What insight!
When asked what we can do about the price of oil and gas...
"Americans can step up by slowing down to less than 60 miles an hour, tune up the cars, replace the air filters, can improve your fuel efficiency by anywhere from 15 [percent] to 20 percent," Frist said.

Problem is when I slow down to 60 mph, it seems I am going so slow I could run faster. More gas for more go!

Democrats Have a Plan to Lower Gas Prices,
While Still Protecting the Environment


IN THE SHORT-TERM:


1. Bush Should Immediately Release Oil from America's Strategic Petroleum Reserve. To lower gas prices, Bush should release oil from America's Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) to help provide immediate relief for consumers. SPR releases have been used in the past—as recently as 2000—to help stabilize oil prices, and it will be necessary at times to release oil from the reserve to help take the burden off consumers. [http://reid.senate.gov/energy/index.cfm#gas; www.house.gov/markey/Issues/iss_energy_ltr041029.pdf (http://www.house.gov/markey/Issues/iss_energy_ltr041029.pdf)]

From what I've been told, this will be used up in 3 weeks. It's at most, a speedbump.
And it didn't help during Katrina:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9141205/


2. Bush Should Work With OPEC to Expand the Oil Supply. Bush must work with Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries—particularly Saudi Arabia—to expand the global supply of oil. [http://reid.senate.gov/energy/index.cfm#gas; http://www.house.gov/markey/Issues/iss_energy_st040510.pdf]

According to OPEC, there is Plenty of Crude:
http://www.opec.org/opecna/Speeches/2006/Paris.htm

What we need are more refineries in the US:
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=12227



3. The FTC Should Investigate Any Possible Market Manipulation. Oil companies are experiencing record profits even as gas prices continue to rise. It is essential that the Federal Trade Commission vigorously investigate the sharp rises in Nevada gas prices the past three years for any possible market manipulation. So far, the FTC has refused to launch a formal investigation into this matter. [http://reid.senate.gov/energy/index.cfm#gas; WP, 4/19/05; www.house.gov/markey/Issues/iss_energy_ltr041029.pdf (http://www.house.gov/markey/Issues/iss_energy_ltr041029.pdf)]

Looks like profits ARE up, but profit margins aren't:
http://www.conocophillips.com/newsroom/other_resources/energyanswers/oil_profits.htm




IN THE LONG-TERM:

1. Develop a Comprehensive Energy Plan to Develop Alternative Energies. High gas prices highlight the need to develop a national energy plan that reduces dependence on foreign oil. The U.S. should develop alternative and renewable fuel sources to help achieve greater energy independence, bolster national security, protect our environment, and create jobs—while also providing a steady, reliable supply of energy for consumers. Bush should support research and development of alternative fuels, particularly hydrogen fuel cell technology, which offers tremendous potential to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and reduce global warming and other environmental challenges. [http://reid.senate.gov/energy/index.cfm#gas]


Looks like he's doing just that:
http://www.energy.gov/news/3261.htm


2. Improve Fuel Economy Standards, Rather Than Drill for More Oil. Any plan to provide national energy security must include better efficiency and conservation. Conserving energy will reduce dependence on foreign oil, protect the environment, and strengthen the economy. Raising fuel efficiency standards will result in substantial savings at the pump for consumers and move our country closer to energy independence. If all cars, trucks and sport utility vehicles had a fuel efficiency standard of 27.5 miles per gallon, the nation would save more oil in three years than could be recovered economically from the entire Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. [http://reid.senate.gov/energy/index.cfm#gas]

He tried that tactic, with little success. Thanks Congress.

http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/mar2006/2006-03-30-02.asp


3. Increase Energy Conservation Efforts. Buildings and homes accounted for 35 percent of the $250 billion Americans spent on energy last year. Congress should pass the High-Performance Green Building Act to promote the development and construction of environmentally friendly federal buildings and schools, also known as "Green Buildings." Incorporating energy efficiency, waste reduction, and other design features that improve building and worker performance, green buildings improve the health of their occupants, protect natural resources, and will save our nation billions of dollars in energy and other costs. [http://reid.senate.gov/energy/index.cfm#gas]

Looks like he has a plan for that too, but who would know?

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/06/20010628-19.html

Look Ma! No Neal Boortz!

Now that was a well thought out post Sixee.

Good info, but as you can see even here you're not going to change anyones mindset.

Fandros

Sorry, Sixee...If I read all that, followed all those links, I might forget where I started and nobody'd ever see me again. :(

Can I get the Cliff Notes version, please? Pretty please? :)

The short version is, even when Bush does what the Democrats want, he's still wrong in their eyes.
And you are right, no matter what I post, I'll still be undereducated, misinformed, brainwashed, et al.
Now I'm just waiting for the personal attacks to begin.

If it weren't for $3 / gallon gas, we'd be hearing about all the homeless on the street since W came to town.

http://www.forbes.com/home/columnists/2006/04/20/energy-costs-gasoline_cx_ns_0420schulz.html

But what's more interesting about these stories is what they don't tell you. For example, the Associated Press reports that "surveys indicate drivers won't be easing off on their mileage, using even more gas than a year ago." Now why is that? If prices are rising, one would expect consumers would use less.

The answer might be in some of the long-term trends that the short-term media lens is too cramped to see. Energy prices may be rising, but energy itself is much less important to consumers and to the overall economy than it once was.

According to the Bureau of Economic Affairs ( see chart here), American consumer spending on energy as a fraction of total personal consumption has declined considerably since 1980. Whereas 25 years ago, one in every ten consumer dollars was spent on energy, today it's one in every 16. In other words, what it takes to heat and cool our homes and drive to and from our jobs and vacation destinations is relatively less costly than it was then.

This goes a long way toward explaining why even when gas prices rise this summer--higher than they were throughout the 1990s--people will still be driving more; it's much more of a value than it was a generation ago.

And after inflation, gas is higher, but not the "highest ever"

http://www.randomuseless.info/gasprice/gasprice.png

Supply and demand. Don't they teach this in high school?

Interesting how that adjusted price curve matches the inverse of the peak oil supply bell curve, isn't it?

http://www.cera.com/news/details/1,,8054,00.html

From what I've been told, this will be used up in 3 weeks. It's at most, a speedbump.

Agreed...not going to do much.

What we need are more refineries in the US:

Yes..and?

Looks like profits ARE up, but profit margins aren't:

You like to harp on this, but in a time where most of us are suffering under clsoe to stiffling energy costs:


Monday Exxon Mobil (http://money.cnn.com/quote/quote.html?symb=XOM) (Research (http://cnnfn.investor.reuters.com/Reports.aspx?ticker=XOM)) reported that it had earned $36.1 billion in 2005, the largest corporate profit (http://money.cnn.com/2006/01/30/news/companies/exxon_earns/index.htm) in U.S. history.

Fourth-quarter earnings are running ahead of third-quarter levels, and analysts forecast that 2006 oil earnings will be 15 percent ahead of 2005 levels.

...and the Exxon CEO retires with $444 million dollars...nothing but corporate fucking greed. They benefit from increased revenue when the price shoots through the roof....the masses suffer. ...and they pad their earning by rasing prices before demand increases then not lowering them after demand is lower in the summer months.

Looks like he's doing just that:

BULLSHIT....4 years into his abuse of this country he pays lip service to alternate energy. He came to Colorado as a political grand stand to show support for NREL after his budget cuts caused them to lay off people.

http://cbs4denver.com/topstories/local_story_050205319.html

Thanks Congress.

...and what party controls that body?

Looks like he has a plan for that too, but who would know?

His plan, cut taxes for the rich, increase spending on the military industrial complex, sell of public lands and cut enviornmental protections while increasing national debt to an all time high. Meanwhile....

The Bush administration has endorsed a Senate plan to close the Boston regional office of the US Department of Energy, which distributed tens of millions of dollars last year to help low-income New Englanders make their homes more energy-efficient.

..and don't forget the budget cuts to NREL, that is, of course, until he could make a politcal statement visiting there.

But what's more interesting about these stories is what they don't tell you. For example, the Associated Press reports that "surveys indicate drivers won't be easing off on their mileage, using even more gas than a year ago." Now why is that? If prices are rising, one would expect consumers would use less.
Do gas' consumers have a choice?

I wonder what Chuck Norris would say?

Chuck Norris does not need Gasoline.
He merely gets in the automobile, and through the sheer force of his will, causes the planet roll underneath the wheels. It just looks like the car is moving to us mere mortals.

Do gas' consumers have a choice? I don't think "big oil" has deployed their mind-control devices... yet.

Buy a Prius or other more efficient car, move closer to work, car pool, ... yes we do choice.

Buy a Prius or other more efficient car

For a person to be in a better economical state if they bought a Prius over a Civic, based upon the price differances of both cars, gas would have to approach $9.00 a gallon based upon driving 10,000 miles a year for 5 years. Hybrid technology is still not very viable as a tool for saving money over a traditional combustion engine given vehicles of the same size and basic engine size as well.

Move close to work/school.

Ride a bike/mass commute/walk.

We have options other than hybrid, folks need to get back to the simple!!

Hell buy a damn horse and let it graze on the yard...no more mowing!!!


Fandros

Move close to work/school.

If the whole goal is to save money and not conservation efforts, how's this going to help? Moving is EXPENSIVE. Selling a house and buying another is EXPENSIVE. Closing costs, moving costs, storage costs, etc.

Ride a bike/mass commute/walk.

Riding a bike might be feasible depending on distance and climate. Mass commuting might be an option depeding on whether a person lives in a city with a good mass transit system. Walking to work, in a country that's as laid out as the US, come on.

We have options other than hybrid, folks need to get back to the simple!!

Yes there are options, many may or may not be feasible given each individual's circumstances. The economy of this country has pushed us away from the simple though over the last 100 years with suburbs, suburbs to the suburbs, computers, etc.

Hell buy a damn horse and let it graze on the yard...no more mowing!!!

While I know this is a joke, most horses can't sustain themselves on simply grazing, unless you want the person to ride a cow to work. Let alone most city ordenances won't permit grazing animals within city limits, most require horses to be properly boarded.

Yeah it's a joke Tale...I should've said goat, it can survive on grazing and supplment that with what you don't use on your compost pile!!!

I agree with you 100% about the suburbia spread causing inherant commute problems. Coming from this old country boy and now forced to live in the city I'm fullly aware of how tough it is to really implement truly old school conservation techiniques.

Most of my post was made tongue in cheek. Even here in Utah where we're going to a light rail system to run the entirety of the Wasatch Front there are problems with it being...helpful to the average joe.

Fandros

yeah they are supposed to be putting a light rail line in here in Columbus, but the big problem is, it won't be in til like 2015 at the earliest. I think they said they were going to start it in 2009.

If the whole goal is to save money and not conservation efforts, how's this going to help? Moving is EXPENSIVE. Selling a house and buying another is EXPENSIVE. Closing costs, moving costs, storage costs, etc.



Riding a bike might be feasible depending on distance and climate. Mass commuting might be an option depeding on whether a person lives in a city with a good mass transit system. Walking to work, in a country that's as laid out as the US, come on.



Yes there are options, many may or may not be feasible given each individual's circumstances. The economy of this country has pushed us away from the simple though over the last 100 years with suburbs, suburbs to the suburbs, computers, etc.



While I know this is a joke, most horses can't sustain themselves on simply grazing, unless you want the person to ride a cow to work. Let alone most city ordenances won't permit grazing animals within city limits, most require horses to be properly boarded.


Wow....just.......wow....
:o

wow just wow what? what was i wrong about there? You quote my whole post without adding a thing, what was the benefit to that?

Riding a goat, hmmm... :p

that would make a beautiful video to put in our funny forum.

Very good read...

http://www.reason.com/0605/fe.rb.peak.shtml

Despite the recent jump in oil prices, the world’s economy has not slowed down. Why not? Goldman Sachs notes that oil is less important than it was a generation ago. At the height of the Iranian oil crisis in 1980–81, paying for gasoline took up 4.5 percent of U.S. GDP and 7.2 percent of U.S. consumer expenditures. In 2005, even though U.S. gas prices peaked at $3.07 per gallon after Hurricane Katrina, only 2.6 percent of GDP went to pay for gas and consumers spent only 3.7 percent of their incomes to fuel their cars and SUVs. Goldman Sachs believes gasoline prices would need to exceed $4 per gallon before consumers really started to cut back.

Pretty much what I posted earlier too. Perhaps moving from a industrial to a service oriented economy is better afterall :P

The short version is, even when Bush does what the Democrats want, he's still wrong in their eyes.
And you are right, no matter what I post, I'll still be undereducated, misinformed, brainwashed, et al.
Now I'm just waiting for the personal attacks to begin.

OH! I love personal attacks! DAMN LIBERAL COMMIES! hows that? Not you of course though. No, you see things correctly or...right....:D

Goldman Sachs believes gasoline prices would need to exceed $4 per gallon before consumers really started to cut back.
Which is why they will rise to 3.99

http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/06.04.25.GasFumes-X.gif

If it were the guy pumping the gas at the local station determining price, then yea.... good analogy.

It isnt however.

You go down a street and every single gas station has gas within 2 cents a gallon of each other. Prices move up and down in uniform precision. I passed a gas station the other day with gas at one price at about 2pm, I come back and the guy is increasing the price. Why? Same gas in his tanks. The reason? The gas isnt his. He has to adjust to price to the market because until we buy it and put it in our cars, the price is in constant flux.
There are no coupons or buy one get one free sales. Nor can people choose to go without gas. We are held hostage to the need for gas and oil. Fuel is not something that should be listed on the open market like goods or services. It should have the same limitations and restrictions as all other things that we as people are dependant upon. Health Care, insurance, Electricity, Railroads....
A neutral 3rd party should determine what fair market value is for the product since there is no real competition between the companies for whatever reason, either collusion or inability to have type of significant impact on the supply.

the same limitations and restrictions as all other things that we as people are dependant upon. Health Care, insurance


Please show me where I can apply for the limit on healthcare costs. I also saw that as of I believe March, 41% of Middle income people in this country are now without health insurance....I'm guessing it has to do with unlimited cost.

He has to adjust to price to the market because until we buy it and put it in our cars, the price is in constant flux. Wow, lookie there, a third party... the best one we'll ever get.

/boggle.

Manipulation of market forces is what this is all about.

There are exceedingly few people who truly cannot curb their gas consumption at all.

If everyone so up in arms about oil companies making a profit would reduce their gas consumption by even a small amount, the aggregate effect on prices would be significant. Vote with your wallet. That's what we do here.

Those longing for socialist controls over gas prices should look into a new place to live, if you really can't handle capitalism. Stop trying to ruin our country with more and more socialist elements.

Prices

The price system in a market economy guides economic activity so flawlessly that most people don't appreciate its importance. Market prices transmit information about relative scarcity and then efficiently coordinate economic activity. The economic content of prices provides incentives that promote economic efficiency.

For example, when the OPEC cartel restricted the supply of oil in the 1970s, oil prices rose dramatically. The higher prices for oil and gasoline transmitted valuable information to both buyers and sellers. Consumers received a strong, clear message about the scarcity of oil by the higher prices at the pump and were forced to change their behavior dramatically. People reacted to the scarcity by driving less, carpooling more, taking public transportation, and buying smaller cars. Producers reacted to the higher price by increasing their efforts at exploration for more oil. In addition, higher oil prices gave producers an incentive to explore and develop alternative fuel and energy sources.

The information transmitted by higher oil prices provided the appropriate incentive structure to both buyers and sellers. Buyers increased their effort to conserve a now more precious resource and sellers increased their effort to find more of this now scarcer resource.

The only alternative to a market price is a controlled or fixed price which always transmits misleading information about relative scarcity. Inappropriate behavior results from a controlled price because false information has been transmitted by an artificial, non-market price.

Look at what happened during the 1970s when U.S. gas prices were controlled. Long lines developed at service stations all over the country because the price for gasoline was kept artificially low by government fiat. The full impact of scarcity was not accurately conveyed. As Milton Friedman pointed out at the time, we could have eliminated the lines at the pump in one day by allowing the price to rise to clear the market.

From our experience with price controls on gasoline and the long lines at the pump and general inconvenience, we get an insight into what happens under socialism where every price in the economy is controlled. The collapse of socialism is due in part to the chaos and inefficiency that result from artificial prices. The information content of a controlled price is always distorted. This in turn distorts the incentives mechanism of prices under socialism. Administered prices are always either too high or too low, which then creates constant shortages and surpluses. Market prices are the only way to transmit information that will create the incentives to ensure economic efficiency.
Today you're fixing gas prices, tomorrow we're all standing in a block long line to buy a roll of toilet paper.

Oh stop being such an alarmist. We have regulation of prices in many different areas of our economy.
Capitalism and free market do not work when consumer choice is taken out of the equation.

Not even remotely comparable to global warming/cooling trends. That, we have very little control over, if any. Petroleum, we have absolute control over. It will last precisely as long as we let it. Allowing the free market to operate has the effect of rationing it based on need. Price fixing has the effect of encouraging continued wasteful use (and takes away incentive for others to develop alternatives).

So, your solution would be to magically create enough gasoline to satisfy the higher demand that would occur at an artificially low price? I'm all for that, once you show me how that alchemy set of yours turns water into unleaded.

Not only is it an unrealistic idea, but you have to face the fact that it would be progressively more unrealistic as the supply runs out (more quickly, due to your subsidizing it).

So, not only would we have morons burning the last of our gas at $2/gallon, joyriding around town, but we would be accelerating the rate at which our suburban infrastructure falls apart. Not to mention the effect on things such as fertilizers, plastics, and other petro products that we all depend on even if we're not driving a mile.

The long term result would be to fuck the very people who you claimed to be helping. Just like we've observed socialism usually working out in the end.

wow just wow what? what was i wrong about there? You quote my whole post without adding a thing, what was the benefit to that?

You were wrong in even responding to it.
Even I got the fact he was being humorous.
You treated it like some serious post that needed responding to.
I mean really, a sense of humor will do you wonders...

And Socialism is a slippery slope. Then again so is a Monopoly.

When did I say subsidize it?
Never.
What I proposed was an independant watchdog to regulate prices. I understand that cost is always passed on to the consumer, however, what we pretty much know that in these times of turbulence oil companies will raise prices 25% if they have 20% increase in price. They are manipulating the spikes to gouge the public.
Im asking for accountability. If the oil companies rise the price of gas, have an agency dedicated to checking their work. An independant 3rd party in charge of acting on behalf of the consumer would at least insure public trust and have all the data in the open.

It makes little sense to people that oil companies are posting record profit margins at a time when their prices are at all time highs. The market model dictates that the higher the cost of your service, the less of your product you will sell.
Oil is product we rely on to maintain our lives. From getting to our jobs to heating our homes. Basic necessities of life as we know it. As such the standards by which the oil companies deal with the public need to be in more open, public and trustworthy manner.

todays headline at Drudge:

http://drudgereport.com/ex.jpg

3-MONTH PROFIT: $8,400,000,000.00 (http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=businessNews&storyid=2006-04-27T124209Z_01_WAA000191_RTRUKOC_0_US-ENERGY-EXXON-EARNS.xml&rpc=23)

other things that we as people are dependant upon. Health Care, insurance, Electricity, Railroads

But publically trading things like electricity as commodity is a good thing right?, hang on a sec let me ask Ken Lay what he thinks.

It makes little sense to people that oil companies are posting record profit margins at a time when their prices are at all time highs.
Heh, profit margins aren't increasing, and haven't. Just their total profit, due to supply and demand. When the price raises to the point that demand becomes more elastic, they might lower them. It won't be because of people bitching though. It'll be because of people taking action.

Get used to it. Nothing that anyone can do will create more oil.

As much as I hate to agree with ******** he is right. Price fixing only delays the problem until the demand is curbed by higher prices nothing should be done. The market will correct itself such is the nature of capitalism.

Remember when the Government set to "fixing" the airline industry? Let's keep them out of the Gas & Oil market.

Beelziod

As much as I hate the high prices I have to agree. I believe in capitalism and while I know these fuckers are making tons of money off of us it's just life. If I get to the point where I don't like it or can't afford it I will walk or bike or buy a motorcycle. Moaning and whining isn't going to change it, the demand has to taper off to have a real effect.

If they really want to get involved in commerce and price gouging, how about going after the cable companies like Comcast, that buy up all the smaller ones so that the choice is no cable or Comcast cable.

At least with the oil prices, you can choose between gas stations.:(

I can't confirm it and I don't have a ton of time to look but....

Someone told me today that a gas station in SC is being sued BY THE GOV'T for selling their gas BELOW cost. WTF?

The idea was to attract customers and turn a profit off of other items in the store.

I think it was one gas station suing another one.

Back in the '70s during our last big gas crunch it was commonplace for Gas Wars to occur. Insane price cuts lead to shortages in areas and odd spikes in demands. Hell I can recall a gas station selling 10 cents lower than one across the street and then the opposite station cheating on the license plate controls ( back then you could only gas on certain days depending on your license plate numbers) in order to draw in customers.

Shortly there after controls/laws were placed on such gas wars. Likely the story you are referring to is a gas station being penalized for breaking those laws.

Interesting to note that many of the arguements here are exactly the same ones I used to hear on TV back in the 70's crunch. I bet Byl could give us even better perspective as I wasn't a legal driver till 1980 and therefore not as impacted ( tho Dad would force me to ride my bike into town ( 10 mile ride to nearest friends...I was in the booooonies) instead of giving me a ride due to the extreme gas prices.....no, they weren't 3 bucks a gallon!! lol

Fandros

Interesting to note that many of the arguements here are exactly the same ones I used to hear on TV back in the 70's crunch. I bet Byl could give us even better perspective as I wasn't a legal driver till 1980

As Fan said, there were many laws enacted to prevent the old-fashion gas price wars, because of the problems that resulted. There have been investigations in this area (I think the specific stations were in Wisconsin) with regard to under-pricing.

And yes, much of what folks are saying now is almost a verbatim rehash of what was being said in the 70's. People do not learn from the past, obviously.

I started driving in the late 60's, when we could scrounge empty soda bottles in the garages and alleys and get enough cash at the local grocery store to spend the night cruising the main drag. Gas was going for around 35 cents a gallon, and the price wars would often take it down as far as a quarter for at least a couple days now and then. (By the way, a pack of smokes was also 35 cents then) Scrounging returnable soda bottles could take care of the gas, so the money we bummed from our folks could be better spent at porkies for a burger and malt.

Nobody believed there could ever come a day when gas would be a dollar a gallon. That was impossible. When it happened, everyone said not to worry, because the prices would adjust, and drop back down. They said the same thing about two dollar gas, and now recently some have been foolish enough to speak those words regarding three dollar gas. When those running the oil companies see profits, does anyone really believe they will roll prices back and give up those profits? Will the truckers lower their prices oince the gas costs go down? Will the lawn care services? Will any of the myriad users of petroleum products who have had to increase fees to offset costs reduce those fees once they see people are willing to pay them?

I am surprised I have not been hearing more about that 2-wheeled gyro whatchamacallit that the guy invented and introduced a couple years back.
(I forget the name) That is one way to move people without gas.

Segway is the name of the scooter.
I also remember the days of the gas shortage.
You have to remember that inflation was a lot lower back then too.
Inflation 1 of the reasons gas is so expensive.
A Dollar doesn't go as far is it once did.
And instead of recycling being a neat little novelty that could earn you a few dollars like back in the 70's, it's mandatory in many areas now.