 |
Mag, it seems that there are so few people who have been informed about this vital information. There is a theory that both Lincoln and JFK were assissinated because they planned to issue interest free money. I don't have enough information to back this up, but it is interesting, as I do believe that anyone who set out to stop this constant rip-off of the USA would become a prime target of the world bankers.
Amazing isn't it!! A US President can control many countries through wealth. And certainly control the citizens of it's own. When the rest of us are unable to enjoy life because the prices of 'everything' has risen along with the tremendous rise in gasoline, our politicians will not suffer because they had the *foresight* to keep their funds where they know the payoff will be.
Oh yes, I should knock myself out to get to the polls to vote one of them into office so they can have an even better existence - at our expense.. . one sheep as left the herd...
There are many conspiracy theories surrounding JFKs death . Most are best disregarded .
IT has NOTHING to do with BUSH!! Why don't people get this?? Holy lord. There is a shortage any president would be in the same god damn situation. I'm sick of people trying to find excuses to bash bush. Just wait till these idiots vote for obama or hiliary. Then you will see a huge downfall in this country. It will be a damn shame I tell you!
It has everything to do with politics and it doesn't matter who the president is. Big oil has been in cahoots with the white house forever. Do you see how the oil companies tout the big bucks they're making while raising prices ridiculously on the citizens? Why aren't they absorbing some of the higher costs instead of getting it all (and more) from us? Why are they getting away with doing this to us? Maybe it's because of the huge sums of tax money they pay the government?
Why haven't we explored our own oil supplies? It isn't the money it would cost us to get it going.- not with the way we spend.
Someone has answers that work. I wish we could hear the truth for a change.
Quote:
Originally Posted by heythere22
The oil companies only make 8 cents on a gallon profit on gas sales. The US government collects 18 cents per gallon and your local State even more.
So who is gouging ?
All that for one measly gallon?? That's like a drop of water in the ocean. It looks like all of them are gouging, but especially our government.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
I'll play contrarian.
Is not that tax money suppose to be used to build and maintain roads and bridges?
Sure ;but if that is true ;and I agree it is a legitimate role of the government to build and maintain roads ;then other taxes should be reduced. Frankly the unstated thing in this debate is that Americans have had a bargain for years on the price of gas. WE don't want to hear it;but even now we pay lower prices than our cousins in Europe. This blame the big oil companies is not founded in fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by inthebox
Tom, most people in Europe have been angry for years about the costs of living there, even though they have good public transportation to depend on. I have many friends in the UK that complain about financing the wealth of the royal family and the cost of Thatcher's vicious politics.
Gasoline has not been their priority because they have excellent public transportation. Where I live there is none. If my sons need to go into the city for business they have to be taken 12 miles to the nearest bus stop and of course picked up again later. People here need cars just to get to their jobs. The public transportation available in the city is unreliable and unsafe too.
I don't think we can start comparing ourselves to other countries in regards to one item like gasoline cost, or we would also have to find what better things they have that we don't - such as health care - housing, etc. Plus, don't forget our very high taxes... isn't that the reason our ancestors left Europe in the first place?
The oil companies may not hold the entire blame for raising gasoline prices but they do have some blame or they wouldn't be announcing the huge profits they have been. The government also has plenty of blame but everyone can justify their need for money - EXCEPT THE CITIZENS - who are expected to be quiet and pay. How fair is that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Their profits in dollars may sound huge. But let's not forget ;they are not mom and pop stores. They are huge corporations . In fact their profits as a percentage are about on average with other industries. Yeah they make lots of money. The world consumes 30 billion barrels of oil annually and the demand is constantly growing . The chart that NeedKarma provided shows that they are taking revenue around 10 cents of the cost of a gallon of gasoline, which is let's say $4 /gal... or less that 3% of the retail cost Those "excess profits" are below 3 percent of retail costs.
Every few years our politicians demagogue the issue and have repeated public investigations into charges of oil price gouging . Still they have NEVER been able to make that charge stick . Regulators have never found merit in the charge.
The FTC recentlyreported that..
"All of the increase can be attributed to increased crude oil costs, because gasoline inventories are as ample as they have been for several years, gasoline consumption is declining to a near-record extent, and refining margins -- the difference between the cost of crude oil and the wholesale price of gasoline -- have fallen."
Federal Trade Commission - Oil and Gas Industry Initiatives
Who's making the big Bucks then ? Russia ,Saudia Arabia,Venezuela ,Iran ,Canada... etc. Why isn't the US in this list ? Because we stifle domestic production .
...
The European population centers evolved the way they did BECAUSE of issues like high prices. They made that call a long time ago and put heavy taxes on consumption .
On issues like health care and housing I am willing to debate that too but I think it would be off topic on this thred . Suffice it to say that in my view they are higher taxed and get less or substandard services for their money .
Sure I believe they are sick of their system . They just ousted 'Red 'Ken Livingston and voted in the Tories in England . The trend in Europe is toward more conservatism (Sarkosy in France ,Merkel in Germany ,Berlesconi in Italy) while we drift further toward nanny-statism and government solutions to every aspect of our lives. The Europeans have been there and done that .
The Eastern European countries ;now free of the Russian yolk could've adapted the same structure as the Western States ;but if you look at them you will find that they have been the most inovative regarding free market principles and tax policies... and their economies are growing as a result.
The Simple (Tax) Life
This is related to the subject, but not in direct answer to the question. "When the going gets tough, the tough get going" is a quote we have all heard. Everyone is looking for a way to lower their fuel expenses, and there are some promising things available. I am joining the thousands who are building HHO generators for their vehicles. If I do it myself, it is not expensive, and some are finding the increase in mileage significant. In WW2 I understand that Englishmen converted their autos to run on wood smoke. Not very efficient, but when there is no fuel, anything is acceptable.
Unfortunately, I think the answer is no to this question. America has had a buffer from the higher gas prices the rest of the world has had to pay for years due to the might of our purchasing power. Now that China and India are bigger market players and the demand is going up and supply is peaking, that buffer is getting thinner. A good starting point is reading the Hirsch Report on peak oil. This report was created by request for the US Department of Energy and published in February 2005. It's conclusion is that the end of oil will be abrupt and to avoid economic disaster we need to start planning alternatives now. That is why wasting more time and resources on drilling in Alaska really only serves the interest of Alaskans. Yeah it would create wealth and jobs there, but it is a poor direction for America at this point because as you said we are dependent on cars and our whole sprawling lifestyle was built around cheap gas. It's interesting that you mention Europe because they do have the infrastructure to weather the energy crisis. America is going to have some trouble because not only are a lot of people resisting alternative energy they are also not willing to put money into changing our infrastructure to make mass transit more of a priority. Both of these steps are absolutely crucial in this stage of the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by purplewings
A vote for McCain quite simply is a vote for decline for our country. We will not be able to sustain our lifestyle if we don't come up with other ideas at this point in the game.
Peak oil is one interesting theory among others.
321energy :: If hydrocarbons are renewable- then is "Peak Oil" a fraud?
But let's address the price bubble in oil we experienced this year. Today a report puts the blame squarely on commodities investors playing the global market.
Report Faults Speculators For Volatility in Oil Prices - WSJ.com
That confirms what I wrote in post #4 ;#8 . I would also point out that the price of the dollar is rising as the price of the oil is dropping . But we know that much of the reason for the price drop is that higher prices stiffled demand (The rats in OPEC want to fix that by pumping less btw) . So perhaps those that think everything is pegged to the dollar value have it backwards. Perhaps oil is the new currency. Just a thought.
Although the abiogenic hypothesis was accepted by some geologists in the former Soviet Union, most geologists now consider the biogenic formation of petroleum to be supported scientifically (i.e. that they are fossil fuels). Though evidence exists for abiogenic creation of methane and hydrocarbon gases within the Earth, studies indicate that they are not produced in commercially significant quantities. This information was taken directly from a wikipedia entry about abiogenic fuel or the theory that petroleum is produced from sources other than biological decomposition.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
The writer of the article you referenced is Joel Bainerman who is primarily a speaker on the Israeli economy and is not a scientist, by the way.
That was one of many links on the subject I could've used . Let's assume however that peak oil is the reality. The rest of the world is exploiting their known reserves and putting it on the market . The United States does not maximize that ability . What are we waiting for?. for the rest of the world to use theirs up and then we can sell it for whatever price we want to ? It just doesn't make sense to have our trade balance warped this way .Pickens is correct when he says it is “the largest transfer of wealth in the history of mankind.”
I am in full agreement that alternatives need to be developed . But we have the ability to rationally transition to a time when alternatives are viable ;without wrecking the economy ,using known energy reserves and existing technologies.
What difference does it make as to the link you use if the information is not correct and it's a bunch of people circularly quoting one another?Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
The point is that right now energy prices are not critical for Americans. Sure some are starting to think about that extra trip to the grocery store or driving 40 miles to have coffee with a friend for a half an hour. (That is an actual anecdote btw). But are we really hurting yet? Is tapping reserves so that people can keep on wasting a finite substance really the best move here? Think hard about it. If we know it's there, what's the rush? I feel like I'm in the desert with a whining child and only one canteen of water and we've only just realized we're lost, for goodness sake. Wouldn't it make sense to explore alternatives now instead of using the last of what we have just as it would make sense to make an attempt to find out where you are before you guzzle all the water that's left in the canteen?
I think the biggest problem is that politicians are only telling people what they want to hear. That goes for both sides. During world war II, people were asked to ration sugar and tires. Now it's suddenly out of the question for our leaders to step up and tell the people what they need to hear... take initiatives for your country and try to conserve first. Should our environment and already threatened species bear the complete brunt of our poor planning and convenience-oriented society? I say no. Yes many might say to hell with the polar bear, who needs 'em. Or I don't give a crap about the baluga whale. Why should I care about conservation of forests or habitats? Why should I care about dumping 90,000 tons of drilling fluid, metal shavings and heavy metals in the ocean for each drilling platform? Why should I care? My answer is that it confounds me that you DON'T care. But then alcoholics really don't care about their livers either. It's almost a perfect analogy, actually. Humans are as thirsty for oil as an alcoholic is thirsty for his favorite drink.
A friend made a very interesting point once that gasoline is one of the only things people pay for that they have to sit and watch a money ticker showing them how much they are paying. Electric bills and natural gas bills arrive in the mail and people think, "Ouch" write a check and vow to shut the lights off and lower the thermostat... but gas is different and it's very telling that the McCain stickers I see are usually on SUV's... People just sucking the earth dry till there's nothing left for their own convenience, but yet I should be expected to go along with THEIR plan of action when it goes against everything I hold beautiful and dear? Sorry, but no thanks.
I don't think most of the people on this board would agree with you that the price is not having a significant impact on their lives beyond that Starbucks.
Quote:
Is tapping reserves so that people can keep on wasting a finite substance really the best move here? Think hard about it. If we know it's there, what's the rush?
I addressed the reason for that already . Clearly you think it preferable for us to continue to import and maintain a balance of trade deficit that is in no small part caused by our consumption of oil from foreign sources. OPEC is contemplating reducing the supply on the market so they can maintain the higher prices. Does that not concern you ? Does it not concern you that we are import from unsavory characters throughout the world while we let our supplies go untapped ? While you bemoan the fate of the polar bear why don't you check out the Russian plans for the Arctic ?
Russia to drill Arctic oil with nuclear icebreaker - Bellona
And the Barent Sea
Increased Oil Activity in the Barents Sea
Or anywhere else there is a drop of oil they can get their hands on !
I am giving reasonable responses to your comments . Perhaps you are not reading my response because again I addressed that point.Quote:
I feel like I'm in the desert with a whining child and only one canteen of water and we've only just realized we're lost, for goodness sake. Wouldn't it make sense to explore alternatives now instead of using the last of what we have just as it would make sense to make an attempt to find out where you are before you guzzle all the water that's left in the canteen?
Under your proposal we would go thirsty for no reason as there is plenty of water in the canteen until we find the oasis.Quote:
I am in full agreement that alternatives need to be developed . But we have the ability to rationally transition to a time when alternatives are viable ;without wrecking the economy ,using known energy reserves and existing technologies.
Clearly from what I am reading , what you are proposing is draconian lifestyle changes for the whole industrial world. And while you are doing that I suppose you will compel the developing world to comply to your utopian vision ? If you believe that carbon emissions are the ultimate cause of global climate change, the US is certainly becoming an ever increasingly smaller source compared to the other rising powers.Advances in alternative energy, that have originated in America are absolutely stunning and already at a rate of progess unmatched by the research in the rest of the world combined . But still we are not doing enough . We should be compelled to endure greater sacrifices by government mandate .Quote:
Should our environment and already threatened species bear the complete brunt of our poor planning and convenience-oriented society?
And I suppose you have ,being a good example ,moved into a grass yurt and forego the automobile ,and climate control in your home ?
First of all (and I had to add this edit) don't distort what I say because you don't know the difference between the word "critical" and "significant impact" Yes, everyone has been significantly impacted. If people are still driving hummers and SUV's, I'm sorry, but the situation isn't critical, yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Well we aren't voting in Russia, now are we? You are outraged by what they are doing there yet you propose we do the same thing? Two wrongs don't make a right.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
China and India and all developing nations are putting a strain on the world's oil supply. OPEC isn't some criminal oil hound, they are simply dealing with the law of supply and demand-- one of the basics you learn in any economics class. As supply dwindles, price goes up. Does it concern me? Sure. The problem with drilling is that there is no guarantee how much oil we get and returns are expected 10 years down the road. That's 10 more years of complacency when we could use the time to start changing our infrastructure and the way we think.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Giving more thought to city planning and giving tax incentives for people to build up instead of out and encouraging people to move to the cities can hardly be called Utopian or draconian. Creating laws that encourage pedestrians and bicyclists and adding dependable light rail system instead of a new interstate is not a grass hut by any stretch of the imagination. Taxing vehicles by weight and reducing the tax based on the number of family members and then using that money to fund alternative energy research makes perfect sense to me. I'm not supporting suffering, but rather encouraging the opinion that we aren't helpless, and we can definitely do better than what we've done the last 8 years which has seen no changes and no forward thinking... at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:52 AM. |