Read this for the truth.

http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/tic...416&ID=5644691

 

Ok, I'll bite. The FedGov takes more in taxes than these big oil Cos make as profit.

Tell CitgoExxonMobil to put their gas on the market at $1.50... pick a price. People will be lined up around the block, right? Then there is no more gas. Sold out. Now what? Go next door to FlakeAwakeGas. Theirs is next in price at $1.89. They sell out. Same thing over and over til you get to StickItToEm, where gas is $3.65. They do their name thing until CitgoExxonMobil gets their next shipment in. What's it all mean?
People will try to maximize their value, within limits. Get the most for their buck. If you put your product on the market at a lower price, you will make less, and you will sell out, all things being equal. The demand is there, no matter what the price, and these guys know that the wells they have today will have to be replaced with the wells of tomorrow.. that are deeper down, under more rock or water, or colder or hotter, doesn't matter. If they sell to you at cheapest price, they won't have the $$ to go get the next tanker load. Who wins then?

I for one find it ridiculous that people gripe about fuel prices when they pay more for bottled water. I am happy that I can get gas at a price way less than france and england. Would I like cheaper fuel? Sure. We are in the process, slightly, of changing our energy supply. Dipping our toes, you might say. The 'enviro' hybrids don't pay off until after 100,000 miles, and, to me, are more of a gimmick, as a non-hybrid Honda can get better mileage on a trip than the hybrid. Electric cars just tranfer the emission load (plus conversion loss load) to the power grid. Solar cars would have to have sails to have enough area to supply power. I don't know of wind powered cars, but if they exist, they'd be rather cantankerous on breezy days, and useless on calm ones.
My basic answer is that people use too much fuel, for the most part. They don't think anything of hopping in their car for frivilous trips, only to repeat the same trip the same day. (I forgot the ToastyOhs when I went to get milk). They use the wrong vehicle, they bought because it was beyootiful and kool, instead of one that fits their needs. SUV's are nothing but gussied up station wagons, that seem to eat a lot of fuel. Who uses their 4WD more than a few times a year, but carry all that mass around full-time? People just don't, apparently, think ahead. The Ford Co of today cannot dictate that we buy the right car for our needs, and cannot sell the cars that will improve fuel economy. People won't buy them until they feel the pinch.
That will not change until fuel price wakes them up a little. Car pooling is not a panacea, but it sure can save a lot of gas. Four day work weeks would cut commuter fuel consumption by 20% overnight.
The more we use, the more we bankroll those that wish to destroy or dominate our society. /rant off
tom

 

SUVs don't have to suck gas like some do. Why doen't GM put the Duramaxx in the 3/4 ton Suburban? Why did Ford cancel the Excursion, the only diesel SUV they had? My excursion gets 21 mpg on the interstate, but I had to buy an overdrive Gear vendor to do that, So why can't ford put a double over drive on a diesel Excursion and make it get 21 mpg? It wouldn't cost that much more.

 

Take a look at what Ford offers in other countries. In Mexico, you can get a diesel Ranger. You can even get it as a chassis cab with a payload higher than a 2wd F150. In England, you can get a diesel powered Fusion that gets roughly 60-70 mpg.
Our automakers have the technology available. They just choose no to make it available to everyone. Take for instance my Metro, it gets 35-40mpg with a 3spd auto trans. Why couldnt it have a 4spd trans like most cars? A 4th gear would probably gain me another 10-15mpg.


Stryder

 

The supply and demand thing works great, assuming you have honest companies that dont control the market. I think the "lets hold back a little bit and raise the price" mentality has taken over. I think the word for it, is, oh, what was it... Collusion!

To keep it at least partially FE related:

I'd like to see a high compression E85 burning FE. I mean, the stuff is 105 octane.

 

what is E85?

 

85% ethanol / 15% gas mix.

 

You sir can't count worth crap. Bigger profits, percentage wise and dollar wise than ever in history and multi-million dollar retirement deals. It isn't just government by a long stretch. BTW, government gets the sme number of dollars per gallon regardless of the price of a gallon. You don't seem to want to blame the real bad guys, just the elected (who we allow to cheat us) ones.

 

Bear,
Two things. 1)I can count. 2)given the number of gallons purchased DAILY, this guy got maybe .00001 per gallon of a days sales for retirement. big whoop. 3) yes, the govt gets the same, but it is more TAX than PROFIT per gallon. What part don't you get about that?

If you sold bread for $1 per loaf, and had a profit of 10 cents per loaf, wouldn't it be a little unsettling if the govt took 25 cents (numbers just for example), and made more money than YOU did, when you did all the work? I know I'd be out of the bread business, and into the Govt business as quick as I could.

Again, supply and demand are the rules of the road. They can't charge more than people will pay. Some people just don't give a flip, and will pay $3 per gallon with not a whimper. Others will not. If GetYourBucks Oil co charges $10 per gallon no one will buy UNTIL everyone else is at that price. Collusion is not legal. Especially in price setting. Or so I hear. Airlines are awfully close on their fares. Is that collusion also, or is the cost of doing business just about the same for almost every airline?
I could go on, but am done now.

/rant Way off.

tom

 

I guess a $98 million dollar retire package isn't out of line then, at least according to your standards. Jeez this ***** of claiming he was responsible for so much, Yeah he was responsible for cheating everyone. Big oil claims they need all this money for new exploration and development. Seems to me that a $98 million pay off is just an example of Big Oil's distorted view of what is right. I wonder what all that money is gonna do for them oil guys when the economy fails and it turns into the survival of the fittest. I will bet my skills trump all his dollars.

 

For the record, there's plenty of things that aren't legal and are still happening. Collusion by the oil companies is only one of them. It's not just simple price setting either. It goes quite a ways beyond that...

 

Bear, to clear up one of your comments, not to argue, but... here on Long Island, our counties' gas tax is percentage based, so they DO make more taxes when the price goes up. But that's only 3-4% tax or so, so at $3/gal, you're talking at most, 12 cents. There are also state/local taxes, but I think they are set-price, not %

I was wondering the other day, if I could find enough information, how much of the price you pay at the pump is the oil company's profits? As in, find the number of gallons of gas they sold for that whopping huge $10B profit (Exxon?) or so last quarter of 2005.

What's funny is every time the news media announces prices are going up, people run out and buy gas before it goes up. Thereby driving the price up faster because demand has gone up. I even did it last week - filled up the Superduty with the credit card before the price went way up.

In a way, there is some twisted logic to raising prices before the supply gets short. It stops people from buying too much gas so there is never such a shortage you have people lining up in their cars the night before a delivery.

I think we need a Ralph Nader-type to go after the oil companies and publicize everything that's going on with the prices fluctuating so much.

Come on, $3/gal again? It was down to 2.25 or so here on LI over the winter. That's a 33% climb in price.

But again, it can be excused by saying that's the only way to get people to cut back enough to keep the '70's-style "no more gas" signs from showing up again.

Maybe we should have ration cards again

 

tomw -- I find your logic to be somewhat flawed. "They can't charge more than people will pay". Some will pay...some will not pay. Humm...

Actually, YES they can charge MORE. If it were some other consumable product, I might agree. However, fuel to most is a NESSESITY. And we will pay what ever the price is. Or we all start walking again...take a bike...or horse it. Oh, we will not be able to take the local transit either...as those prices will get very high. The number of buses running will be cut to save costs. More people needing a ride...will need to walk. Inner Cities will suffer the most. Like usual.

Speaking of water, how about we charge you more now. It took more money to transport the water to the store. Now we all pay more. Clothes, food, etc...etc...etc. IT WILL ALL GO UP!!!

The trucker is not going to absorb the cost of higher fuel. He passes that cost on to the consumer. You and I will pay more...for everything...not just the fuel to power our vehicles.

Look at the BIG picture...not just filling your own tank. YES...we will pay what ever the price is...because it is a necessity.

WHY...WHY...WHY...are the oil companies not building more refineries here in the US??? They claim it will cost too much...and they need the GOVT to help with those costs. They also claim that the EPA is what is making the cost of those refineries out of reach. If we had more refineries, then we would not be at the current 98-100% refine capacity. Right?

These questions are not solely directed at you tomw, but for all us FTE folks reading...and might be in the "KNOW".

biz
_______________________________
1976 F150 LWB 390FE NP435 NP205 4x4 3.50s

 

ok, lets clear some things up. Yes the oil co. are making more money, but that's at least partially b/c 1.)the dynamic has changed. The U.S. as a Consumer used to be able to go to different oil co. and say, oh you're 3c cheaper, we'll go there. There are less big oil companies, so we can now do less of that.
2.) we drive big, gas hogging cars. The Suv is a waste of time, the minivan is twice as efficient and noone wants one. When we buy a car that actually was meant for commuting, we won't feel the pinch so bad. I liken this to the 70's gas crisis, at least partially.
3.) We are competing with china for gas now. Before we didn't have to. And they got a loooooooot of people that could potentially want some gas to burn.

4.) the solution is to burn less gas, and use the new gasohol more. We're paying farmers not to grow crops now, so we have at least some capacity to supplement our oil supply. Using commuter cars to commute in is another great idea. Not the truck or suv. Hydrogen is like electric, putting the strain on the power grid to split water to make hydrogen or to charge up the electric cars. In short, we gotta do what we did in the late 70's and 80's, buy a little car and drive it less.

I don't see gas going down significantly over the next few years. Maybe in another ten, but don't hold your breath. More likely to get up to 5 bucks a gallon and stay there.

 

I'll take that bet. Being as they ALREADY have the $98 million, your skills would have to go a looooooong way to trump that.