" and had three of our vehicles queued up at one of the only two gas pumps in the only town within 25 miles of our base camp and I commented to my bidness partner about the price. Quoth he: "I'm just glad there's somebody out here willing to sell us some."

Kinda expresses my perspective on the whole of it.

If you want gas, pay whomsoever has some for sale whatever he says it costs. If you don't wanna do that, find a way not to need some of his gas.

There is currently no shortage of such fuel in the world. Got plenty. I don't like paying four bucks a gallon for mine, but that's the onliest way I can get some. And I currently perceive that I need some. So, I pay.

I'd a hellofa lot rather pay six dollars a gallon for it than spend billions bombing one of the places where we could buy some of it if we weren't busy bombing it, eh?

We citizens of the "most powerful and prosperous nation on earth" can get our priorities pretty confused sometimes. :)

[ceramictec]

Dan,

I heard the same thing you described weeks ago on CNBC & MSNBC.
somebody's trying to make us think we should be happy.

[cx]

:shake: Oh, no, didn't say it made me happy, Brian. :rolleyes:

[ceramictec]

we shouldn't be happy no matter which way they try to present the recent rise in gas prices. and we shouldn't have been for the last few years.
Exxon/Mobil & others have been making record earnings for years.

http://money.cnn.com/2006/01/30/news/companies/exxon_earns/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11098458/
http://money.cnn.com/2008/02/01/news/companies/exxon_earnings/

[Davestone]

Kate,you takin up for big oil?!! :D

[Davy]

The other day I seen the price go down a penny, seen it with my own eyes. I was so happy, I was telling everybody about it. :shake: :D

[ceramictec]

well Oil has been on a downturn this week.
I hope the traders start selling it off and cashing in.

NEW YORK (AP) -- Oil tumbled more than $5 a barrel Tuesday in its second big drop this week, hurling crude back to levels not seen since June 26 as traders wary about the health of the global economy cashed in gains from oil's recent rally.

Analysts attributed much of the recent sell-off to profit-taking, saying traders were cashing in on the previous week's gains. A stronger dollar also helped keep prices lower by discouraging investors from pumping more money into commodities. :)

[Shaughnn]

Listened top a radio piece this afternoon about a local car collector and his 1959 Opel Rekord P-1 Caravan and had to rush home to confirm what he was saying. Yup, it's true. This 1959 pick-up bed chain-driven car got 376 Miles Per gallon straight out of the dealership!!! If that technology existed in 1959, and was used in production automobiles, why the hell are American cars still dragging along in the double and single digits?!?!?
Price of gas = Market Value Tired of it? Change your lifestyle or demand better fuel economy from auto manufacturers. Blaming the market because you don't want to pay their prices (but inevitably do) borders on insanity, doesn't it? :)
Shaughnn

[ddmoit]

How about some links, Shaughnn? It's not that I don't believe you; I just want to see what you saw, and I'm lazy.

[ceramictec]

http://www.race-cardrivers.com/Shell%20Opel.htm

[HS345]

367 mpg?
If you believe that, I gotta car I'll sell ya that runs on water, gits 1000 miles to the 16.9 oz bottle.

[Shaughnn]

Thanks Brian,
That's a much more complete website than any of the others I found. For instance, I knew that it was a 1959 model-year but I didn't realize that it had been modified for a 1973 competition. One thing that I found on one of the other sites (the original purchaser from Talladega) was the explaination for the insulation caking the entire motor. The first buyer discovered in an engineering text that the key to the performance was to keep the engine at the highest heat possible, so the entire engine block was insulated to that end. I guess that the chain-drive would also cut out a lot of weight, while sacrificing it for a really jerky ride?
Anyway, there you go Dan. I'm pretty certain that the current (Seattle area) owner had said that he's gotten it running now. It's got a filler tube on the ceiling for the gas tank. :)
Shaughnn
PS: Greg, just for you I checked Snopes but didn't find anything. If you find something to debunk this, please share? :)

[ddmoit]

My guess is that the car probably did get 376 mpg, but when the rest of the facts are filled in, that number will become less impressive. I haven't pieced it all together yet, but it appears that the astounding mpg was achieved at a constant speed of 30 mph.

To the larger question - is the oil industry (or someone else) somehow stifling free market forces from developing more fuel efficient cars?

I really think it would be nearly impossible to succeed at such a task - especially on a global basis. Imagine the resources - financial and otherwise - that it would take. Imagine the prolonged collusion amongst otherwise disagreeable bedfellows it would require.

I suspect the cost of suppressing such technology would far exceed the damage incurred by the existence of such technology.

Nope, I don't believe it.

[Shaughnn]

Dan,
According to the original purchaser who tried to track down “Fuel Economy of the Gasoline Engine” (ISBN 0-470-99132-1),the original publication from the Shell experiment, that book has disappeared from the United States Library of Congress. He found his copy through the Maryland Book Exchange after learning from a professor that the University of West Virginia used to use book as an engineering text.
How can a book go missing from the Library of Congress? I thought that people weren't allowed to check things out without some really heavy authorization? It's not a lending library, is it?
Shaughnn

[HS345]

I don't need to debunk it Shaughnn, it is self debunking.

It simply doesn't exist in any practical way.

Are we all going to drive around in some herky jerky chain drive death trap at 30 mph?

I don't think so Tim.

[HS345]

Has anyone checked Sandy Berger's place?

[Shaughnn]

Greg,
You don't believe that, with modern composite materials, and alloy-extruding technology, that a production frame and chassis couldn't be assembled to allow for increased fuel efficiency without stripping the car down to a bucket seat and shag carpeting? How about an all-hydraulic drive-train to cut down on weight? And you don't believe that utilizing the engineering principles which went into that engine that you could coax an extra 50 MPG out of a current vehicle?
Why do you need to drive faster than 30 MPG in the city anyway, Greg? Kids live in cities too, you know? Do you want to run over a kid, fer gosh sakes!?! Or a dog? Do you wanna squash a little doggie, Greg?!?!? Slow down a little, Pardner! They'll still have ice cream when you get to the party. :)
Shaughnn

[ddmoit]

How can a book go missing from the Library of Congress?I'm usually quick to assume malfeasance when it comes to the government, but in this case, it could be plain old incompetence.

[HS345]

Gimme a break Shaughnn, I don't drive fast. As it is I have to endure the onslaught of @ss riders and bird flippers for only doin' 5 over.

You don't think big auto would bring this technology to market, if it existed? They are hemorrhaging money. Haven't you heard? SUV and truck sales have come to a screeching halt. Get real man.

[Crestone Tile]

Why do you need to drive faster than 30 MPG in the city anyway, Greg? Kids live in cities too, you know? Do you want to run over a kid, fer gosh sakes!?! Or a dog? Do you wanna squash a little doggie, Greg?!?!? Slow down a little, Pardner! They'll still have ice cream when you get to the party.
Shaughnn


...and you gotta watch out for those unconstitutional photo ticketing devices! :)

[Davestone]

Well,i believe they can get much better mileage, but i don't wanna drive an old Stanley Steamer either...sure,Flatfloor likes his but come on! :bow:

[SteveVB]

My wifes 2007 V-6 passat gets 70-80 mpg.


at around 30 mph with little pedal input.... one you get a vehicle moving it takes very little to keep it moving.... If I took out the CD player, the fat tires, took out the v-6 and put in a 1 or 2 cylinder, removed the leather seats, all the plastic trim crap, all the safety equipment, and am left with the frame and an engine probably could get a few hundred miles per gallon in a steady state on some flat stretch of road... wouldnt be drivable, could not carry anything or anyone, but I could get a bunch of miles per gallon.

Dan is on the money here- no way anyone could keep the technology from getting to the market place- our transport is cheap even with fuel running 4-5 dollars a gallon....

[Dave Taylor]

i don't wanna drive an old Stanley Steamer either...sure,Flatfloor likes his but come on! No way..... Kate never would allow ol' Flat to keep drivin' his Stanley..... so he sold it to my grand-pappy. Been in the Taylor junk yard since.

Never buy nuttin' used from Ralph Flatfloor. Hmmmmm.... or is it Flat Williams?

[sandbagger]

just for you I checked Snopes but didn't find anything. If you find something to debunk this, please share?nothing to debunk, Shaughnn. :shrug: Really, I don't understand all the broohaa about this "high mileage" car that "mysteriously" reappeared after all these years. The answer - like most conspiracies - is hidden in plain site. If you want to find it, that is.

Shell Oil has been sponsoring the Eco-Marathon (http://www.shell.us/home/content/usa/responsible_energy/ecomarathon_americas/eco_marathon_americas.html) since 1939. And it had nothing to do with any complicated business thing - it was all for a little fun: "The Shell Eco-Marathon started as the 'Shell Mileage Marathon' in 1939 after an argument between employees of Shell Oil’s research laboratory in Wood River, Illinois, as to whose car gave the better fuel mileage. From the outset in Wood River, the rules were as simple as the concept: to see which vehicle could go the farthest distance on the least amount of fuel." What makes it so much fun - and certainly so interesting - is the the rules. Or lack actually. Go as far as you can on a gallon of fuel. Problem is, most people see these crazy numbers and stop reading. I guess it's more fun to get into the conspiracies. :rolleyes:

Sorry, no conspiracy or magic - just simple Newtonian physics. Reduce mass and friction, increase efficiency - presto! More MPG. :yeah:

[Shaughnn]

Art,
Now if only auto makers would take that same initiative and "just for fun" make a car which is smart and practical? Anyone remember what happened to the GM "EV1"? Lots of interest from consumers but GM refused to offer them for purchase; only available as a limited lease. Eventually GM bought up all of the existing EV1's it could find and trashed them. The plant was closed with a waiting list of buyers/lessees.
Simultaneous with the developement of the Hummer-brand.
Shaughnn

[sandbagger]

if only auto makers would take that same initiative and "just for fun" make a car which is smart and practical?engineering such a car is the easy part, and you can find lots of them in books like "Cars Detroit Never Built." Why they weren't built is not a conspiracy, unless you call the combinations of massive regulation and lawyers ready to sue at the drop of a pin a conspiracy.

The story of EV-1 is also simple, but most people have convenientlly forgotten the whole story. Kinda like the bad vacation everybody laughs about 10 yrs later. Did you know Time called EV-1 one of the 50 Worst Cars of All-Time? (http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,28804,1658545_1658544_1658535,00.html) I suspect not. EV-1 was a great idea, but as Time reports not ready for prime time. For example, everyone assumes the car was sold in CA because or the CARB mandate. True to a point, but why none in GM's hometown of Detroit? Simple - the batteries barely worked in cold weather.

Yes there were buyers. Problem is there wasn't a product. GM has sold enough bad cars, they didn't need another one - especially with such a high profile.

[rwcarpenter]

I keep hearing the comments from European countries about having to pay $8-9 per US gallon for years. Well that is no comparison as we should have buying power since we use way more of the black stuff than those countries...GB is smaller than kansas. :lol1: :jack:

[RedRockTile]

Dan, the value of the US dollar that you originally mentioned is really the issue. I don't care if gas goes to 8 bucks a gallon, just as long as I can triple my current tile installation rate to keep up with inflation. :tup2: I've increased my price this summer but not enough to keep up with gas prices and the overall increased cost of living. Unfortunately, it will take many years before I can "afford" to live at the same level I could live 3 years ago.

Cost of gas is just the tip of the iceberg. Look at all the products that need petroleum - either directly or as a by product. A bale of hay will cost me twice as much as it did a few years ago. And the farmer is still making the same net profit.

[ceramictec]

NEW YORK - Oil prices fell harder than they have in 17 years Tuesday, as fears that record fuel prices are spreading broad economic pain exacerbated the third big sell-off in just over a week.

Light, sweet crude plunged $6.44, or 4.4 percent, to settle at $138.74 a barrel in an extremely volatile session. Prices at one point plummeted more than $10 from the day's high.

Mounting concerns about the risks inflation poses to the United States, the world's biggest oil consumer, helped spark the declines. Analysts also attributed the sell-off to Thursday's expiration of options contracts, which tend to increase volatility, and to computers programed to automatically sell once prices reach certain thresholds.

"There was this big ... selling pressure when prices dipped below $140 a barrel. It got a lot of bulls very nervous," said Tom Kloza, chief oil analyst at the Oil Price Information Service. "If it was a fire, you'd call it an accelerant."

[ceramictec]

Oil ends sharply lower for second straight day, dragging prices down more than $10 this week

NEW YORK (AP) -- Oil prices settled sharply lower for the second time in a row Wednesday, leaving crude more than $10 cheaper in just two days of frenzied trading and prompting speculation that the hard-charging market may be running out of steam.


Light, sweet crude for August delivery fell $4.14 to settle at $134.60 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange, after earlier sinking as low as $132. The drop follows a $6.44 sell-off Tuesday, crude's biggest since the Gulf War.

The two-day slide of $10.58 a barrel marks a dramatic turnaround in crude prices, which as recently as Friday traded at record highs above $147 a barrel. But even with this week's sell-off, prices remain about 80 percent above where they were a year ago and up about 40 percent from the start of the year.

[SteveVB]

Short Oil and Oil Services....get long refiners, interest rates and the dollar.... if it continues. BUT...this may just be expiration positioning - if thats the case watch for a big rise next week.

[ceramictec]

it was a sell-off to Thursday's expiration of options contracts.
hopefully tomorrow will be a bigger drop.

[sandbagger]

Cramer predicted a top of $150 for oil some time back. I've been trying to figure out if this guy really knows what he speaks. 'twill be interesting......

[HS345]

Well Art, if you watch this guy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhgmUU3SDH0) Cramer is full of ****. And truth be told, Don Harrold DOES catch Cramer in a bunch of bad calls.
However, when you take Dennis Kucinich even the least bit serious, you lose a lot of credibility.

[sandbagger]

out of curiosity as much as anything I've been watching Cramer pretty consistently for the last several months. I've also tried to pay attention to the anti-Cramers. And truth be told, Don Harrold DOES catch Cramer in a bunch of bad calls. Ever hear of a guy by the name of Peter Lynch? (rhetorical question) Lynch made a whole bunch of "bad calls" while managing Magellan, and if you read his books (I have) he readily admits it. But he made a lot more good calls than bad, and made a lot of money for the folks who stuck with him over the long term. And the long term is what it's all about.
:nod:

[ceramictec]

nobody can make 100% good calls, even Cramer admits when he makes a bad one. he wouldn't be on t.v. if he was a that good and made all good predictions and trades. I think he has a pretty goo DD team doing a lot of research for him, he does know every ticker symbol on the Nasdaq.

[ceramictec]

NEW YORK - Oil prices fell below $130 a barrel for the first time in more than a month Thursday, as a dramatic slide entered a third day along with a sharp sell-off in natural gas.


The declines accelerated amid growing concerns about the weakening U.S. economy.

"The entire buillish scenario ... is starting to crack," said James Cordier, president of Tampa, Fla.-based trading firms Liberty Trading Group and OptionSellers.com.

Light, sweet crude for August delivery dropped $5.31 to settle at $129.29 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange. Prices have fallen more than $15 in just the past three days.

[ddmoit]

The declines accelerated amid growing concerns about the weakening U.S. economy.It's kind of hard to cheer lower oil prices when they're being driven by a dour outlook on the US economy.

[John Bridge]

Dan, we can get a handle on gas and oil prices by removing both commodities from the futures market in this country. I guess we've been there, though. ;)

[ddmoit]

It's hardly worth discussing, John, because no amount of legislation could stop futures trading.

Besides, you should instinctively know by now that it's a bad idea because it requires government coercion to prevent an otherwise legitimate contract between two consenting parties.;)

Folks wouldn't have the cash to bid up commodities if the Fed would stop increasing the money supply faster than any real corresponding wealth is being created. It's that simple.

[HS345]

While there's no denying the Fed is a big part of the equation, it's not the only factor.

Plain old supply figures in BIG time. All Bush had to do is rescind the executive order banning offshore drilling and oil dropped almost five bucks as he was speaking.

DRILL NOW, PAY LESS!!!

[tilerite]

I think oil usage is down which would also lower the price. Good job, America!

[ddmoit]

Rick, demand is down not through efficiency but by way of a faltering economy - hardly reason to cheer.:(

[Crestone Tile]

Yes, but a faltering economy may lead to an increased demand in efficiency. The only time a significant number of people are willing to make a lifestyle change is when it directly impacts their pocketbook.

[ddmoit]

I'm a big fan of market-driven efficiency.:tup1:

Smart folks know that it isn't necessary to wait for a bad economy to become efficient. The effort must simply justify the reward.

[SteveVB]

Dan, we can get a handle on gas and oil prices by removing both commodities from the futures market in this country.

So then the futures would only be traded in dozens of other markets around the globe?? Non US traders have a more generous heart? I dont get it. Refiners and producers unable to hedge - holy crapo that would be a huge disaster- add volititlity to finished goods no doubt, probably add cost to finished goods like gasoline as refiners price the uncertantity of raw materials.... sounds like a great solution...or not.

Some info for anyone who cares...

http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/oog/info/twip/twip_gasoline.html

[tilerite]

Dan
Its a start. People are adjusting. The American people are partly to blame for this problem in the first place. Maybe now, we will learn to be a bit more efficient. I know I have.

[ceramictec]

the SEC stopped "naked short selling" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naked_shorting) in major financial firms, including Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac..
you think they could have this happen on the futures markets too.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/markets/2008-07-15-sec-limits-short-sales_N.htm?csp=34

[ceramictec]

Smart folks know that it isn't necessary to wait for a bad economy to become efficient. The effort must simply justify the reward.
Maybe now, we will learn to be a bit more efficient. I know I have.but in good times Gluttony takes over. :)

[ddmoit]

If folks can afford to be gluttonous, I make no judgment about that either.

Everything that has a price is scarce. Some things are more scarce than others. I know of no fairer way to distribute scare goods than the free market. The folks that are best at providing the things that society wants are rewarded with profits, and thus gain an edge at acquiring scarce goods.

There will always be rich folks and there will always be poor folks. But in an unhampered market, no one is locked into either category.

[tilerite]

It wouldn't hurt for the human race to learn to be a little less wasteful. It doesn't change our free market or cut into our quality of life. Maybe those with less would have a bit more. Its a nice thought.

[ddmoit]

Maybe so, Rick, but I don't pretend to know what's best for humanity. And, I certainly don't condone the use of force by those who claim to know what's best to press their vision upon the rest of us.

I believe that people are ultimately the best judge of what is best for themselves, and that they should be free to pursue those ends. Nothing is better than the free market in facilitating that drive.

[tilerite]

Who said anything force, Dan? Don't you think that its better to evolve and learn better ways to live rather than stay stagnant and be ignorant to change. I have changed so much since I was in my 20's. When I'm gone, I would hope I gave more to mankind than I took. That wouldn't be the case if I died tomorrow so I continually seek ways to better myself. It may sound corny but you can't knock a guy for trying.

[ceramictec]

Friday July 18, 6:17 pm ET

As the price of oil drops dramatically, some analysts wonder if the bubble is bursting

NEW YORK (AP) -- The price of oil recorded its biggest weekly drop ever, and a gallon of gas finally pulled back from its record high. So is it time to declare the energy bubble popped?

Experts won't go that far just yet.

"It's too early to say we've seen the worst of it," said Tom Kloza, publisher and chief oil analyst of the Oil Price Information Service in Wall, N.J. "We would be Pollyannish if we believe one week represents a trend."

Still, with oil recording yet another drop on Friday, some industry experts who just days ago thought there was more juice left in oil's meteoric run are reconsidering.

"If this is not the bubble's implosion, than it's a reasonable facsimile," analyst and trader Stephen Schork said in his daily market commentary. "Time will tell. Nevertheless, for the time being we no longer care to hold a bullish view."

Light, sweet crude for August delivery fell 41 cents Friday to settle at $128.88 on the New York Mercantile Exchange -- well below its trading record of more than $147 a week earlier.

[tilerite]

Maybe we've seen the worst but we'll never see $3 a gallon again.

[John Bridge]

Rick, Why not? :)

[Shaughnn]

John,
Now that they know people will pay that price, there will ALWAYS be an excuse for the price to remain that high or higher. I know we've all heard the phrase "leaving cash on the table" with regard to submitting bids to clients. If you knew that a client was expecting to pay "X", would you really have a lot of outside incentive to pare down your own bid below that amount? Now that they know that people won't pull them from their Ivory Towers and rend them in the streets because of $4 gas and without any regulatory oversight to enforce a "real market" price you can expect that we'll see jumps to test our tolerances until there isn't a drop of black gold left in Mother Earth bosom. :)
Shaughnn

[ddmoit]

I have to disagree with your economic analysis, Shaughnn.

In the early '80s, gas a gallon of gas was going for around $1.35 - and we all paid it if we wanted to drive. At that point, they knew we would pay at least that much. But in the later half of that decade, we were paying $0.65 for a gallon of gas (I had a lawn service at the time).

What gives? Why did they let the price fall when they knew we would pay double? The truth is that they don't control the price; the market does.

Just because I've demonstrated a willingness to pay $4 for a gallon of gas (although perhaps less of it than I would buy at a lower price), it doesn't mean that station X can continue to charge $4 when station Y down the street is charging $3.50.

The kind of collusion necessary to support your theory just doesn't exist, and that is proven every time the price goes down, which has been often.

And once again, as we are debating various conspiracies, the Federal Reserve is undeniably debasing our currency, which is the main reason our dollars buy less stuff these days. And yet, these thieves get a pass from the public. I just don't get it. Is the theft that is taking place really too complicated for most folks to understand?

[ceramictec]

most technical traders now are saying that oil will fall to $110-$115 into the 4th quarter before making another run up to $150 again if higher by end of year into the new year.

[tilerite]

Rick, Why not?

Educated guess. In this case, I would love to be wrong but if I were a betting man, I would bet against.

[HS345]

What gives? Why did they let the price fall when they knew we would pay double? The truth is that they don't control the price; the market does.
Bingo! If Bush and all his "oil cronies" controlled the price, wouldn't they make the price go down until the election? Just a thought.

[ddmoit]

While the market does control prices (via supply and demand), it does react to the disruption and chaos of war.

[sandbagger]

this blame thing on "speculators" is just silly. Prices of future supplies of any commodity are driven by perceptions of current and future conditions that investors believe will affect both supply and demand. Voting to increase drilling won't change supplies tomorrow, but it will change perceptions - and prices will go down. Don't try to tell me Bush's order didn't have some impact on this week's fall. Now if Congress would just finish it off...... :)

[tilerite]

this blame thing on "speculators" is just silly.

Can you prove that Art? There seems to be ample evidence that the market has been manipulated to some extent. The following article poses some interesting questions:


Soaring Oil Prices Put Focus on Speculators

by Scott Horsley



Are Speculators to Blame?

Examine the evidence on whether a new bubble is behind soaring oil and food prices.


June 23, 2008 ·

Crude oil prices rose again Monday, despite Saudi Arabia's promise over the weekend to modestly increase oil production.

Costly crude oil has pushed gasoline prices over $4 per gallon in most parts of the country. And that has politicians eager to show their concern.

There have been a lot of explanations offered for the doubling of crude oil prices over the last year: a weak dollar, strong demand overseas, greedy oil companies, a stubborn OPEC. The latest culprit singled out on Capitol Hill and the campaign trail is oil speculators.

"We all know that some people on Wall Street are not above gaming the system," said Republican presidential candidate John McCain last week in Houston. "When you have enough speculators betting on the rising price of oil, that itself can cause oil prices to keep on rising."

McCain's Democratic rival took aim at speculators as well.

"Big investors or purchasers or buyers can artificially jack up the price of oil in order to secure short-term profits," Illinois Sen. Barack Obama told reporters, traveling in his campaign plane.

Both presidential candidates have called for more government oversight of oil speculators. And Congress has been busy holding hearings on the subject.

The House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations reported Monday that speculators are responsible for about 70 percent of the oil traded on the New York Mercantile Exchange — up from less than 40 percent at the beginning of the decade.

Unlike traditional players in the oil market, who buy and sell futures contracts as a way to lock in prices, financial speculators have no use for the oil itself. They're simply placing a bet that the price of oil, and in some cases other commodities, will rise.

This speculative money "has nothing to do with the real world supply or demand for crude oil," said Michael Masters, portfolio manager of Masters Capital Management.

In other words, consumers might not be putting any more gasoline in their tanks, but their pension funds are loading up on oil futures. That growing demand from institutional investors is driving up the price.

One witness likened it to the run-up in real estate prices when rich retirees move into a small town. "The increase in the size of the funds that these people have is so enormous, there can be no doubt that this increase in the demand for paper barrels has bid up the price of paper barrels," said Edward Krapels, director of Energy Security Analysis.

Not everyone is convinced that speculators are to blame for rising oil prices. The Bush administration has downplayed their role. And Severin Borenstein, who heads the University of California Energy Institute, argues that speculators are chasing high prices, not causing them.

"There is no evidence that the current price of oil is being driven by speculators or hedge fund activity, or by anything else that's going on on the financial side," Borenstein said. "Every day, real supply and real demand are meeting in the physical oil market and trading at prices of $130 a barrel. It's hard to see how financial traders could be causing that to happen."

Still, Congress is looking for ways to rein in speculators, or at least get a clearer picture of what they're up to.

Some lawmakers worry that the problem goes beyond speculation to manipulation — especially since much of the oil trading happens out of sight, or on lightly regulated markets.

"Here's one economic principle that I know: Bad things happen in the dark," said Rep. Jay Inslee (D-WA). "That's where these markets are now: in the dark. And it's time to shed a little light on them."

Inslee recalled what happened in the West Coast electricity market at the beginning of the decade, when traders deliberately withheld power and used other schemes to artificially drive up the price.

The federal agency that oversees the oil market has already taken some steps to increase transparency. Lawmakers will be considering ways to go further, including rules making it harder for speculators to buy up large quantities of oil and limiting financial speculation in the oil market altogether.

[sandbagger]

Can you prove that Art? well, I can pretty much prove that the article you posted has questionable credibility. This claim by the author Inslee recalled what happened in the West Coast electricity market at the beginning of the decade, when traders deliberately withheld power and used other schemes to artificially drive up the price. is factually incorrect. The "deliberate withholding" was simply market forces at work. CA tried to dictate prices on the wholesale market and the market did the logical thing - took its business elsewhere. This was a government price-control scheme that ended failing miserably just like every price-control scheme we've ever tried.

as for the Saudi thing, everything I've read says that the Saudis have far less capability to influence the price of oil today than in Reagan's time when they helped bankrupt the USSR. The just don't have that much reserve capacity. That's why the "news" about Saudi production was ignored. On the other hand, we've seen lots of news lately (if you care to dig a little) that the US may have far more oil reserves than much of the ME. THAT is why any anticipation of more US production has the potential to significantly move the markets. :nod:

[ddmoit]

Rick,

I'd be hard pressed to identify a group of people more ignorant on the subject of economics than politicians and journalists.

Here is an economist's explanation of speculation in the oil market. But I have to warn you, it's not light reading. Anyone who is determined to comprehend it can do so, but it is dry and tedious reading.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/022024.html

Fallacies about oil futures prices abound. One is that the Arabians bought the futures and sent the prices up so they could sell more oil at higher prices. Which is it? Are they buying or selling? Another is that oil speculators buy and sell from each other in rounds of trading while lifting the price.

The fact of the matter is that the futures price is connected to the current spot price for immediate delivery. It is impossible for the futures price to get too far above spot. It cannot get above it by more than the cost of carry. Otherwise traders will buy spot and carry the commodity while selling the futures contract. This will lock in an arbitrage profit. Oil contracts out to March 2009 are showing this cost of carry situation. On the other hand, the spot price can get higher than the futures price if the existing supply is limited or if the future supply is expected to be large. Oil futures prices start to decline after March 2009.

No sensible speculator will pay prices so high for future delivery that they could have gotten oil cheaper by buying it now and storing it for a few months. The Saudis can't make any money by bidding the futures price up beyond the cost of carry. Otherwise they will end up taking delivery of high-priced oil, far from being able to sell it t high prices.

Unlike stock prices, which can vary within large bounds because their maturity is infinite and there is nothing necessary to tie down the price (apart from a liquidation or a buyout), futures prices cannot depart from the reality of the spot price very far. That is because in a few months time, the contract matures. And when it does, the futures price converges to the spot price at that date. Hence, the futures price is tied strongly to spot prices.

If oil futures prices are rising, the essential thing is that the spot prices are rising. If oil is expected to be short in the future, then as futures prices rise, it will cause traders to buy in the spot market and store oil. If inventories are not rising, then the latter is not occurring. Reports are that inventories are not rising. This means that futures are rising because the spot prices are rising. It means that demand NOW is meeting lower supply NOW, and that is the proximate cause of the oil price rise.

Here are some more...

http://www.lewrockwell.com/anderson/anderson219.html

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/karlsson9.html

http://www.lewrockwell.com/shaffer/shaffer177.html

[tilerite]

Thanks guys. I do not claim to be the be all and know all but I've read many more articles than the one I hastily posted and listened to much chat that leads me to believe there is manipulation at work on some level. Too much evidence to ignore, in my opinion. As for, how much it has affected the price, I cannot say but the price of gas doubling in 2 years is more than just market demand. Too me, that's just common sense. I will read everything you guys post and I will continue to do my own research. I really want to know the truth.

[tilerite]

O Reilly definitely thinks there is manipulation:


Oil and Trouble
By Bill O'Reilly for BillOReilly.com
Thursday, June 12, 2008

The gas station guy in my town is exhausted from climbing the ladder every day in order to change the price sign. Of course, it's up, up and away. High gas prices, I predict, will become the biggest issue in the presidential campaign.

This week, Republican senators blocked a Democratic-sponsored bill that would have imposed a "windfall profits" tax on the five major oil companies. Since these companies made about $36 billion in profits in the first quarter alone, "windfall" may be understating it.

The GOP says the bill would not have lowered gas prices, as any tax punishment would be passed along to gasoline consumers. But let me break this to the Republicans gently: the folks are angry with the oil companies. Unless you guys can help bring some relief to beleaguered American working people, the Democrats will wipe you out.

Of course, both parties are at fault. Every president in the last 50 years has whiffed on alternative energy. While Brazil emphasized flex-fuel vehicles operating largely on sugar-based ethanol, our presidents and Congresspeople took junkets to the Middle East to hug Saudi Arabian oil sheiks. And now, as Reverend Wright is fond of saying, the chickens have come home to roost.

The gangsters that run OPEC understand that technological advances will diminish oil demand down the road. So, they are accumulating as much cash as possible right now. It costs Saudi Arabia about two dollars to market each barrel of oil. Last week, those huggable Saudis charged the world $138 for that barrel.

The oil apologists say it's a "supply and demand" thing. Sure. Here's a bulletin: when you limit the supply, as OPEC is doing, the demand will skyrocket. Yeah, China and India are using more oil. Yeah, the U.S. dollar is weak. But in most competitive businesses, if your customers want more product, you put out more product. Not in oil. OPEC keeps production down to maximize profits.

So, enough. The oil scam is hammering the U.S. economy and, if Iran keeps causing trouble, gas prices might double from here. Israel stated this week that it will take military action against Iran if it continues developing nukes. Since I believe the crazy mullahs actually want that to happen because it would inflame worldwide jihad, this is a obviously a crisis situation.

Congress must mandate, by law, that American car and truck manufacturers begin to produce a high percentage of flex-fuel vehicles. Once that law is passed, gas stations will begin installing alcohol-based fuel pumps. Congress must also drop import tariffs on alcohol-based fuel so countries like Brazil could sell them to us.

We simply have got to get away from the oil cartel. It's a national security issue.

[ddmoit]

Rick,

I know you're a fan of O'Reilly (you and a whole bunch of other people), and I respect that. I enjoy him occasionally as well; I even read one of his books.

But, he is weak on economics, and he is even weaker on not knowing when he is weak.

I remember years ago - probably after 9/11, Bill was hounding Greenspan for not lowering interest rates fast enough. Greenspan's interest rate drops are what got us into the mess we're in now, and he wasn't doing it fast enough to suit O'Reilly.

[HS345]

I agree with Dan, (holy cow!) I also catch the O'Really Factor from time to time and generally enjoy watching it. I too listened to one of Bill's books.

But a statement like this should throw up some serious red flags:Congress must mandate, by law, that American car and truck manufacturers begin to produce a high percentage of flex-fuel vehicles. Once that law is passed, gas stations will begin installing alcohol-based fuel pumps. Congress must also drop import tariffs on alcohol-based fuel so countries like Brazil could sell them to us.
As Ben Stein might say, wow.

[Crestone Tile]

There's ethanol pumps all over around my region. Even if I had a flex fuel vehicle, I wouldn't use them.

[tilerite]

Yeah, you guys are right. We should just keep things as they are, you know, since it's working out so well. Stupid Brazilians , using sugar to power their vehicles.What do they know? :uhh:

[HS345]

Don't get me wrong Rick, I am all for viable alternative fuel sources. Trouble is, there currently aren't any in this country. We are not Brazil, they have the ability to grow large quantities of sugar cane, we do not. We do not have any viable biomass candidate to convert to ethanol in the good ole USA.

Are you aware that Brazil also uses a fair amount of nuclear power? Are you aware that Brazil recently discovered a large oil reserve in the Atlantic, and intends to develop it fully? Why is it we are the only country in the world that doesn't utilize our own oil reserves?

"Renewable energy" is great, but in the mean time we need good old fashioned black gold to power our economy.

[JTG]

Damm
I sure picked a good time to get back into the oil business! :)
JTG

[tilerite]

Greg, if it were up to me, we would build some new nuke plants. As for alternative fuels, I most certainly believe we are capable of converting and using our own resources. Can't go on like this, that's for sure. Four bucks a gallon for gas is not necessarily the ceiling and if war were to break out between us and Iran, I have no doubt that the price could double from what it is now. We need to get off the juice, plain and simple.

[HS345]

As for alternative fuels, I most certainly believe we are capable of converting and using our own resources.
And those would be?

[Crestone Tile]

Rick,

I'm not hating on alternative fuels ... I just think the current and near future ethanol applications are not a realistic help for the economy or the environment. Maybe if we were spending more money on science / research for things like cellulosic ethanol, solar, wind, etc., our energy resource outlook may be different.

I believe we should have increased electric, hydrogen, and biodiesel technology in our automotive industry, but until the government stops whoring themselves to the oil industry, I don't see making leaps and bounds in that sector. Instead, we just get these smoke and mirrors policies that are fooling people into believing that actual progress is being made in renewables.

[tilerite]

And those would be

Water, corn, electricity, sugar.

[tilerite]

Matt
I pretty much agree with everything you said.

[HS345]

Rick, I actually was asking for specifics. Electricity, sugar, from what sources?

We all know corn ain't working out. Water as fuel is still a ways out.

[tilerite]

Water for fuel is a ways out but its come a long way. Very exciting technology, to say the least. Improvements have also been made with battery powered electric motors, though it still has a long way to go. Ethanol from corn is the most likely alternative at this point. Who knows, maybe we'll learn how to harvest energy from grout. I can honestly say, a lot of energy sure goes into applying it. :)

[ddmoit]

Guys,

You don't have to figure it out, unless you want to. And, neither does the government. It's what entrepreneurs do in a free market. And when the cost of oil really goes up (as opposed to just the value of our currency going down) entrepreneurs will be more motivated than ever to come up with competitive (and therefore profitable) alternatives.

[HS345]

Zactly! :tup2:

[tilerite]

Yeah Dan, maybe in a perfect world. Unfortunately, we're talking about oil, not computer chips and if you really believe the price increases are nothing more than supply and demand, I have some used grout I'd like to sell you. .

[ddmoit]

Rick, in a perfect world, we wouldn't need capitalism. It is precisely because the world is imperfect and filled with uncertainty that humans - when unfettered by coercive force - resort to free market capitalism (and tend to cooperate with their fellow man of out self-interest!).

If you have a theory about how some economic goods are different than others and follow different economic laws, then let's hear it. Otherwise economic laws apply to all economic goods and services in the same manner - be they computer chips or barrels of oil.

To be clear, the market value of oil is controlled by supply and demand. The price we pay in dollars is influenced by the supply and demand for dollars. Right now, the Federal Reserve has increased the supply in dollars and the demand is dropping. If you want to trade dollars for oil, you need more dollars than before because the market value of the dollar is less.

[Crestone Tile]

Leaving it up to entrepreneurs would be great if the energy industry was actually part of a free market economy rather than a protectionist economy where corporations dictate local, state, and federal government actions and policyies. Just ask Stanley Meyer ... oh wait, he's dead.

[SteveVB]

Just ask Stanley Meyer ... oh wait, he's dead.

Oh man cant touch that one....the water power guy....but if I remember correctly

thats the corporate conspiracy theory,... or is that a government conspriacy theory?... or is that where the government is run by the corps, or maybe the other way around? Crap I get them all confused. I think Meyer was killed by the government to help the corps, nope.... no....wait it was the corps who killed him because he was going to... no wait the government set him up to make it look like the big bad corporations were to blame so that they would shift the blame from themselves ( but that didnt work cause its all over the net) ..... I dont think my tinfoil is folded correctly since I cant get the stories straight....

or.... maybe.... the guy had an annurism and died.

[SteveVB]

Never happen but this would be something ...

http://www.aynrand.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=18691&news_iv_ctrl=2421


Something in there for Dan too....

[Crestone Tile]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=11sY8Sno_y8

[cx]

From Matt's video, the inventor speaking to a reporter:

In his injector "the water hits a high-pulse voltage frequency" and that's what powers the engine. If my hearing was correct, what the hell does that mean?

When you start gettin' "technical" speak such as that from inventors, I get a little skeptical. If they guy's got something really unique and useful that he's created, he should at least be able to tell a news reporter what it is in real terms, instead of some made up babble, no?

Wish it were true, though. :)

[Crestone Tile]

I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I'm not convinced that Stanley Meyer was 86'd by big oil, big corp, or big government, but I'm also not sure that he wasn't.

If people think that oil, pharmaceuticals, and health insurance play by the rules and operate under free market competition, well ... ignorance really is bliss, and I envy them.

Also, his invention does sound too good to be true, but then again, who knows:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HjIyxEvAYM&NR=1

[ddmoit]

It take a lot of energy to separate the hydrogen and oxygen atoms of a molecule of water. It's got to come from somewhere. There are rules in physics against perpetual motion machines.

[HS345]

Conspiracy theories aside, couldn't there be some environmental consequence to permanently separating water into its core components, never to be reunited again?

[ddmoit]

Are you serious, Greg?

Photosynthesis (http://www.emc.maricopa.edu/faculty/farabee/BIOBK/BioBookPS.html) breaks water into its atomic components all the time.

I would never call it permanent though. Hydrogen and oxygen atoms are joined together all the time to reform water. It is even a byproduct of combustion.

[tilerite]

Rick, in a perfect world, we wouldn't need capitalism. .

Dan, in a perfect world, people in high places would do the right thing. Seriously, how can you believe that gas, which was $2 a couple of years ago, $3 last year, $4 this year and God knows what it will be next year, is simply supply and demand and free market enterprise, with no manipulation taking place on any level whether through the government, the oil companies or speculators?
At what point do you say to yourself; "hmmmm, sumptin ain't rite here", $5 a gallon, $6 a gallon, $10 a gallon? I suppose you think that health care costs are also just a result of good ole capitalism too? :rolleyes:
On a slighlty related note: Norway's, "the Think City" 100% electric powered auto is heading for the American market. It can travel 112 miles on a full battery charge.and will be priced between $20,000 and $25,000. Not bad for local driving. Take that, oil whores!!

[HS345]

Guess I didn't think that one through too well. :o First time for everything, eh?:D

I now return you to your regularly scheduled conspiracy thread. :yo:

[HS345]

Rick, Big oil has been investigated for price gouging time and time again. What is your evidence that anything other than market forces are at work here?

On a slighlty related note: Norway's, "the Think City" 100% electric powered auto is heading for the American market. It can travel 112 miles on a full battery charge.and will be priced between $20,000 and $25,000. Not bad for local driving. Take that, oil whores!!
Rick, where does the electricity to charge those batteries come from? In this country it comes primarily from burning oil, and coal. :) And what does THIS little death car look like? Does it look anything like the "Smart car"?

[ddmoit]

Dan, in a perfect world, people in high places would do the right thing.Yep. We don't live in a perfect world. But we like to pretend that we do by giving fellow mortals increasingly more power over us and expecting them to act with our best interests in mind. That is why I advocate the smallest government possible.

Only the government (definition: an organization that claims a territorial monopoly on the use of force) can truly manipulate supply and demand significantly over time. In my previous posts, I complain of just that - The Federal Reserve is manipulating the supply of money, causing its value in terms of economic goods to decrease.

Healthcare is not a free market; it is a government manipulated mess that will not improve until market forces are able to operate unfettered.

Lastly, the only way corporations can control us is through government, which is exactly what they do. And we continually increase the size of the tool they use against us in the mistaken belief that the government is looking out for us - that it all would work right if only the right people were in charge. :rolleyes:

[Shaughnn]

Rick,
A few years back they said that California's "Energy Crisis" was market driven and the result of too little production capacity. President Bush flatly refused to investigate. Then we find out that Enron was completely manipulating the market to drive up prices, just like people accused and just like our advocates in government rejected.
"Can't possibly happen", they say. "Never underestimate the influence of greed", I say.
Shaughnn

[ddmoit]

I think that's a bad example, Shaughnn. Enron was reacting in a perfectly predictable manner to regulations (deregulated is not the same as the absence of regulations) that provided incentives for withholding electricity from the California market. It was government manipulation (price controls) of supply and demand.

You can't be two places at once Shaughnn. Are you also greedy when you choose to work on a high margin job over a lesser or no margin job? I'd say no, but that seems to be the charge you level against power companies that can make more by selling their product outside of California.

[Shaughnn]

Dan,
You are correct that "deregulation" led to the Enron conspiracy. And the campaign to deregulate the California market was funded by Enron only a few years prior. When the initiative to deregulate ("open the marketplace to Green Alternatives") the California energy market was proposed, I read into who was supporting it and found that Enron (a company I hadn't heard of before that) was a huge contributor. So, how did the "free market" fail in that case? When business manipulated the laws to allow it to capitalize upon the very loopholes which they orchestrated.
I think that, Dan, you will argue in all cases that the only solution is "smaller government". It's my experience that "big government" has become the tool of "big business" and that power-hungry politicians are just the necessary cogs to keep that machine churning. Cogs which are easily replaced through "term limits" and the manipulation of public perception by media "big business" which plunders the public airwaves and are beholden to no one but their shareholders.
Shaughnn

[ddmoit]

It's my experience that "big government" has become the tool of "big business" and that power-hungry politicians are just the necessary cogs to keep that machine churning.Agreed. But term limits do not solve anything. As long as someone can gain control of the choices we have for politicians, they care not how many times they have to swap one of their players for another.

The solution is to break up the concentration of government power.

Some folks equate the free market with putting the wolves in charge of the henhouse. They think the free market is where giant corporations run roughshod over hapless consumers.

But nowhere do the wolves have more control over the henhouse than in our current situation. In a free market, it is the consumer that has the power. But, I have found that saying that to people indoctrinated for 13 years in our public schools is like talking to a brick wall.

[cx]

I think that, Dan, you will argue in all cases that the only solution is "smaller government". It's my experience that "big government" has become the tool of "big business" and that power-hungry politicians are just the necessary cogs to keep that machine churning.I will certainly argue that there can be no "solution" that does not include returning to smaller government, especially at the federal level. Our federal government, as designed, should be perhaps five to ten percent of it's current bloated size. Max!

And we don't need no steenkin' term limits to accomplish that aside from the term limits built into the system in the form of election cycles. But the problem with that is.............. But, I have found that saying that to people indoctrinated for 13 years in our public schools is like talking to a brick wall.If the government is to be taken back by The People and returned to it's original shape and purpose, the people gotta be sufficiently educated to recognize the problems for what they are. In a society wherein a very large percentage of the young people identify the Bill of Rights as part of the Communist Manifesto, education is clearly our problem.

Then we can begin cleaning up the State governments as well. At the local level there is gonna be idiocy so long as it's made up of humans. I ain't got a clue how to fix that situation, but, then, I've never lived in a country that had a functional Constitutional government at the Federal level. Maybe when the top is operating correctly and effectively, the folks at the lower levels would be able to see the result and want to copy them.

Naaaaaa, Commissioner's Court and City Council still gonna be petty. Flies in the face of natural selection is what it does! :D

My opinion; worth price charged.

[John Bridge]

I think government has to be from the bottom up, rather than the top down. It seems to me the place to start is at the state level. Elect some people who have some gumption, who won't allow the people at the federal level to usurp the powers of the state legislators.

Education needs to be handled at the local level. In fact it should be handled at the individual level.

[tilerite]

Smaller government? Can't we just get rid of all of em? :bang:

[tilerite]

Rick, Big oil has been investigated for price gouging time and time again. What is your evidence that anything other than market forces are at work here?

I didn't say I had evidence. For Gods sake, I'm a tileman not a secret agent. What I said was, looking around and using common sense, its obvious that manipulation of some kind is going on. The price increases in oil over the last few years do not even come close to the level of inflation over that same time. How can you believe that this is nothing more than market forces?

Rick, where does the electricity to charge those batteries come from? In this country it comes primarily from burning oil, and coal. And what does THIS little death car look like? Does it look anything like the "Smart car"?

I stated previously, that we need to build more nuclear plants. Yes Greg, that thing is certainly something I wouldn't drive but you know what, its a start.

[HS345]

If we got rid of all of 'em that'd be anarchy. Might just work.:D

Rick, I'd pay good money to watch you do tile work outta that smart car.:yeah:

[Crestone Tile]

I'd drive it. I love those things. It's not a death trap either:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ju6t-yyoU8s

We could have a bundle of electricity from wind and solar right now. Solar tech needs to improve a bit in my opinion, but it's still very doable (I'm not talking about just PVs)

[tilerite]

Rick, I'd pay good money to watch you do tile work outta that smart car

I was actually thinking about that. May fit a few sponges and a trowel.

[tilerite]

Good point Matt. No shortage of wind in this country.

[ceramictec]

Oil drops below $125 for 1st time in over 6 weeks

Oil falls below $125 a barrel for first time in over 6 weeks after US gasoline supplies jump

NEW YORK (AP) -- Oil prices shed nearly $4 Wednesday, tumbling below $125 a barrel for the first time since early June on growing fears that high prices and the weak economy are destroying demand.

Light, sweet crude for September delivery dropped $3.98 to settle at $124.44 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange, crude's lowest finish since June 4. The August contract expired Tuesday at $127.95.



another commodity took a big hit today...GOLD....- $25.30

http://www.kitco.com/images/live/nygold.gif

[tilerite]

I'm leaving for Philly in a few days. Would be nice if the drop in price was reflected at the pump.

[ddmoit]

We're back to being less than $4/gallon in my part of Michigan.

[ceramictec]

same here, seen a high of $4.15 in some area's and now back to $3.92.

we have a 1% tax for beaches in my County. other area's are $3.90/$3.88

[HS345]

I filled up for $3.79 yesterday.

[ceramictec]

I filled up for $3.79 yesterday.I filled up for $3.79 yesterday. :tongue:

[HS345]

I guess my wife found gas for $3.75.:D

[tilerite]

Wow, what a bargain :rolleyes:

[Dave U.K.]

I know this might have already been discussed.....but how you guys managing with the price of fuel..?..

Here in the UK it has been crippling....a big chunk of earnings goe's on fuel.. :cry:

do you think there will ever be a way out of this situation guys..?..

[cx]

http://www.johnbridge.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=64354

'Bout twenty threads down on the same page, Dave.

Want me to combine you with that thread?

[Dave U.K.]

YES!! please CX...........sorry if the question has been asked , which i thought it would have but the price of fuel is outrageous isn't it..?..

[cx]

It has certainly captured my attention. :)

[tilerite]

We left NC yesterday and found the prices to be in the $3.77 range throughout Virginia. Here in Philly, its still over $4.00. Thought I saw $3.55 at a Getty station in Carlisle Pa. (near Pa. turnpike and Rte. 81). I'll check it out when we're heading back.

[ceramictec]

Thirst for petroleum forges a new oil reality

Drivers unlikely to see gas prices retreat to levels enjoyed for a generation
The two events, half a world apart, went largely unheralded.

Early this month, Valero Energy in Texas got the unwelcome news that Mexico would be cutting supplies to one of the company's Gulf Coast refineries by up to 15 percent. Mexico's state-owned oil enterprise is one of Valero's main sources of crude, but oil output from Mexican fields, including the giant Cantarell field, is drying up. Mexican sales of crude oil to the United States have plunged to their lowest level in more than a dozen years.

The same week, India's Tata Motors announced it was expanding its plans to begin producing a new $2,500 "people's car" called the Nano in the fall. The company hopes that by making automobiles affordable for people in India and elsewhere, it could eventually sell 1 million of them a year.

Although neither development made headlines, together they were emblematic of the larger forces of supply and demand that have sent world oil prices bursting through one record level after another. And while the cost of crude has surged before, this oil shock is different. There is little prospect that drivers will ever again see gas prices retreat to the levels they enjoyed for much of the last generation.

[sandbagger]

the loss from Mexico could easily be made up from domestic sources. Of course, we'd have to actually go after them. :bang:

[LadyGodiva]

I kind of think it's good for oil prices to be higher here and also the cost of living. It's about time some Americans started to feel the pinch like our European friends.

They've always had things harder across the pond and don't seem to gripe half as much.

[sandbagger]

you're kidding, right, LadyG? somehow I fear you are not. You are either a hardcore socialist or have no clue as to why there are distinct differences between the US and OLD Europe. Like their high taxes; like their socialist policies that guarantee a certain level of income; like their 35-hr workweek - when they aren't on paid "sabbatical."

no, LadyG - our "friends" across the pond make their own pain. And I for one want no part of it - which is a lot of the reason most of our ancestors left Europe for the US in the first place. :usflag:

[MudMaker]

Art.. Haven't you learned yet that she likes to stir the pot??
Nobody's that stupid to make a comment like that... :)

[SteveVB]

Haven't you learned yet that she likes to stir the pot??
Nobody's that stupid to make a comment like that...

Good point, :shake: cause that was the most unbelievably stupid post I think I have seen on here... :smash: to think that someone would wish hardship on fellow citizens that is pretty hateful...glad its just pot stirring and not a real reflection of character... ;)


:usflag: :usflag: :usflag: :usflag: :usflag: :usflag: :usflag: :usflag:

[cx]

Gentlemen, I recognize this is the Mud Box, but we still keep a civil tongue and avoid personal attacks, even here and regardless the perceived provocation.

Enough with the name calling, please, however phrased. :shades:

[sandbagger]

Haven't you learned yet that she likes to stir the pot?? Stirring the pot is one thing. But in case you folks have forgotten, Lord Obama hissownself is on the record favoring higher gas prices. He was very specific - stating that it wasn't high prices that was the problem, it was that the price had risen too fast. And then there was the one telling us how we can't keep driving our SUVs.

nothing like an Obama supporter reminding us just how far left this guy really is to "stir the pot."

[ceramictec]

Monday July 28, 2:42 pm ET


The recent decline in oil prices is expected to continue amid fresh signs that the rapid runnup in crude prices is curbing demand, particularly in the US, analysts say.


“It just really feels like a market that wants to head south for several more dollars probably down to $117 during the next one or two weeks,” said Jim Ritterbusch, president of his own oil trading advisory service based in Galena, Illinois.

Oil rallied briefly on Monday, with prices up about $2, after new rebel attacks on Shell Oil’s facilities in Nigeria and new concerns about Iran’s nuclear program.

But these geopolitical factors, which Ritterbusch said in earlier months would have triggered a buying frenzy, were undercut by reports of significant decline in demand.

[MudMaker]

I kind of think it's good for oil prices to be higher here and also the cost of living. It's about time some Americans started to feel the pinch like our European friends.

They've always had things harder across the pond and don't seem to gripe half as much.

Gentlemen, I recognize this is the Mud Box, but we still keep a civil tongue and avoid personal attacks, even here and regardless the perceived provocation.

Enough with the name calling, please, however phrased.

cx.. I was just defending LG....

Higher prices and harder times will affect the lower income families the most. No one wants that to happen.. Do they???

and remember LG "life's Good" :)

[HS345]

I thought the libs were for the little guy. Why would they want people to suffer economic hardship? :rolleyes:

[MudMaker]

That's what I'm sayin - stirring the pot.. :stirpot:

[HS345]

My wife reports that gas was $3.51 at a station near her work.:)

I guess that's pretty sad to get excited about $3.51 a gallon gas.:(

Oh well, what the hey!! :yipee: :yipee: :yipee: :yipee:

[MudMaker]

Leavin Tn yesterday in Jamestown it was $3.49... :)

[SteveVB]

Back in the twos pretty soon, fall/winter barring a big disruption- hurricane etc.

[ceramictec]

NEW YORK (AP) -- Oil prices tumbled more than $2 a barrel Tuesday, finishing at their lowest level in seven weeks as a stronger dollar and beliefs that record prices are eroding the world's thirst for energy sparked another dramatic sell-off.

The drop -- which surpassed $4 a barrel at one point during the day -- was a throwback to oil's nosedive over the past two weeks and outweighed supply concerns touched off by a militant attack Monday on two Nigerian crude pipelines. It was oil's seventh decline in the last 10 sessions.

Light, sweet crude for September delivery fell $2.54 to settle at $122.19 on the New York Mercantile Exchange. It was the lowest settlement price for a front-month contract since June 10. Earlier, prices fell to $120.42, also the lowest level since June 10. Oil has now fallen more than $25 from its trading high of $147.27, reached July 11.

[SteveVB]

must be speculators pushing it down... :rolleyes:

I hope congress looks into this... :suspect:













Where is the tongue in cheek smilie?

[cx]

Yeah, damn capitalists! :mad:

[MudMaker]

Jest filled up in Centerville, well, actually Kettering but paid $3.39..
Man.. their droppin like a rock... LG (Life's Good) :)

[silvercitytile]

yeah frank wit all them toys, now LG. mine is the greenest here

[Dan Kramer]

Diesel is down from 4.99 to 4.78 here. I'm thrilled. :cry:

[tilerite]

Just filled up at Wawa in Levittown, Pa. for $3.85

[dgunnels]

Filled a friend's van at 3.81 last week in Tifton, GA. This morning it's 3.88 locally.

[HS345]

This is from yesterday in Canton, Ohio.

Twenty miles to the north of this station, in Akron, gas was $3.79.:wtf:

[tilerite]

Paid $3.69.9 in Virginia today on our way back from Philly.

[ceramictec]

wow, since last night we jumped from $3.85 to $3.69 this afternoon..... :yipee:

[tilerite]

Its funny how $3.50 looks like a bargain. We have been conditioned to think that what was once unthinkable, is now cheap.

[ceramictec]

that's their master plan :tongue:

[tilerite]

Yup. :tongue:

[ceramictec]

and don't get me started on your little "I was at a WaWa" post. :tongue:


lol

[HS345]

Speaking of :tongue:

Democrats say no drilling--even if gas hits $10 (http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NDAzZWFjNjVhYWZmMGI4ODkyZGI1OTViZTI5MDY3Y2U=)

[tilerite]

and don't get me started on your little "I was at a WaWa" post

But, but I was at Wawa. Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, Wawa!

[Jaz]

Troy Michigan =$3.79 gal.

Sicily and much of Italy = $9.39 gal. :cry:

Jaz

[ceramictec]

Motorists who have watched the price of crude oil drop 15 percent in the past three weeks while the average price at the pump has come down just 3 percent are getting drilled, two leading energy analysts claim.

The two claim that owners of the US's 160,000 gas stations are not dropping retail gas prices in line with the drop in oil because they want to fatten their anemic margins.

"Of course, motorists are getting hosed," says Weeden & Co.'s Charles Maxwell, who's known as the "dean" of energy analysts.

"The dealers at the pump will often wait several days before passing along the drop in crude prices - and I don't blame them," Maxwell said. "If their competitors aren't going to drop the price, the dealer isn't."

Jeff Lenard, a spokesman for the National Association of Convenience Stores, whose members own 2,200 gas stations, admitted that some of his members are slow to drop pump prices as oil prices fall.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/08032008/photos/biz035b.jpg

[sandbagger]

If I remember correctly part of the reason for the lag at the pump has to do with cash flow. When gas prices go up the operator is purchasing supply to fill his tanks with money from cheap gas. If he doesn't have a little cushion in the bank he goes negative - not good when you have bills to pay to operate the station. So now he's buying gas a little cheaper, but has to prepare for the next inevitable uptick. And there's another lag between the cost of raw materials and finished product.

I dunno, I guess I have a hard time believing that there's enough cooperation among the parties involved to sustain all these conspiracies. :shrug:

[John Bridge]

Conspiracy? All they have to do is check the futures market to determine the going rate du jour. :)

[sandbagger]

the futures market price is not what the operator pays when tanker pulls up and fills those underground tanks.

[John Bridge]

The futures price is, however, a universal base price reference, and that price has a direct influence on prices paid by retailers and on retail prices at the pump.

Certainly, there are other forces at work, but remove unleaded gas from the futures market if you want to sponsor competition at the retail level. Right now there is little or none, particularly since the number of independent dealers is dwindling and corporate stores are on the increase.

[ceramictec]

NEW YORK - Oil prices plunged to a three-month low Monday, briefly tumbling below $120 a barrel in another huge sell-off after Tropical Storm Edouard seemed less likely to disrupt oil and natural gas output in the Gulf of Mexico.

Crude's steep drop — prices fell more than $5 at one point during the day — dragged down other commodities from corn to copper and mimicked the big nosedives of the past three weeks, adding to growing beliefs that the oil bubble is at least temporarily deflating.

[jjwq8]

Before I can comment on the price of a gallon of gas in Beirut can some please explain to me the currency? It is next to impossible to determine the price when the posted amount is for a "tank" and that equals 20 liters=33,100LL.
More to the point is why in God's name anyone would be suicidal enough to want to drive here.
Best excuse I know to sit back and :neesie:

[ceramictec]

Tuesday August 5, 4:24 pm ET

Oil ends below $120 for first time since May on concerns about US slowdown hurting demand.


NEW YORK (AP) -- Oil traders sent crude prices tumbling as low as $118 a barrel Tuesday on the growing belief that a U.S. economic slowdown and high energy costs are curbing consumer demand for gasoline and other petroleum products.

Crude oil finished the day just above $119 a barrel -- its lowest settlement price since early May.

[John Bridge]

Hey Jeremy, where ya been? Cancel that. I know where you've been and are. :D

Now please tell us what the dollar cost of gasoline/petrol is in Kuwait. ;)

[jjwq8]

Unchanged in a dogs age. KD 0.065 a liter. 25 cents a liter would be about a buck a gallon depending on exchange rates. And they are building a brand new (worlds largest $15+ billion?) refinery to help send more of the black stuff your way. are you still hauling the aerodynamic equivalent of a barn around in back of your truck?

[ceramictec]

Oil prices end below $119 after US inventory report shows jump in crude, distillate supplies


NEW YORK (AP) -- Oil prices briefly dropped below $118 a barrel Wednesday -- $30 below their record high -- after a jump in U.S. crude and other fuel supplies fed beliefs that high energy prices are eating into demand.

[ceramictec]

like I said....:)

http://www.johnbridge.com/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=674151&postcount=7
http://www.johnbridge.com/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=689527&postcount=120


Oil sinks on stronger dollar to $115 a barrel

Oil plummets as dollar's jump, signs of slowing growth lure investors out of energy to stocks

NEW YORK (AP) -- Oil prices dove to $115 a barrel on Friday, driven lower by a huge jump in the U.S. dollar, signs of moderating demand around the world and the burgeoning belief that commodities may have peaked.

[John Bridge]

I have a very aerodynamic 8-ton monster of a fifth-wheel trailer. Love it very much. ;)

By the way, diesel is running about 4.70 U.S. in Montana. Unleaded gas is about 4.07.

[ceramictec]

it's dropping around my parts, got it for $3.69 in this on area but others area's average about $3.78

[mdanforth]

found it for $3.76 here....well in Brunswick, in Farmington it's $3.95

[sandbagger]

wife paid $3.49 yesterday at Fry's - some kind of store discount :dance:

[kate42]

Today I saw gas posted for 3.91 - cash only, the latest gimmick by the oil companies. Use a credit/debit card and it is at least 10 cents/gallon more.

[Bellsfloors]

Couldn't believe it but I got price gouged this past weekend in Orlando FL near the International Airport. My wife and I rented a car for the weekend to visit her best friends daughters wedding. We stopped at Suncoast Energy fuel mart to refill the tank as it seemed the only gas station around. No signs anywhere to see from Butler National Drive near the airport as we pulled in. Looking only at the last few digits on the pump and thinking hmm... 3.49 good price just like home in Kansas. Filled it up, payed the cashier, then noticed the actual price was 5.49 a gallon :deal: :bang: . Yikes! :eek: :wtf: Just glad I only needed 6.732 gallons as the total for that amount came to $37.02. Got taken for an extra 12-13 bucks. Lesson learned, don't stop and assume everyone is honest and fair in tourist states and especially near the airports where rentals are offered. Next time we may take the refill offer by the Rental car company at the airport. Looks like it is good deal compared to the crooks that lurk around some airports.

[tilerite]

$341.9 in Mocksville (15 miles west of Winston-Salem, NC.

[ceramictec]

Check oil prices today.
they dropped $ 7.80 this a.m. so far in trading.
hope it continues to drop and doesn't get traded higher.

down to $108
http://i36.tinypic.com/ap8c4l.jpg

[ceramictec]

Monday September 8, 1:44 pm ET

Oil prices give up early gains as Hurricane Ike loses strength, dollar rises

NEW YORK (AP) -- Oil prices slipped Monday as Hurricane Ike weakened over Cuba and the U.S. dollar strengthened.

Ike, after scouring the Bahamas and Haiti, made landfall on Cuba as a Category 3 storm, but then lost speed and became a Category 2. It is expected to enter the Gulf later this week.

http://i36.tinypic.com/13z0c2.jpg

[ddmoit]

Interesting story about a 65 mpg Ford sold in Europe:

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_37/b4099060491065.htm?chan=rss_topStories_ssi_5

My first reaction is to condemn the US government for regulations that distort the free market. I suppose its better to throw taxpayer dollars at our auto-making dinosaurs rather than let them compete in an unfettered market.

Next, I criticize Ford for not being competitive, smart, and bold enough to do what Mercedes-Benz, Nissan, and Honda are planning to do here.

[RedRockTile]

Hmmm ... I just stopped looking at the price of diesel and just buy it. I'm in a no win situation. Can't sell the beast cuz no one wants it. Can't get something cheaper cuz I'm still making payments. Can't drive something more economical cuz it can't haul my stuff. Better plan on cutting costs somewhere else and bump up my rate another 15%.

[ceramictec]

lost 2% today :D

http://i36.tinypic.com/5chmc.jpg

[ddmoit]

Here's an article from May of this summer...

http://www.lewrockwell.com/armentano-d/armentano13.html

There are several important reasons to believe that crude oil prices of roughly $130/barrel are simply not sustainable. The first is that world-wide economic growth, and hence the demand for crude oil, has slowed markedly due to the credit crunch and the bursting real estate bubble. The second reason is that the Federal Reserve has finally decided to stop lowering interest rates and/or creating credit as if it were the Tooth Fairy; a stronger dollar will mean lower oil prices. Third, the already record high crude oil and gasoline prices have created strong incentives for consumer and business conservation and that has lowered overall demand.

Yet the most fundamental reason to expect prices to fall is that the gap between the price of crude oil and the cost of producing it is just way, way too large to be sustained long-run.

[RedRockTile]

So, get rid of the EPA and the NHTSA so we can get more domestic oil, refine more efficiently, and get vehicles with better fuel economy AND horsepower.

[sandbagger]

give the liberals and lawyers a big chunk of the blame for why this car (and many others) can't be sold in the US. Also blame them for a lot of the reasons for why US cars are what they are. Crash test rules, for starters - big differences between US and Europe. For instance, did you know the test dummies wear seat belts in Europe but not in the US, even though our seat belt laws are the same? That drives a lot of design requirements (and cost) into US vehicles. It also means a lot of vehicles available to other markets aren't available to the US.

Part of the blame for lack of diesels in the US is perception based on past experience. Anybody remember GM's 350 diesel back in the 70s? Mostly in the Olds 88, it was a maintenance nightmare, noisy, and a real dog. But you can't dismiss government bureaucracy either - driven by vocal fringe activists groups with a decidedly unAmerican agenda. :usflag:

[ceramictec]

Friday September 12, 3:52 pm ET

Gasoline rises as Hurricane Ike approaches Texas coast, but crude briefly dips below $100


NEW YORK (AP) -- Gasoline prices jumped at the wholesale level Friday as Hurricane Ike swept through Gulf of Mexico, prompting companies along the Texas coast to shut down refining and drilling operations.

Crude oil on the futures market, however, briefly sank below the psychologically important $100-a-barrel mark for the first time since April 2 -- showing that investors believe a worsening global economy will continue to drive down demand for some time in the United States and elsewhere.

[Bugman]

Our cheapest station in town jumped to $4.609 today from about $3.699 yesterday. :uhh: An adjacent Exxon station was at $3.999 today. Guess where we filled up?

[koihito]

Which is nice and all, but gas went from $3.56 :complain: to $4.15 a gallon today in my area. Ain't no way a hurricane that hasn't hit yet causes that kind of spike legitimately.

[ceramictec]

it went up a Dollar ? :cry:

around here it's $3.52 to $3.69 depending on the County.

[dgunnels]

Price per gal jumped .75 yesterday around here. Many stations have run out.

[Tool Guy - Kg]

Jumped to $3.99

[John Bridge]

Futures market, futures market!

There is no shortage of fuel.

[irish tileguy in michigan]

$3.89 last night at my local costco, and the lines were 6-7 deep with people expecting another jump today.

[tilerite]

There was price gauging in the $5 range and some stations actually ran out of gas here in the Winston-Salem area yesterday. I managed to fill up the Tundra for $3.66 a gallon, even though the station has requested I use a maximum of 10 gallons. Sorry, 10 gallons barely gets me to the corner store. :uhh:

[ddmoit]

Sounds like you were over-demanding, Rick. Does that make you a supply gouger?

[ceramictec]

maybe thats why our gas here in Florida hasnt gone up,
Charlie Crist has the anti gouging law in affect and people breaking it face serious fines.

you guys also have one just signed in NC:
http://www.blueridgenow.com/article/20080912/NEWS/809110225/1042/news&title=NC_activates_anti_gouging_law_as_gas_prices_spike_
I would report all these stations!

[ddmoit]

Price Gouging Mad-Lib (http://mises.org/story/3082)

What is so hard to understand about prices being determined by supply and demand? :bang:

On the other hand, I challenge anyone to define price gouging without being arbitrary.

Karl Marx believed that prices were determined by production costs, and that anything beyond that was exploitation. Align yourselves with him if you want to. You're free to be wrong.

[tilerite]

Sounds like you were over-demanding, Rick. Does that make you a supply gouger

No, I'm just a gas hog. :rolleyes:

[tilerite]

On the other hand, I challenge anyone to define price gouging without being arbitrary

Thats easy. Say you own a station and you hear that other stations are running out of gas, so you up your price knowing that you can get a buck or two more. Thats gauging and there's nothing arbitrary about it.

[ceramictec]

we havent moved prices for a week, I just went and filled up to be sure.

one guy at the staion said his family in Ark. or Ala. had near $8 and he seen $5 on the freeway down into North Florida.

Up in NJ where my family is it's still $3.20's
http://i34.tinypic.com/15x4jr6.jpg

[ceramictec]

North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper said Friday the law applies to all levels of the fuel supply chain. Cooper said his office is ready to take consumer complaints.

Easley said wholesale prices were up less than 20 cents a gallon and consumers shouldn't see prices rise substantially more than the wholesale increase.


http://www.ncdoj.com/consumerprotection/cp_complaints.jsp

[ddmoit]

Thats easy. Say you own a station and you hear that other stations are running out of gas, so you up your price knowing that you can get a buck or two more. Thats gauging and there's nothing arbitrary about itNo, it isn't, Rick. It's an entrepreneur reacting to an increase in scarcity of supply - in other words, supply and demand determining price.
we havent moved prices for a week, I just went and filled up to be sure. This is an example of you increasing your demand, given a supply decrease and no resulting price increase. It results in gas stations with no gas.
Easley said wholesale prices were up less than 20 cents a gallon and consumers shouldn't see prices rise substantially more than the wholesale increase.This politician is an example of someone who subscribes to the Marxist idea that productions costs determine prices. It completely ignores supply and demand.

If prices are not allowed to increase in the face of scarcity of supply, the result is that the first people in line demand more product than they would have at a market determined price, and the rest do without product at all.

If the price is allowed to rise, the first people in line may not buy all they want, but only as much as they need, leaving more product to be distributed in a more equitable manner.

Additionally, gentlemen, these hurricanes are not surprises. It is easy to predict well in advance that prices may rise and to plan accordingly. If you live in a place where hurricanes can effect your commodity supplies (pretty much the whole country - given our current refining capacity), you should expect to suffer the cost of increased prices during times of scarcity, or the cost of storing your own personal excess supply.

In my book, to the extent that you do not embrace the solutions of the unfettered market, you are a socialist.

[ceramictec]

Originally Posted by Brain
we havent moved prices for a week, I just went and filled up to be sure.This is an example of you increasing your demand, given a supply decrease and no resulting price increase. It results in gas stations with no gas.I would have filled up tomorrow so how is this bad ? I cant just not get gas.

[SteveVB]

There was price gauging in the $5 range and some stations actually ran out of gas here in the Winston-Salem area yesterday.

the irony of the statement is precious... laws of supply and demand at work.

[ddmoit]

I would have filled up tomorrow so how is this bad ? I cant just not get gas.I didn't say it was bad, Brian. I make no judgment of your behavior at all. I merely stated that you increased your demand. Your statement implies that you anticipated a price increase in the near future, and it increased your demand (as evidenced by your purchase) at the current price.

If everyone behaves as you, and the price is not allowed to increase accordingly, the first people in line buy as much gas as they can hold (as opposed to as much gas as they can afford at a true market price), and the rest do without.

Shortages are caused or made worse by price controls. Anti-gouging laws are price controls. They are anti-free market, anti-freedom, and anti-liberty.

[tilerite]

the irony of the statement is precious... laws of supply and demand at work.

Once the station had to pay more for the product, that is where supply and demand comes into play, but as long as they are selling the product they already paid for at normal price, they are morally obligated to maintain the current price, in my opinion.
If I was told that backerboard prices would be doubling next week and knowing that, I looked at a perspective job today, I would obviously compensate to cover the additional costs but, if however I had enough pieces of bb in my garage that had already been purchased at normal prices, I would not up my price. Wouldn't be right. But thats just me.

[tilerite]

Shortages are caused or made worse by price controls. Anti-gouging laws are price controls. They are anti-free market, anti-freedom, and anti-liberty.

Depends on who we're talking about. Oil has a direct effect on virtually every aspect of our lives. Price controls are a necessary evil. On the other hand, I can charge fifty bucks a sq. ft. to lay tile if I want, because that is not going to have the same effect as a government regulated industry like oil.

[ddmoit]

Once the station had to pay more for the product, that is where supply and demand comes into play, but as long as they are selling the product they already paid for at normal price, they are morally obligated to maintain the current price, in my opinion.Karl Marx agrees with you. I don't.

What is moral about letting the customers who are first in line exhaust the supply at below market prices?

I know it bugs you that the station owner is getting an undeserved windfall, but what about the customers at the end of the line who do without if the price is not increased?

Are you also bothered when the station owner - or other entrepreneurs are negatively impacted by supply gluts?

[ddmoit]

Price controls are a necessary evil.:shake: I don't know what else to say.:(

[SteveVB]

Once the station had to pay more for the product, that is where supply and demand comes into play, but as long as they are selling the product they already paid for at normal price, they are morally obligated to maintain the current price, in my opinion.

So by that logic when the demand goes down, and they have expensive gas in thier tank they have to sell it at the higher price until the supply is exhausted???? You dont get to choose the time frame- time isnt in the equation, it is supply and demand, not supply and demand with a timing delay.

price controls are evil- distorting costs and causing a misallocation of resources- though thats specifically why some argue for them. It's another form of populist wealth distribution at the extreme.

[tilerite]

Marxism Dan? Pul-eeeeeeeeeze! It's not supply and demand when just five U.S. oil companies control product distribution, and OPEC keeps the supply down in order to keep the world markets on edge. Remember, it costs Saudi Arabia less than $2 a barrel to bring oil to the market. That same barrel today has risen as high as $140.00 per gallon. You act like the oil companies play fair when they do not. I won't even get into other mitigating factors such as speculators ramping up the price.

What is moral about letting the customers who are first in line exhaust the supply at below market prices?

Market prices according to whom, the gas station owner?

I know it bugs you that the station owner is getting an undeserved windfall, but what about the customers at the end of the line who do without if the price is not increased?

Whether or not there is remaining gas for the customers at the end of the line, has nothing to do with the price. It has to do with the amount of gas the station has and if the owner wants everyone to be able to get gas, he/she can impose a limit. Also, according to your logic, anyone can raise the price on anything as long as they pin a reason on it like, supply and demand and market price.

Are you also bothered when the station owner - or other entrepreneurs are negatively impacted by supply gluts?

I like to see fairness across the board. I like to see everyone come out ok. When people get shafted, for whatever reasons, it bothers me.

[tilerite]

So by that logic when the demand goes down, and they have expensive gas in thier tank they have to sell it at the higher price until the supply is exhausted???? You dont get to choose the time frame- time isnt in the equation, it is supply and demand, not supply and demand with a timing delay. price controls are evil- distorting costs and causing a misallocation of resources- though thats specifically why some argue for them. It's another form of populist wealth distribution at the extreme.

Supply and demand according to who? I believe what happened yesterday was more about greed than so called market prices and/or supply and demand. Gas station owners knew there was a panic and that rumors were floating about stations drying up, so they took advantage of it and raised their prices because they knew they could get those prices. Anyone who doesn't see something wrong with this, well........................

[sandbagger]

Originally Posted by Rick
Price controls are a necessary evil.
I don't know what else to say.

let me help. Nixon and Carter. :sick:

[cx]

Also, according to your logic, anyone can raise the price on anything as long as they pin a reason on it like, supply and demand and market price.Rick, in a market economy "anyone" can raise his price with no reason at all if he wants. So long as there are people willing to purchase his product at his price, what difference does it make why he decided upon that price?

If customers decide his price is too high, they'll stop buying his product or buy less of it and he will lower his price until it's once again attractive to his customers.

Do tell what's wrong with that.

[SteveVB]

it costs Saudi Arabia less than $2 a barrel to bring oil to the market.

fact check that....


Supply and demand according to who? I believe what happened yesterday was more about greed than so called market prices and/or supply and demand. Gas station owners knew there was a panic and that rumors were floating about stations drying up, so they took advantage of it and raised their prices because they knew they could get those prices. Anyone who doesn't see something wrong with this, well........................

you stated earlier that stations were out of fuel, so the supply is zero, then that makes the exisitng fuel at stations with a limited supply more valuable-period.
Business make decisions based on the information they have available, same with consumers, if they dont want to pay for the fuel then they dont purchase it, and the demand drops, so the price may drop then also, until a balance is reached. Just because it doesnt match what your view of an arbitrary normal is has no bearing, and fixing a price at an arbitrary level is counter productive and has all sorts of consequences to consumers and suppliers.

[ceramictec]

I hate arguing with my fellow tile buds, but.....
Shortages are caused or made worse by price controls. Anti-gouging laws are price controls. They are anti-free market, anti-freedom, and anti-liberty.raising prices before or after a disaster to take advantage of people in need for your personal profit seems wrong.

just because some of the platforms and refineries were shut down doesnt give stations a right to raise a price on speculation there will be a shortage.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crist comments on Florida's fuel supply and gas prices

Saturday, September 13, 2008

Gov. Charlie Crist today held a press conference about Florida's fuel supply and gas prices. His message:

It is important for the people of Florida to know that Florida is fortunate to receive our gas supply by ships through our coastal ports.

Our East and West Coast ports are open, operating, and receiving petroleum.
the state’s reserves are more than adequate to meet the state supply.

We are coordinating with the petroleum industry and representatives from the Florida Petroleum Council and Florida Petroleum Marketers and Convenience Store Association

Our supply is good, based on the projected demand from consumers.

Gov.Crist urges all Floridians to report suspected cases of price gouging

Floridians can call 1-800-HELP-FLA or 1-866-966-7226.

According to the Attorney General’s Office, there are currently 98 price gouging complaints, with more than half from the Tallahassee area.

Crist is working with Attorney General Bill McCollum and Agriculture Commissioner Charles Bronson to ensure swift and appropriate action is taken against all price gougers.

Source: Office of the Governor

[ddmoit]

I hate arguing with my fellow tile buds, but.....No worries, Brian. I don't consider the status of any friendship to be in play over this discussion.
raising prices before or after a disaster to take advantage of people in need for your personal profit seems wrong.Two implications with which I disagree here:
1. that you can know the motivation of the station owners.
2. that the station owners control the price.

Generally, doesn't everyone try to get the highest prices for goods and services that they sell? And, don't consumers try to pay the least amount for goods and services that they buy? I don't consider any of this to be greedy or immoral. Before anyone mentions profiting from the misfortune of others, isn't that what doctors do when they charge to mend broken limbs?

Thank God there are entrepreneurs out there that are willing to offer relief of our misfortunes at any price! Must they all operate as charities?

Lastly, what about the unintended consequence of price controls of depriving everyone except those at the front of the line from buying any gas at all? Isn't this immoral - whether it is intended or not? I know it's not the intention of the price control advocates, but it is a direct consequence. Please stop ignoring it. Surely you're not willing to penalize these people out of your desire to spite the "price gougers".
Our supply is good, based on the projected demand from consumers.Does Crist somehow know better than the market??? If he does, he's wasting his clairvoyance.

On any given day, most people aren't driving around with full tanks of gas. What happens to supply when suddenly everyone decides to top of their tanks?

According to the Attorney General’s Office, there are currently 98 price gouging complaints, with more than half from the Tallahassee area. Again I ask, what is price gouging if we don't even have a definition that isn't arbitrary? I fail to be impressed by the publics' ability to identify price gouging.

[tilerite]

Rick, in a market economy "anyone" can raise his price with no reason at all if he wants. So long as there are people willing to purchase his product at his price, what difference does it make why he decided upon that price? If customers decide his price is too high, they'll stop buying his product or buy less of it and he will lower his price until it's once again attractive to his customers. Do tell what's wrong with that. __________________

Gas is a commodity that we all must have and basically cannot survive without.This isn't a case of the mom and pop store down the lane raising the price of candy in which, as you stated, we could just say no. Not only that, the few companies that control the worlds gas supply are for all intents and purposes, a monopoly, that has the ability manipulate the price on many levels.
Its convenient when people who can afford the increase claim "if they can't afford it, they don't have to buy it", when in reality, thousands of people cannot afford it. My bet, you would be singing a different tune if you were one of those who couldn't afford it.
Forgive me if this comes off as rude but, if you claim to be about fair play and helping the little man, you can't think its ok for people that control the price of a major resource, to just jack the price up to increase personal profit during a time of national tragedy. Thats not what this nation really stands for.
I think some of you guys get so obsessed with technical interpretations of everything from the Constitution to gas price laws that you sometimes forget there is a human elemant involved.

[ddmoit]

Gas is a commodity that we all must have and basically cannot survive without.Rick, that's preposterous. I can think of 2 acquaintances off the top of my head that haven't bought any gas (or diesel) in years. They're both doing fine. One of them is somewhat more well-off financially than I am. Further, Americans have recently demonstrated that the demand for gasoline isn't nearly as inelastic as folks like to claim. When the price gets high enough, we can and do live with less.

Forgive me if this comes off as rude but, if you claim to be about fair play and helping the little man...Who claims this, Rick?

...you can't think its ok for people that control the price of a major resource, to just jack the price up to increase personal profit during a time of national tragedy. Thats not what this nation really stands for.You're not listening, Rick. People don't control gas prices - supply and demand does.

Suppose you are correct, and people really do control gas prices. Why don't they just raise the price to $8 a gallon tomorrow? Why didn't they raise the price to $10 a gallon five years ago? I mean, if they can control the price, why didn't they??? They can control the price, right? Nothing can stop them. If something could, then they really are not in control of it, right?

I think some of you guys get so obsessed with technical interpretations of everything from the Constitution to gas price laws that you sometimes forget there is a human elemant involved.We can't let emotion interfere with reason, Rick. It wouldn't change reality, no matter how much we want it to.

[pitterpat]

This past week when I went to get gas for the van here's the scenario. Going down the street, look up and see the "Speedway" gasoline station sign with the prices posted_ $3.94/gal. I say to myself...."Costco better be cheaper" go to Costco and it is $ 3.59...I put $30 in and am talking to the lady behind me and the attendant. I find out that Costco was $3.58 the day b/4 and just raised it about 30 mins. earlier to $3.59. Right there at that point I decide to fillup....$80.00 more later I am full...$110.00. Now who is controlling the price of gas???????

Anyway....the gas they are selling today they bought 5 years ago!!

[sandbagger]

You're not listening, Rick. People don't control gas prices - supply and demand does. I'm not sure anybody's listening. :rolleyes:

that's a nice argument for the classroom, Dan, but it plays a little differently in practice. At the risk of stating the obvious, there is a person at the gas station who changes the price that rings up on the register. This is not CNBC where we watch the feed on the market indexes or something. That person chooses when and how much to change the price - up or down. (Or maybe he gets a call from his boss.) There is nobody named "supply and demand" fiddling with the gas pump computers!

The point is simple - there is a person in complete and total control of the price that rings up on a particular pump when a gallon of gas dispensed. So what if Joe raises his price to, say, $5 when everyone else is at $3.50? Under normal market conditions ol' Joe won't sell a lot of gas. But suddenly there is a 1000% increase in traffic in Joe's area. At first Joe still doesn't sell a lot of gas, but as the $3.50 stations dry up traffic goes to Joe's $5 gas. Except now Joe knows he is the only gas around and his gas is $10. Supply and demand alright.

but is it a free market? NO! When artificial, extraordinary conditions insert temporary constraints then the markets cannot operate freely. Take my example. The traffic increase (like in a storm evac) is not the problem, per se. But the side effect is that the flow of gas to that market (thanks to traffic) is suddenly constrained. In other words, there is plenty of supply to meet demand - if it could get to the pumps.

Extraordinary conditions can also remove that element of choice someone mentioned. Like when there is a mandatory evac order issued. Maybe you don't have to drive yourself, but somebody has to drive and that somebody is going to have to buy fuel. You can't choose to stay home until prices come down. Suddenly your free market becomes a captive market. New ballgame, new rules. :cry:

[koihito]

You know, in theory I find that Dan would be right IF we had a true free market. The problem is we do not have a free market in most arenas. The government has already stuck it's nose in things and when it comes to fuels decided that mixtures, octane, no-lead, antitrust, taxes, licensing, and a plethora of other things need rules. The reality is that rising fuel prices hurts most segments of the economy and therefore the government has a vested interest in doing something about it. We haven't had a true free market since well before ww2.

[tilerite]

Kudos to Art and Nathan for giving a better explanation that I did. I find it so much easier to communicate face to face as opposed to doing it on a forum. Can't seem to get the fingers to properly type my thoughts. Oh well, nice job, guys. Ok Dan, to address your responses


Rick, that's preposterous. I can think of 2 acquaintances off the top of my head that haven't bought any gas (or diesel) in years. They're both doing fine. One of them is somewhat more well-off financially than I am. Further, Americans have recently demonstrated that the demand for gasoline isn't nearly as inelastic as folks like to claim. When the price gets high enough, we can and do live with less.

Doesn't matter if they directly purchased gas or not. I guarantee you that in some direct or indirect way, unless they are living on their own private island, they are dependent on it. We all are.

You're not listening, Rick. People don't control gas prices - supply and demand does.

No Dan, it is you who is not listening. Raising prices to profit off the fears of the consumer, has nothing to do with supply and demand. Funny thing, gas prices and supply seem to be back to normal today. This never had a thing to do with supply and demand.

We can't let emotion interfere with reason, Rick. It wouldn't change reality, no matter how much we want it to.

You're right, Dan. That would be, ummmmmmm, human.

[Davestone]

Oil at $93 and gas at almost $4.00 because of Ike? Gimme a break :bow:

[tilerite]

Dan says, thats the free market for ya. :uhh:

[ddmoit]

It isn't just me saying it, Rick. It's most respected economists.

Here's a few:

Thomas Sowell (http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell091404.asp)

Walter Williams (http://www.americanconservativedaily.com/2006/06/walter-e-williams-explains-price-gouging-myth/)


If you want to continue believing politicians and media pundits, well, that's your prerogative.

[ceramictec]

Dan,

that one article is from Sept. 14, 2004

Crist & the Attorney Generals office takes care of price gouging fast here these days.
after Hurricane Charley the scumbags popped up charging 1k for a $300 small generator.
Police were arresting them as fast as possible for taking advantage of people in need.

I do understand supply & demand for say a hot pair of jeans or shirt that you can name the price for if people want it, but your talking two different situations here.

http://www.800helpfla.com/price_gouging.html


in the wake of natural disaster, essentials -- such as food, ice generators, lanterns, lumber, etc. -- may be in short supply. Charging exorbitant or excessive prices for these and other necessities following a disaster is not only unethical, it's illegal.

Under Sections 501.160 and 501.205 Florida Statutes, it is illegal to charge unconscionable prices for goods or services following a declared state of emergency.

Individuals or businesses found guilty of price-gouging could face fines up to $1,000 per violation.

[tilerite]

It isn't just me saying it, Rick. It's most respected economists.

Plenty of well respected people, including our own Brian, say otherwise. I could post links but you'll just label them as resources that are not credible.

[ceramictec]

Plenty of well respected people, including our own Brian,you have me mixed up with cx ? :scratch:

[tilerite]

By the way, we have anti-gauging laws here in NC., so not only is gauging just plain wrong, its also against the law.

http://www.wsoctv.com/news/17476393/detail.html

[tilerite]

you have me mixed up with cx

Naaaa!!

[ddmoit]

that one article is from Sept. 14, 2004Brian, the laws of economics have not changed since then.:)

I could post links but you'll just label them as resources that are not credible.Rick, I challenge you to find one instance of me dismissing information based on the source. I'm always willing to evaluate content on its merit.

And, being against the law makes it wrong? Please!

It was once lawful for whites to own blacks. It was once illegal for women to vote. It was once illegal for blacks to sit in the front of the bus.

Do you really want to use legality as a moral defense? I hope not.

Natural Law impresses me. Legislation does not.

[ceramictec]

the laws of economics have not changed since then.your still not getting the difference of gouging people while in need
to people wanting an item out of necessity.

this is what I'm talking about.

"Charging exorbitant or excessive prices for these and other
necessities following a disaster is not only unethical, it's illegal."

your getting it mixed up.

if I have new polished porcelain tile and nobody else has it, sure.
I'm going to move the price up higher.

but if I have new polished generator and people are in need
of it following a disaster and I mark it up....that's just WRONG!

the laws of economics have not changedbut they do change......
when the State, Attorney General & Governor step in creating an Anti Gouging law (http://www.flsenate.gov/statutes/index.cfm?mode=View%20Statutes&SubMenu=1&App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=501.160&URL=CH0501/Sec160.HTM) .

[ddmoit]

your getting it mixed upBrian, my friend, I believe it is you who is mixed up.
but they [economic laws] do change......
when the State, Attorney General & Governor step in creating an Anti Gouging law .While politicians may legislate market regulations, they can no more change the laws of economics than they could change the law of gravity.

You proponents of "anti-gouging" laws have failed repeatedly to answer a question that I have asked. I'll ask it one more time.

Anti-gouging laws are price controls. In a time of crisis, an anti-gouging law effectively caps prices of scarce commodities at below market prices (prices that are driven by supply and demand). This allows people in the front of the line to purchase more of a commodity than they may have at the higher true market price. This leaves little or no product for the people behind them in the line. How is that moral or just?

Additionally, higher market prices in a time of crisis compels entrepreneurs to divert more products to an afflicted area (drawn by higher prices). Artificial price caps discourage entrepreneurs from diverting supplies of a scarce commodity to an afflicted area. How is this moral or just?

Why do people who claim to care about the "human factor" support anti-gouging laws that have the unintended consequence of exacerbating human misery?

[SteveVB]

in the wake of natural disaster, essentials -- such as food, ice generators, lanterns, lumber, etc. -- may be in short supply. Charging exorbitant or excessive prices for these and other necessities following a disaster is not only unethical, it's illegal.

there's your definition Dan.... :uhh:

[ceramictec]

Anti-gouging laws are price controls. In a time of crisis, an anti-gouging law effectively caps prices of scarce commodities at below market prices (prices that are driven by supply and demand). This allows people in the front of the line to purchase more of a commodity than they may have at the higher true market price. This leaves little or no product for the people behind them in the line. How is that moral or just?

Additionally, higher market prices in a time of crisis compels entrepreneurs to divert more products to an afflicted area (drawn by higher prices). Artificial price caps discourage entrepreneurs from diverting supplies of a scarce commodity to an afflicted area.
:bonk: Oy Vie :bang:

[tilerite]

Rick, I challenge you to find one instance of me dismissing information based on the source. I'm always willing to evaluate content on its merit.

I was being presumptuous. Sorry, Dan.

And, being against the law makes it wrong? Please!
Ummmmmm yeah, kind of does, unless you support lawlessness.

It was once lawful for whites to own blacks. It was once illegal for women to vote. It was once illegal for blacks to sit in the front of the bus.

So that justifies you to break any law you don't agree with? Are you comparing price gauging laws to slavery and oppression? I know you're smarter than that, Dan.

Do you really want to use legality as a moral defense? I hope not.

No, I want to use legality as a legal defense. For moral defense, I use morality. I think guns are immoral but since they are legal, I won't sit here and argue that guns shouldn't be legal just because I may have a moral problem with them.

[tilerite]

Oy Vie

I think you meant "vay".

[ceramictec]

vie, vay, vey...all of the above. :jack:

[tilerite]

Oye vay!! :uhh:

[ddmoit]

So that justifies you to break any law you don't agree with?If by "don't agree with" you mean "find to be unjust", then yes. It's called civil disobedience. It was practiced by the likes of Henry David Thoreau, Mahatma Gandhi, and Martin Luther King, Jr. Admittedly, I lack the courage of those men. They all spent time in jail, and two of them died for their causes. I'm just a guy making my case on an Internet forum from the safety of my home. :uhh:

[cx]

Being supported by a majority has never made any law or cause right, Rick, only popular.

And being in the minority has never made anyone wrong. Dan is demonstrating that here for our side. :)

[Davestone]

How do these threads go oh so wrong? :D