The happiest I've been in 2 years!!!!!!!!!!! Now I just need the Coupe done!!! FUCK all the reasons..>BREAK OUT THE 50 GAL DRUMS HAMB RELAY FROM OH...2.25 MY ASS!!! FILL HER UP!
The prices are going down because the BASTARDS in office who condoned the rip-off in the first place are up for re-election this coming NOV. Their thinking (big oil)is if the price of fuel goes down, maybe the voters will go easy on the incumbents. FUCK THAT- PARTY'S OVER, ASSHOLES... Seems they(elected officials) are THE ONLY THING that doesn't effected the price of gasoline. (Sorry for the rant, fellas)
I work at a Dodge dealership, can;t remember when the last Durango was sold. But them stupid lookin runt Aztec clone Calibers are selling as fast as the tires hit the ground off the trailer......
I remember 24.9 cents a gallon and getting a free gift with a fill up. Jam and jellie from a dinky ass company with a wierd name,"Smuckers". I also remember "price wars" and 94 octane REGULAR! 104 octane PREMIUM! I wouldnt really mind paying so much if my daily didnt ping on 92 octane "super" Any other oldsters remember getting S&H green stamps with more than 5 gallons purchase? R.R.
Iraq was not an oil producing country before the war since, oh, say 1991. There has been an oil embargo on Iraq since the GW1. The very minimal "oil for food" production was tokenistic. Iraq is producing about 5 times the oil it did during the embargo. The primary obstacle to it producing more is the state of infrastructure there - Saddam did not maintain his pumping stations, pipelines, or anything else. (and why would he with an embargo that lasted almost 15 years) You have to define stable before you can make your second claim. If you mean daily bloodshed due to sectarian violence has increased, I think you'll find it hasn't really gone up much, but the media reporting it has. If you mean unstable because there is an occupying force, I think you will find that we have actually stabilized the region in general - Iraq no longer is a threat & Iran wouldn't consider invading them since we're there (which was always a concern before). If you believe that oil is traded as a market commodity & simple market factors such as supply & demand affect the price, you are only minimally correct & mainly delusional. If you believe politicians control the price of oil, you're only partially right & indirectly. The monopoly known as OPEC controls the price of oil - for the most part - the US government has a major influence. The US Government, not necessarily the politician(s) in office at the time, through the State Department, affects the world-wide price of oil moreso than even OPEC. As the largest consumer of oil, the US dangles it's purchasing power in front of countries as a carrot in exchange for political (large-scale strategic - not election-style) concessions. For example, "if you let us build a base in your country, we will buy 20% of our oil from you for the next 10 years." (notional example). That's why when you look at where we get the majority of our oil & then look at that through history, you will find, at various times, we imported most of our oil from any number of seemingly random countries - not the ones most friendly to us, not the ones with the most reserves, not the ones with the easiest to refine, but the ones we wanted to influence at the time. The fact is, we could supply all of our own oil, but we don't. We also sell oil as a political tool. The overwhelming majority of oil coming out of Alaska goes to Russia (even during the cold war!), Japan, & other East Asian countries. We drill & cap; we pump only enough to keep a well viable & pay for it's maintenance. The Alaskan pipeline runs at less than 30% capacity - not for want of oil in the ground, rather, that's the minimal capacity to keep it viable. Someone mentioned the pipeline being shut down - shouldn't affect the price at all, yet may be used as an excuse to raise some prices. Oil is a political tool on a scale the individual politicians cannot completely control. Until oil is traded on the open market as a true commodity, without political or cartel manipulation, you (we) will pay whatever price it is or drive something that doesn't use it.
We'll a few things, Flat Ernie. First, thanks for reading my post(s). I'm guessing you're one of a select few. Second, I'm guessing we both agree this isn't a place for political debate. To be honest, I kinda felt guilty about posting my original posts on here, but I don't know, I like informed comment, and was making my best attempt at doing so. So go ahead and respond to what I said on the board if you want, and if you wish to debate this further, we can do so through PMs. I actually would prefer public posts but don't think Ryan would appreciate it. And just to let you know, I'm looking at this more as a conversation than a debate. I value hearing people's thoughts and opinions and learning from them a whole lot more than I value being right. So let us begin... Flat Ernie]Iraq was not an oil producing country before the war since, oh, say 1991. There has been an oil embargo on Iraq since the GW1. The very minimal "oil for food" production was tokenistic. Iraq is producing about 5 times the oil it did during the embargo. The primary obstacle to it producing more is the state of infrastructure there - Saddam did not maintain his pumping stations, pipelines, or anything else. (and why would he with an embargo that lasted almost 15 years)) 2002 oil production was at about 2.5 million barrels a day last I heard. Haven't been following this, but I strongly doubt it is not less today, and it certainly is not at 10 million barrels a day. But I did overstate my point on that one. As far as infrastructure, it clearly is crappy and out of date. However, I'd say the main obstacle is creating a safe enough environment for infrastructure to be repaired, constructed, and allowed to exist for more than a few days or a few months without the threat of being blown up. (You have to define stable before you can make your second claim. If you mean daily bloodshed due to sectarian violence has increased, I think you'll find it hasn't really gone up much, but the media reporting it has. If you mean unstable because there is an occupying force, I think you will find that we have actually stabilized the region in general - Iraq no longer is a threat & Iran wouldn't consider invading them since we're there (which was always a concern before). ) Stable as in regional stability. Here, I couldn't disagree with you more. Same goes for your claims about sectarian violence. See Turkey and Kurdistan. See Iran nuclear situation. See Iran as regional power, they don't have to invade Iraq because they already exert control over it. See Iraq civil war. See al-qaeda in Iraq. See Saudi Arabia's increasing investments in security forces...but why? See a strong shiite influence in a sunni dominated region. Don't blame this on the media. This is the consensus of non-partisan experts from the likes of government, academia, and military. I will not debate this. Argument has been made that Iraqi civil war is the best case scenario in terms of regional stability. Great, still not as stable as pre-invasion. (If you believe politicians control the price of oil, you're only partially right & indirectly. The monopoly known as OPEC controls the price of oil - for the most part - the US government has a major influence.) I agree I am partially right, which is what I thought I said in my post(s). Through diplomacy ("turn up the spigot" which happens to address supply not price, but does not necessarily have to be the case), and yes diplomacy is largely conducted by the state department. But I was also saying that because demand has met supply (or more explicitly, current production capacity), the U.S. government's influence has been dramatically marginalized. Countries can shop their oil around because everybody wants to buy it. It's a sellers market. And as I stated in my post, a major incentive for countries like Saudi Arabia to reign in OPEC has been reduced because high oil prices haven't had the detrimental effects on the global economy that most economists estimated. Likewise, because of increased demand, they do not have the production capacity to flood the market. Building production capacity is not something that just happens either, it takes years and is now underway around the world. So in how the market works, I don't know if we're that much in disagreement. But as I see it, supply and demand still comes into play, just in a variety of ways. The main point of my posts I guess was to explain that real factors do affect oil prices, not just elections, the free market, and opaque conspiratorial forces, which I think we would both agree with. (If you believe that oil is traded as a market commodity & simple market factors such as supply & demand affect the price, you are only minimally correct & mainly delusional.) Also, last time I checked, oil was traded on the open market in commodities exchanges all over the world. When we hear about the price of oil, it's always open market prices, "west texas crude hit $7? a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange." These prices are affected by world events, hurricane, pipeline problems, etc., as well as consumption concerns: ''Demand for gasoline dropped x% this month", and fed reserve reports about the state of the economy. Traders on these exchanges also have been driving up prices. Again, not saying this is all there is to it, and that the open market is all that defines prices, but it was exactly this type of information, a report on what oil is trading on the open market, that started this thread. And if you go and look at gas prices there's even more factors that contribute to price like transport, processing, and retail margins. (The US Government, not necessarily the politician(s) in office at the time, through the State Department, affects the world-wide price of oil more so than even OPEC.) And how do OPEC countries feel about the current administration? Why is everybody in the state department resigning? How do OPEC countries feel about China? (As the largest consumer of oil, the US dangles it's purchasing power in front of countries as a carrot in exchange for political (large-scale strategic - not election-style) concessions. For example, "if you let us build a base in your country, we will buy 20% of our oil from you for the next 10 years." (notional example). That's why when you look at where we get the majority of our oil & then look at that through history, you will find, at various times, we imported most of our oil from any number of seemingly random countries - not the ones most friendly to us, not the ones with the most reserves, not the ones with the easiest to refine, but the ones we wanted to influence at the time.) Like Mexico, Canada, and South America. Might it be that they are the closest and therefore the cheapest to bring to market? Doesn't seem that random to me with the costs of transport. And also, I'll reiterate again, with demand and production capacity as they are, the U.S.'s leverage with producers has greatly diminished. With China courting OPEC countries with no strings attached contracts, the US's relationships aren't so cozy anymore. Also, due to things like world opinion of US foreign policy, the U.S.'s bargaining power is not as strong. A lot of countries would rather deal with Asia than the U.S. In many OPEC countries, with a better-informed public than ten years ago, the U.S. has become too much of a political liability. (The fact is, we could supply all of our own oil, but we don't. We also sell oil as a political tool. The overwhelming majority of oil coming out of Alaska goes to Russia (even during the cold war!), Japan, & other East Asian countries. We drill & cap; we pump only enough to keep a well viable & pay for it's maintenance. The Alaskan pipeline runs at less than 30% capacity - not for want of oil in the ground, rather, that's the minimal capacity to keep it viable. Someone mentioned the pipeline being shut down - shouldn't affect the price at all, yet may be used as an excuse to raise some prices.) The fact is, in ground supply and production capacity are two different things. No question the U.S. could use only domestic oil sources if developed properly, but for how long? And how much infrastructure would we have to build? Strategically, it makes more sense for the U.S. to save its oil. And American as companies are businesses, they also have incentive not to overbuild capacity. Remember just a couple of years ago with the collapse of the Asian economy--Demand Again--oil was at the lowest it had ever been. (Oil is a political tool on a scale the individual politicians cannot completely control. Until oil is traded on the open market as a true commodity, without political or cartel manipulation, you (we) will pay whatever price it is or drive something that doesn't use it.[/quote]) Agreed. Not everybody has oil, and countries that do can feel free to manipulate cost, so long as demand shows no sign of decreasing. The closer demand is to production capacity, the less political leverage a buyer has and the more they have to pay. likewise, things that affect supply and demand like hurricanes, terrorist attacks, and worries of a recession will affect the price of oil. Cheers.
You should try living with UK gas prices, currently around £0.96 / litre, or in your terms $8.10 a gallon equivalent, it really hurts your pocket when your ride only gets 15mpg ! That's why we have normal itty-bitty cars that will get 45mpg!!!!! Never mind, we make sacrifices to be able to run our rods and customs
Gas itself costs the same in Europe. Blame the cost to the consumer on the HIGH taxes y'all pay. Tell your politicians to stop the outrageous taxation. I hope prices come down, I love cheap gas. I don't drink or do drugs, all I am left with is horsepower.... regards, DJ
While we're looking for price setting conspiracies how 'bout finding out who made a $80K house circa 2000 cost $150K today (in Arkansas)? Why do houses cost more in California? There's another story of secret manipulation I'll bet. And who dictated that old cars will continually cost more? When I was a kid high school boys butchered '57 chevys just for fun 'cause they were cheap. When you find out where the conspiracy to raise car prices meets, let me know! I'll be there with a big stick. In the meanwhile I'll enjoy a little break on the gas prices 'cause I hate high prices just as much as the next guy.
it is crazy....... I was paying 3.00+ a gallon in Utah and Colorado. thankfully my scoot gets fairly good fuel mileage at high speeds.
Just paid 2.29 for a fill up. "Summer Driving Season" MY ASS !! some Louisiana refineries probably just came back on line.
Currently $6.10 for a US gallon here for regular (95 octane). There is a garage in the next town that sells 102 octane, £2.40 a litre ( nearly $16 for a US gallon ! ). Someone says above why hasn't anyone made a new fuel yet if we can build bombs to destroy the world, simple - money. Our fuel tax is something like 88%, so the government have no interest in helping to develop new fuels. The petrol companies still make billions, so they have no interest in it. Its just like smoking - the government tax it to try and promote healthly living etc but in reality they dont want everyone to give up - the tax pays for our health service/other government spending. I should add I'm a non smoker. The UK motorist gets the rough end of the stick, not only do we pay that for fuel we have to pay Vehicle Excise Duty ( upto £210, $365 ) every year for each vehicle. Now they are talking about charging per mile via GPS and a black box in your car, prices of $3 per mile on motorways (freeways) and 90c per mile for other roads. We also pay £30-45 a year for an MOT ( roadworthiness check ) - if it fails you can't drive it legally from that point on. This week one of the big insurers announced that they were upping prices by up to 40%! you guys have got it good!
Crafty, you're a bit low - cheapest I can find petrol locally is about £.99/l - 3.78l/US gallon = £3.74 @ $1.90/£1 = $7.10/US gallon!! That 102 octane stuff is about $17.25/US gallon - more expensive than CAM2 or any of the other racing gas over there!
ernie...I paid 91p a litre yesterday!!!!! To equate that to the colonials we are still paying $7 a gal diesel is around 96p so $7.50 a gal....may be a bit OT but a mate has a TDI VWGolf, it's chipped up to 230bhp (from a diesel Golf!) and he runs it on used vegatable oil...OK it smells like sumats cooking when he goes past but it's real cheap for a daily!
ernie, prices here on the south coast range from 91.9 - 93.9 for reg. Its still too much tho Far as diesel is concerned Im getting 30-34mpg (UK gallon) from my daily, so what with diesel costing more I think it pretty much eats up the mpg benefit I'd get.
Haha, that's so rad. Mystery! That hurts to hear how high it is over there? It's always been significantly higher than we have state side though correct?
I think it all comes from be'ing allowed to play liar's poker with the fuel. In other places the price doesn't change much, because the goverment just doubles or triples it. I work in NYC and sometimes get to watch the fuel barges scoot around. When the price is right the barges skitter the fuel off the tankers fast. When the price goes wrong the barges anchor. Then it's who moves next, the tanker cut the price or the barges take what you can get.
Check this site: http://www.gasbuddy.com/gb_gastemperaturemap.aspx Looks like Iowa, Missouri, & South Carolina are lowest overall... Much greener this week than last...
So, who is he debating? My twisted theories are all over the place but it seems the reality is more what you and your friendly opponent are discussing. No matter what, I too will enjoy the lower prices. I used my Speedy rewards coupon last week and paid 2.13/gal for reg. Got enough points for another coupon and will save that one for snowmobile season. That season is ALL about fuel for the sleds and the transports.
The Jalopy Journal
