Liberals Get What They Wanted...High Fuel Prices

[saturneptune]

uteo,
If you had read some posts above, you would have seen that Joseph had a good solution to the problem that would bring down prices. And I will bet that the oil company executive's bellies would still be stuffed and their Washington thieving buddies would still get their money.

 

[UTEOTW]

I have read the thread. The whole thing.

Increasing supply and decreasing demand are the answer, sure.

I just think that those who think that the oil companies are fleecing us by selling for what the commodities markets determine need to get their heads out of the sand. Even at the "record" profits, they are still making miniscule returns compared to what they spend relative to other businesses.

I also think that people should accept that we have entered a new paradign with respect to the price of oil and gas (and natural gas for that matter) with the increasing world demand and increasing world political instability. And if the peak oil people are right, you have not seen anything yet. (I know that Ken, BTW, doesn't accept peak oil. I am a bit more undecided to accepting but he has the advantage of being better informed and closer to the action.)

 

[saturneptune]

uteo,
We havent seen anything yet? You might be surprised what the American people are capable of when they have had enough of a certain situation. It could be that the oil companies and the Washington establishment haven't seen anything yet.

 

[SpiritualMadMan]

Yes, we *still* have the VOTE!

Unfortunately, until the American People are sick enough of the two party staus quo and are willing to shell out some **real** money for a viable Third Party Candidate....

Oh well....

When all we have to VOTE for is the lesser of two evils...

It is never a good idea to substitute a worse evil for the lesser one simply because one is angry at the lsser one...

Better to be heard through Written Letters and keep our eyes open for a Better Candidate...

But, no matter who is elected...

To fix the problems is going to be painful for everyone...

Mike Sr.

 

[saturneptune]

Mike,
This country needs to learn to survive on the oil we produce, and yes, it is going to be painful. As far as third parties go, I have for most of my life thought it is better to vote for the lesser evil (Republican) than allowing the Democrats to be elected. But as of late, I wonder if the thievery and greed of the Republicans is any better than the moral repugnence of the Democrats. Only God and the will of the American people can solve this problem.

 

[SpiritualMadMan]

Living on the 40 percent we comsume today can not be accomplished over night or without major investment in infrastructure...

We are a commuter nation.

A nation of independent individualists...

Getting us to share rides and car pool is difficult when we live in the same neighborhood...

But, I am the only one where I work who lives in the town I commute from...

So, I am not too hopeful in a quick fix...

Especially one where the American People have to band together and economize...

I fear Willard Cantelon's book "The Day the Dollar Died" will end up being "The Day The Oil Died"...

Mike Sr.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Double posted. Sorry.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Originally posted by Joseph_Botwinick:

Originally posted by UTEOTW:
[qb] "If there are, I think those should also end in the spirit of capitalism and let the oil tycoons spend their own money and make it on their own in a truly free market. What do ya say?"

In principle, I agree. There are too many special interests who get tax breaks for themselves. The question is where is the line between those special breaks that help the country and those that just help a select few and/or the politicians?

I don't know what breaks and subsidies the oil companies get, either. If we knew, we might could decide whether specific breaks were worthwhile or not.

Let's say there were incentives to developing new oil supplies in some area. Would you consider that beneficial? If there was money to research better ways of getting oil out of oil shale or tar sands, would that be worthwhile?

Did anyone else besides me notice how concerned UTEOW was about not becoming socialist until it might adversely effect the oil company. Then, he is cautious about how it might hurt us if we took away socialistic entitlements from the oil companies. Are you telling me that there are times when capitalism is not as good for the consumer as socialism? I am curious...do you work for an oil comapny?

Joseph Botwinick

 

[KenH]

Originally posted by saturneptune:
You offer solutions after something has been said.

Those solutions were what I offered on a local radio talk show on this past Thursday morning. I just passed along what I said from the notes I had made before I called.

As long as Joseph stayed with logic he was doing well. It was when he engaged in mindless populist poppycock that he went astray in his recommendations.

 

[KenH]

Originally posted by Joseph_Botwinick:
do the oil companies recieve government subsidies and funding

The company I work for paid 39% in taxes in 2005, per the Form 10-K filed with the SEC(this is public information). As far as I am aware we receive no government subsidies and wouldn't want them. Government money comes with government strings attached.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Originally posted by KenH:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by saturneptune:
You offer solutions after something has been said.

Those solutions were what I offered on a local radio talk show on this past Thursday morning. I just passed along what I said from the notes I had made before I called.

As long as Joseph stayed with logic he was doing well. It was when he engaged in mindless populist poppycock that he went astray in his recommendations. </font>[/QUOTE]Which show did you call. Was it an Arkansas or Texas show? Do you guys get KARN where you live?

Joseph Botwinick

 

[KenH]

Originally posted by saturneptune:
1) The market does not set the price of the billion dollar compensation of the oil executives.

2) You and Ken need to start a talk show to put oil companies in a good light.

1) The executive compensation committee of a company does. Ultimately, the stockholders have the final say as they can replace the board of directors if they don't like its actions.

2) Or, to borrow a phrase from Ayn Rand, maybe Atlas should simply shrug and leave you on your own for a month and see how you make out without the products provided by the oil companies.

But as responsible corporate citizens they won't leave you to suffer due to your ignorance.

 

[KenH]

Originally posted by Joseph_Botwinick:
Which show did you call.

It was Rodney Wimberly's show, "Good Morning South Arkansas" on KELD, 106.5 FM, in El Dorado. I called in around 6:35 on Thursday morning. I am not used to calling into talk shows but I found it to be fun. I may do it again sometime.

KARN is not strong enough to reach El Dorado.

 

[KenH]

Excellent posts, UTEOTW.

 

[KenH]

Originally posted by saturneptune:
1) I have no obligation to put up or shut up to your smoke and mirrors math to justify the oil companies.

2) Those areas are ones in which I can choose other options.

1) If my math is only smoke and mirrors then it ought to be a breeze for you to refute it. You can't so you are forced to bear witness by, in essence, saying that I am lying. Therefore, since you are a Christian you are under an obligation to prove that I am lying.

2) Sure you have an option. Why don't you and Joseph and the other complainers pool your money together and start your own refinery and figure out a way to sell gasoline for $1.00/gal. as Joseph thinks the price should be and manage to break even, much less make a profit. As I once read somewhere:

"People who want milk should not seat themselves on a stool in the middle of a field in hope that a cow will back up to them." - Elbert Hubbard

 

[KenH]

Originally posted by saturneptune:
You might be surprised what the American people are capable of when they have had enough of a certain situation. It could be that the oil companies and the Washington establishment haven't seen anything yet.

Are you threatening violence, saturnneptune? I imagine the the Department of Homeland Security might be interested in this threat of yours. They are probably already aware of it.

 

[KenH]

Originally posted by Joseph_Botwinick:
Did anyone else besides me notice how concerned UTEOW was about not becoming socialist until it might adversely effect the oil company.

I didn't see any inconsistency in UTEOW's post at all.

Socialism is always a bad idea. Just look at how "successful" the old Soviet Union was.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Originally posted by KenH:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by saturneptune:
You might be surprised what the American people are capable of when they have had enough of a certain situation. It could be that the oil companies and the Washington establishment haven't seen anything yet.

Are you threatening violence, saturnneptune? I imagine the the Department of Homeland Security might be interested in this threat of yours. They are probably already aware of it. </font>[/QUOTE]Ken,

I think you are reaching a bit here. I don't see a threat of violence here.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[KenH]

Maybe so, Joseph. But he sounded rather ominous stating "You might be surprised what the American people are capable of".

 

[saturneptune]

Ken H.
Why dont you call them? They represent the establishment you so eagerly embrace. You really need a hobby.