cinnabar
Shiny_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2004
- Messages
- 386
Gas prices
- Thread starter cinnabar
- Start date
- Status
Mr Majestyk
Rough_Rock
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2006
- Messages
- 77
Brazil fuels its cars with alcohol distilled from sugar cane. I wish we could do the same; anything that is green can be distilled into alcohol. I am not an expert but I have heard that there simply isn''t enough available land to grow enough corn, for example, to get enough alcohol to fuel all our cars. However, fitting cars to run on alcohol is not difficult or costly, and if we could get up to 20% alcohol fueled vehicles, that would help a lot with our dependence on foreign oil.
Also, prices are largely determined by supply and demand. What evidence is there of price gouging? ConocoPhillips, the nation''s third largest oil and gas company posted Q1 profit of 3.29 billion on 47.9 billion in revenue, or 6.86%. If you feel that profit % is excessive, what profit margin do you feel is "fair" and why?
The price for a bbl of crude is not determined by the oil companies but by the market.
Also, prices are largely determined by supply and demand. What evidence is there of price gouging? ConocoPhillips, the nation''s third largest oil and gas company posted Q1 profit of 3.29 billion on 47.9 billion in revenue, or 6.86%. If you feel that profit % is excessive, what profit margin do you feel is "fair" and why?
The price for a bbl of crude is not determined by the oil companies but by the market.
sydneycasandra
Shiny_Rock
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2005
- Messages
- 325
I love that cartoon... I am actually hoping that people will get creative and give my FI and I gas cards for our wedding gifts! We live 80 miles apart and making the trip once, sometimes twice a week is expensive. (we will continue to live separately for a couple years after the wedding.)
Not a bad idea at all... crystal and china are nice but my car sure doesn''t run on them!
Not a bad idea at all... crystal and china are nice but my car sure doesn''t run on them!
selflove
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- May 12, 2005
- Messages
- 972
I was just gonna post about this very topic and I got beat to the punch!
Paying $42+ tonight to fill up my fuel-efficient compact car just burns me up!! On Saturday (Earth Day) I watched Bush''s BS speech and I wanted to throw my shoe at the TV when he said that "Americans are addicted to oil"!
No, we are not addicted to OIL, we are addicted to CARS, and there are lots of ways to FUEL CARS BESIDES OIL!
I live in a city (LA) where the oil companies ripped out all the rail lines decades ago so I don''t even have public transportation as an option.
Yet he continues to say that "There is no evidence of price gouging." HELLO!! Obviously this man is living in an alternative reality from me.
And as I was choking down the $42+ fill-up (the most I''ve EVER paid), I sadly looked around me in the gas station area and saw the huge pickup truck, the oversized SUZ, and the 5.0l luxury sedan, and realized that the prices are not going to go down...Americans apparently have so much expendable income (or more likely they just go further in debt) that they don''t mind paying double the price that gas was just 2 years ago. Those oil companies are going to have us at $5/gal by the end of summer, just like the media has predicted.
Paying $42+ tonight to fill up my fuel-efficient compact car just burns me up!! On Saturday (Earth Day) I watched Bush''s BS speech and I wanted to throw my shoe at the TV when he said that "Americans are addicted to oil"!
No, we are not addicted to OIL, we are addicted to CARS, and there are lots of ways to FUEL CARS BESIDES OIL!
I live in a city (LA) where the oil companies ripped out all the rail lines decades ago so I don''t even have public transportation as an option.
Yet he continues to say that "There is no evidence of price gouging." HELLO!! Obviously this man is living in an alternative reality from me.
And as I was choking down the $42+ fill-up (the most I''ve EVER paid), I sadly looked around me in the gas station area and saw the huge pickup truck, the oversized SUZ, and the 5.0l luxury sedan, and realized that the prices are not going to go down...Americans apparently have so much expendable income (or more likely they just go further in debt) that they don''t mind paying double the price that gas was just 2 years ago. Those oil companies are going to have us at $5/gal by the end of summer, just like the media has predicted.
ForteKitty
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2004
- Messages
- 5,239
We need to find alternatives for everything, including ways to turn refuse into energy, as opposed to landfilling. One of the biggest landfills in L.A. County will be closing in 2013, and trash fees will multiply by at least 5 times due to high gas costs associated with shipping the refuse to the desert. It''s amazing that European countries have been utilizing alternative methods for at least 10 years, while we are still in the process of "testing" these facilities, and will perhaps start to implement them after 10 years. I recently started working with the Environmental Programs Division of LA County, and is beyond FRUSTRATED at how ridiculous it is to deal with bureaucracies. Such a simple solution, so cost efficient, yet they can''t get it past their stubborn heads that we need change! grr....
movie zombie
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2005
- Messages
- 11,879
follow the $$$$, as the old saying goes. wonder why we don''t have change in this country [other than relaxed environmental protections put into effect this week, laying blame on environmental protections as causing high fuel costs]? wonder why the administration''s policy is what it is re oil? follow the $$$$......
movie zombie
movie zombie
Rank Amateur
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2003
- Messages
- 1,555
Reducing our dependence on foreign oil may be good for strategic reasons but it won''t do anything for gas prices. Look at England''s gas prices, or the USA''s natural gas price spikes.
In Brazil, the (opressive) government has forcibly pumped billions into their ethanol program over quite a few years. Do you want your government raising your taxes to develop ethanol which in the end may use as much energy to create as it yields? Will you accept lower performance from your car at a higher price? When "big farming" is getting all the $$ instead of "big oil" will you complain about them, too?
The answers aren''t so easy, other than to blame Bush.
In Brazil, the (opressive) government has forcibly pumped billions into their ethanol program over quite a few years. Do you want your government raising your taxes to develop ethanol which in the end may use as much energy to create as it yields? Will you accept lower performance from your car at a higher price? When "big farming" is getting all the $$ instead of "big oil" will you complain about them, too?
The answers aren''t so easy, other than to blame Bush.
movie zombie
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2005
- Messages
- 11,879
in theory, anyway.Date: 4/27/2006 3:47:00 PM
Author: SanDiegoLady
I am disgusted in the fact that one of the parties is selling out our country and the other is simply giving it away.. We are in desperate need of a real leader. I''m sick to death of both the major parties'' behaviors and the fact neither will be responsible, they freaking work for US. Idiots.
movie zombie
ForteKitty
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2004
- Messages
- 5,239
tawn
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2003
- Messages
- 1,311
I have an Uncle who works for a big oil company in Canada, and he makes a buttload of money. The perks are unreal, luxury paid trips all over the world...they can''t use them all! And, they''re paying almost $5 a gallon in Canada??
Was it 60 billion dollars profit that the oil companies in the US made last year? Hmmmm...I must be stupid because it just doesn''t add up to me!
Was it 60 billion dollars profit that the oil companies in the US made last year? Hmmmm...I must be stupid because it just doesn''t add up to me!
gingerBcookie
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2004
- Messages
- 1,858
the OTC convention is coming to houston next week and my caterer was asked to do their big party. apparently, they made 5x what they expected from their rigs this year and want a blow out bang out celebration.
the budget? they told my caterer to do whatever and charge whatever cuz she''ll get it.
and yet gas prices are still climbing...?
the budget? they told my caterer to do whatever and charge whatever cuz she''ll get it.
and yet gas prices are still climbing...?
movie zombie
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2005
- Messages
- 11,879
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2004
- Messages
- 2,547
OK: today I am scatterbrained and this jumps arround a bit...
There are no simple solutions, and isolated facts by themselves are often misleading.
6.86% profit is normally considered low for certain industries - the fact that this a multibillion dollar per year industry means that the "profit" by itself is a large number.
So what happens to that "profit" Probably about 75% of it will be reinvested into newer (and often more efficient - and/or less poluting) facilities. The remainder will be paid to the shareholders of the companies.
Concerning business practices (wages, bonuses, benifits, services contracted): The practice of mega million dollar a year companies and up are pretty consistent. The oil industry is not an outsider on this. Concerning bonuses paid to work in remote areas: the oil industry has the larges number of employees that qualify for such benifits - but are by no means unique in what is provided to attract workers to that environment.
If anything, the US companies tend to be "cleaner" in some ways than some foreign companies. It used to be standard practice for companies to hire "ladies of the evening" for "entertainment purposes" - or provide "spa services and other things" to gals for such celibrations - and at conferences for visiting clients. This is still very common overseas in other countries. I can remember attending business conferences where I (as a plant superintendent) was offered a variety of meal, drink, and entertainment services (including ladies for the evening - or even to keep her all week if I liked her) by multiple companies who offered materials and services for the type of plant I ran. Vendors who did business with you were not only willing to take you to lunch or dinner when they periodically visited - but to provide in my case female companionship with it (including hotel rooms if needed). By and large - such practices are no longer common in the US.
Concerning alternate energy.... Lots of issues. Brazil has done something unique and will be able to have a long term stable situation only becasue they were able to match crop, climate, and production facilities with massive long term investment for a relatively small population (sugar cane is much more productive than corn).
It would not work here in the US. At best the US will only be able to provide part of the needs this way (and we should do what we can).
I am also aware of on study on building a 200 MW electical plant burning trees that were raised within 50 miles of the plant (the trees would have to be planted 20 years prior to harvest, and then dry for 2 years after harvest). The economincs actually worked out - except for planting all the needed trees every year for 20 years prior to when the plant would come on line.
It is no longer true that ethonal production uses more energy than it producse. The modern processes are more efficient - and do in fact make energy sense to a certain degree.
However, the one of the real fallicies of ethonal production has recently been revealed and the environmentalist are starting to notice. Up to now - ethonal was almost always produced using clean burning natural gas in the production plants: considered almost emmisions free.
However the cost of natural gas has skyrocket in the last several years - and is not going to go down soon - if ever (in large part due to the quantity now being used for electrical generation - there is no longer a "surplus" of natural gas to keep prices down).
Thus, it no longer makes much sense to build a gas fired ethonal plant, escpecially when there is a much cheaper and stead energy source available: coal.
Thus, several of the latest ethonal plants constructed are coal fired and more are under construction... and the emissions from burning the coal for ethonal production is arguably worse than if gasoline did not have 10% ethonal in it at all... (and the corn stalks will not provide enough energy - unlike the sugar cane stalks in brazil). Environmentalist are starting to scream.... and watch it get louder as more and more and more coal fired ethonal plants are built.
Why does the US seem to lag on many issues that other countries adopt. By in large, those other countries do not apply the strict environmental processes and regulations to the facilities. Thus people can relatively easily build them. That does not mean that they cannot be built here - just that it is a much more arduous process and may be significantly more costly.
Currently, US investors want to see a process or technique prefected elsewhere (without "much" polution contols) before they are willing to fund its construction here in the US with the US required polution controls. Thus, you hear of all kinds of things in other countries that are not in the US.
An example of what can go wrong... Many places in the US used to incinerate trash and generate some energy from it (60''s - 70''s). In the vast majority of cases these facilities were shut down by environmental restrictions on air emmisions: It was cheaper to bury the trash intact than to clean up the emmissions; and the investors in some plants lost part of their investment due to the changes in environmental regulations after these plants were built.
If you are an investor with money to spend - with the intent on making money from your investment... It is, within the US, much more atttactive to spend it on a carwash or other things where you do not have to deal with the ardous environmental process (your town needs another new car wash - dosn''t it? - look at all of them that have sprung up in the last decade).
Unfortunatly, the US environmental process - in my opinion - has run amuck. In many cases: 95% of the benifits could be achived with 25 - 35% of the cost and regulatory burden: but activist feel that we must get that last 5% (and I have dealt with water and air emmision permits, PCB''s, and nuclear). The US also regulates things that no one else in the world regulates.
As far as what our real energy options are for the future: I direct you back to what may not be the best organized series of posings in about Dec of 2005 in this forum that I did on energy use. They are long, and I never finished the last section. But if you wonder where wind, oil, gas, nuclear (and nuclear safety), and other forms of energy really fit - there is a wealth of data in those postings. I need a good day or two of dedicated efforts to finish the last section, and then to put together a pared down summary posting. Just not sure when I''ll get there.
Perry
There are no simple solutions, and isolated facts by themselves are often misleading.
6.86% profit is normally considered low for certain industries - the fact that this a multibillion dollar per year industry means that the "profit" by itself is a large number.
So what happens to that "profit" Probably about 75% of it will be reinvested into newer (and often more efficient - and/or less poluting) facilities. The remainder will be paid to the shareholders of the companies.
Concerning business practices (wages, bonuses, benifits, services contracted): The practice of mega million dollar a year companies and up are pretty consistent. The oil industry is not an outsider on this. Concerning bonuses paid to work in remote areas: the oil industry has the larges number of employees that qualify for such benifits - but are by no means unique in what is provided to attract workers to that environment.
If anything, the US companies tend to be "cleaner" in some ways than some foreign companies. It used to be standard practice for companies to hire "ladies of the evening" for "entertainment purposes" - or provide "spa services and other things" to gals for such celibrations - and at conferences for visiting clients. This is still very common overseas in other countries. I can remember attending business conferences where I (as a plant superintendent) was offered a variety of meal, drink, and entertainment services (including ladies for the evening - or even to keep her all week if I liked her) by multiple companies who offered materials and services for the type of plant I ran. Vendors who did business with you were not only willing to take you to lunch or dinner when they periodically visited - but to provide in my case female companionship with it (including hotel rooms if needed). By and large - such practices are no longer common in the US.
Concerning alternate energy.... Lots of issues. Brazil has done something unique and will be able to have a long term stable situation only becasue they were able to match crop, climate, and production facilities with massive long term investment for a relatively small population (sugar cane is much more productive than corn).
It would not work here in the US. At best the US will only be able to provide part of the needs this way (and we should do what we can).
I am also aware of on study on building a 200 MW electical plant burning trees that were raised within 50 miles of the plant (the trees would have to be planted 20 years prior to harvest, and then dry for 2 years after harvest). The economincs actually worked out - except for planting all the needed trees every year for 20 years prior to when the plant would come on line.
It is no longer true that ethonal production uses more energy than it producse. The modern processes are more efficient - and do in fact make energy sense to a certain degree.
However, the one of the real fallicies of ethonal production has recently been revealed and the environmentalist are starting to notice. Up to now - ethonal was almost always produced using clean burning natural gas in the production plants: considered almost emmisions free.
However the cost of natural gas has skyrocket in the last several years - and is not going to go down soon - if ever (in large part due to the quantity now being used for electrical generation - there is no longer a "surplus" of natural gas to keep prices down).
Thus, it no longer makes much sense to build a gas fired ethonal plant, escpecially when there is a much cheaper and stead energy source available: coal.
Thus, several of the latest ethonal plants constructed are coal fired and more are under construction... and the emissions from burning the coal for ethonal production is arguably worse than if gasoline did not have 10% ethonal in it at all... (and the corn stalks will not provide enough energy - unlike the sugar cane stalks in brazil). Environmentalist are starting to scream.... and watch it get louder as more and more and more coal fired ethonal plants are built.
Why does the US seem to lag on many issues that other countries adopt. By in large, those other countries do not apply the strict environmental processes and regulations to the facilities. Thus people can relatively easily build them. That does not mean that they cannot be built here - just that it is a much more arduous process and may be significantly more costly.
Currently, US investors want to see a process or technique prefected elsewhere (without "much" polution contols) before they are willing to fund its construction here in the US with the US required polution controls. Thus, you hear of all kinds of things in other countries that are not in the US.
An example of what can go wrong... Many places in the US used to incinerate trash and generate some energy from it (60''s - 70''s). In the vast majority of cases these facilities were shut down by environmental restrictions on air emmisions: It was cheaper to bury the trash intact than to clean up the emmissions; and the investors in some plants lost part of their investment due to the changes in environmental regulations after these plants were built.
If you are an investor with money to spend - with the intent on making money from your investment... It is, within the US, much more atttactive to spend it on a carwash or other things where you do not have to deal with the ardous environmental process (your town needs another new car wash - dosn''t it? - look at all of them that have sprung up in the last decade).
Unfortunatly, the US environmental process - in my opinion - has run amuck. In many cases: 95% of the benifits could be achived with 25 - 35% of the cost and regulatory burden: but activist feel that we must get that last 5% (and I have dealt with water and air emmision permits, PCB''s, and nuclear). The US also regulates things that no one else in the world regulates.
As far as what our real energy options are for the future: I direct you back to what may not be the best organized series of posings in about Dec of 2005 in this forum that I did on energy use. They are long, and I never finished the last section. But if you wonder where wind, oil, gas, nuclear (and nuclear safety), and other forms of energy really fit - there is a wealth of data in those postings. I need a good day or two of dedicated efforts to finish the last section, and then to put together a pared down summary posting. Just not sure when I''ll get there.
Perry
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2004
- Messages
- 2,547
Here are some links on coal fired ethonal plants:
www.csmonitor.com/2006/0323/p01s01-sten.html
www.greencarcongress.com/2005/11/two_coalfueled_.html
www.news.minnesota.publicradio.org/features/2005/02/16_steilm_coalethanol/
Edited to add:
And; what it took Brazil to get where they are: Not sure that many countries will or can do this.
www.yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6817
Perry
www.csmonitor.com/2006/0323/p01s01-sten.html
www.greencarcongress.com/2005/11/two_coalfueled_.html
www.news.minnesota.publicradio.org/features/2005/02/16_steilm_coalethanol/
Edited to add:
And; what it took Brazil to get where they are: Not sure that many countries will or can do this.
www.yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6817
Perry
Mr Majestyk
Rough_Rock
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2006
- Messages
- 77
Once again, it is NOT the magnitude of the profit, but the %. I made 5K on my 401(k) plan last quarter. What does that tell you? Nothing. If I had 500K in my plan I made 1%, not so good. If I had 50K in my plan I made 10%, not bad. Sure the profit numbers seem high, but they are based on a very high revenue. Also, "profit" is only one measure of a company''s performance. There is the cash flow, debt, and many other factors to consider.
I am not defending the oil companies, but citing $XX billion "profit" means nothing.
The price of gasoline is not determined by the oil companies. Tell China to stop its development and prices will drop with the fall in demand.
The gold mining companies are really jacking up the gold price too. And silver, and platinum, and palladium.
I am not defending the oil companies, but citing $XX billion "profit" means nothing.
The price of gasoline is not determined by the oil companies. Tell China to stop its development and prices will drop with the fall in demand.
The gold mining companies are really jacking up the gold price too. And silver, and platinum, and palladium.
moon river
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2006
- Messages
- 1,806
Mr Majestyk
Rough_Rock
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2006
- Messages
- 77
Actually, the Chinese are a very large part of the equation.
Since you are determined to believe that there is a oil company conspiracy, I see that nothing will change your mind on that. So be it.
"Part of the profit is based on percentages..." All earnings, as in my 401(k) example, are meaningful only when expressed as a percentage. It means nothing to say that a company made $xx, or that you made $xx on your stock fund. What was your return on your investment? How much interest do you pay on your mortgage? It''s the %, not the $$ that matters.
Inventories of many items, especially commodities, change value with the market. How about diamond inventories?
I''ll go with logic. You go with your "scam."
Since you are determined to believe that there is a oil company conspiracy, I see that nothing will change your mind on that. So be it.
"Part of the profit is based on percentages..." All earnings, as in my 401(k) example, are meaningful only when expressed as a percentage. It means nothing to say that a company made $xx, or that you made $xx on your stock fund. What was your return on your investment? How much interest do you pay on your mortgage? It''s the %, not the $$ that matters.
Inventories of many items, especially commodities, change value with the market. How about diamond inventories?
I''ll go with logic. You go with your "scam."
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2005
- Messages
- 19,501
I just sold my Corolla after driving it 7 years and "upgraded" to a Chevy Trailblazer (my DH''s wishes more than mine, unfortunately), but I walk to work and some of the very good money we made off the Corolla, which was paid off, went towards our gas bill, ha ha! We are planning to start a family soon and wanted our new car to be "safer" than my old Corolla. He drives a Dodge Intrepid and his company pays for the car and gas put into it, so our compromise hasn''t shorted us at all. We seldom take long-distance rides in the Trailblazer so I think it will pay off until we get (to my liking) a hybrid, when prices go down (call me a dreamer if you must!)Date: 4/27/2006 4:43:44 PM
Author: ForteKitty
It''s time to sell my Corolla and get rollerblades. Good thing I only live 3.5 miles away from work.
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2004
- Messages
- 2,547
I do admit that it is a cute cartoon:
However, to toss a few more facts into the mix: I just ran a simple calculation of the total amount of profit in a gallon of petrolium product based off of some 2005 monthy production statistics on the DOE website.
Anyway - it shows that the total profit per gallon of oil products (gasoline, diesel, fuel oil, jet fuel, and all other oil products: and gasoline only makes up about 45% of the total).... is in the range of about 20 cents per gallon.
The oil companies have always made a profit on every gallon of oil product - otherwise they would not be in business - or would not have survived in business. I think a little research would show that this profit per gallon is fairly consistent over the years (adjusted for inflation).
Thus, "excess" profit for the US oil companies is not the main reason (if it is part of any reason) that the cost of gasoline is going up so much. At best, you might show that the US oil companies are making an extra penny or two on a gallon of oil product recently (and I''m not sure you would even find that).
Personally, I''ve now done enough digging to conclude that their has not been major price gouging by the US oil companies: The world market for oil drives the prices and the oil producing countries are the ones who really profit from the price increases. The production companies in many foreign countries profits incomes and profits are largly driven by how many gallons of product they produce (with the owning country collecting the lions share of the value of the oil pumped).
Perry
However, to toss a few more facts into the mix: I just ran a simple calculation of the total amount of profit in a gallon of petrolium product based off of some 2005 monthy production statistics on the DOE website.
Anyway - it shows that the total profit per gallon of oil products (gasoline, diesel, fuel oil, jet fuel, and all other oil products: and gasoline only makes up about 45% of the total).... is in the range of about 20 cents per gallon.
The oil companies have always made a profit on every gallon of oil product - otherwise they would not be in business - or would not have survived in business. I think a little research would show that this profit per gallon is fairly consistent over the years (adjusted for inflation).
Thus, "excess" profit for the US oil companies is not the main reason (if it is part of any reason) that the cost of gasoline is going up so much. At best, you might show that the US oil companies are making an extra penny or two on a gallon of oil product recently (and I''m not sure you would even find that).
Personally, I''ve now done enough digging to conclude that their has not been major price gouging by the US oil companies: The world market for oil drives the prices and the oil producing countries are the ones who really profit from the price increases. The production companies in many foreign countries profits incomes and profits are largly driven by how many gallons of product they produce (with the owning country collecting the lions share of the value of the oil pumped).
Perry
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2004
- Messages
- 6,632
Actually Exxon posted 1Q profits of 7%, Conoco 1Q of 13%, and Chevron 1Q profits of 49%.
Those are pretty healthy, esp considering they are increases compared to last year''s record breaking profits. The amount of profit they have made in the 1st 3 months of this year is in the billiions.
As far as why nothing is done about it, that money can buy alot of influence.
movie zombie
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2005
- Messages
- 11,879
Mr Majestyk
Rough_Rock
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2006
- Messages
- 77
"honestly what your view on the issue may be, isn't really important to me in the great scheme of things. "
Well, YOUR view isn't important to ME.
At least we have Perry who deals in facts, not emotions.
" I think their rising profit is obscene given the cost of gas in this country."
This is total nonsense. What profit would you prefer that they make? What % or dollar amount of profit would you deem appropriate and why.
The oil companies do not set the prices, regardless of who is in the White House.
I calculate Exxon Mobil's 2005 profit at about 9.4% (8.4 bil on 89 bil of revenue). Actually, they paid 25 bil in taxes to the Federal Gov't.
Why don't you pick on the price of food, which has increased greater than the price of fuel? Or the price of housing?
Well, YOUR view isn't important to ME.
At least we have Perry who deals in facts, not emotions.
" I think their rising profit is obscene given the cost of gas in this country."
This is total nonsense. What profit would you prefer that they make? What % or dollar amount of profit would you deem appropriate and why.
The oil companies do not set the prices, regardless of who is in the White House.
I calculate Exxon Mobil's 2005 profit at about 9.4% (8.4 bil on 89 bil of revenue). Actually, they paid 25 bil in taxes to the Federal Gov't.
Why don't you pick on the price of food, which has increased greater than the price of fuel? Or the price of housing?
Mr Majestyk
Rough_Rock
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2006
- Messages
- 77
"and you don''t have to spend $$$ to buy influence if you have ''oil people'' in positions of power within the administration......."
And this proves what? It''s just feculent liberal blather. Precisely how does having "oil people" (whatever that means" in the admin affect the price of oil, or anything else? The US Gov''t does not set the price. The market sets the price. You could have Hillary Clintoon as Pres and the price wouldn''t change.
And this proves what? It''s just feculent liberal blather. Precisely how does having "oil people" (whatever that means" in the admin affect the price of oil, or anything else? The US Gov''t does not set the price. The market sets the price. You could have Hillary Clintoon as Pres and the price wouldn''t change.
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2005
- Messages
- 19,501
I agree, Mr. Majestyk, the market does set the price. It''s easy to pick on "oil people" if you are a consumer who listens only to media and doesn''t pay attention to the small stuff.
My husband sells liquid propellants. Those are the chemicals that make your hairspray,cooking spray, whatever sprays, spray. His pricing is directly influenced by the price of oil. When the price of oil goes up, he passes along the extra cost to his customers, who are manufacturers of the above household items (for starters). My point is that gasoline prices are not the only thing affected by the price of oil.
If we were not so reliant on guzzling gas in this country, this issue wouldn''t be such a huge one. Unfortunately no one really wants to make small but meaningful changes in their habits. Instead we would rather sit and point our fingers at the government, and spend time
b*%ching about the price of gas and how it''s causing us to go broke.
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2004
- Messages
- 2,547
Here is a graphic that may help:
Most oil companies make their money from the refining and distribution / marketing. Most crude oil in the world is not owned by the oil companies - but by others. Some of the oil companies have production companies that make a profit from pumping the oil in other countries - and those production cost are a small part of the crude oil price (and the profit from them smaller yet).
State and federal "gas" taxes are the biggest chunk of the price of a gallon of gasoline (or diesel) after the price of the crude oil.
Perry
Most oil companies make their money from the refining and distribution / marketing. Most crude oil in the world is not owned by the oil companies - but by others. Some of the oil companies have production companies that make a profit from pumping the oil in other countries - and those production cost are a small part of the crude oil price (and the profit from them smaller yet).
State and federal "gas" taxes are the biggest chunk of the price of a gallon of gasoline (or diesel) after the price of the crude oil.
Perry
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2004
- Messages
- 2,547
Here is another one that gives you an idea what happens when the price of crude oil goes up - and when refining problems (major shutdowns) affect the cost of refining.
If you look closely at these and the similar chart above you will see that crude oil price is the main driver- as it goes up the share of the other cost go down because they are relatively fixed (the cost of refining, distribution, marketing, and even taxes) is fairly constant.
Perry
If you look closely at these and the similar chart above you will see that crude oil price is the main driver- as it goes up the share of the other cost go down because they are relatively fixed (the cost of refining, distribution, marketing, and even taxes) is fairly constant.
Perry
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2004
- Messages
- 2,547
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2004
- Messages
- 2,547
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2004
- Messages
- 2,547
- Status
Engagement Ring Trends 2025: Styles Set to Shine
Engagement Ring Trends 2025: Styles Set to Shine - 01/15
300x240.png)