$3.00 per gallon gasoline. Why is everyone so panicked?

Page 2 of 6  
Apples and oranges. In Europe fuel and auto taxes are used to feed the socialist systems under which most live. It has little to do with conservation. The fuel taxes are two to three times what they are in the US
and why they generally drive midget and small cars. If one wants laws that say the employer must pay you whether you go to work or not, or offer one so called 'free' healthcare, the money has to come from somewhere. Governments do not do anything that can create wealth, they must take money from those that can create wealth. Thirty hour work weeks do not help productivity rates. The US uses more energy but we feed half the world, produce more products and wealth than any other economy. period. There is not a country in the word that even approaches our annual increases in GDP. People from all around the world long to come to live in the USA and those that do not, long to do business in the USA ;)
mike
wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

We feed half the world? What do you? Drive a Ford tractor on the farm? While the United State exports billions of dollars of food every year (I think around $45 billion), it doesn't supply most of the food in the world. Or anywhere near half.
The US more energy to produce $1,000,000 of economic activity than Europe or Japan. It's not that the US produces more economic activity per person than most countries, but the US uses more energy to produce the same amount of economic acitvity. http://earthtrends.wri.org/text/energy-resources/variable-668.html
The US economy is smaller than the economy in Europe. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_ (nominal)
Norway and a few other countries have a higher per capita GDP than the US. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28nominal%29_per_capita
China, India and South Korea and many other countries are growing at a faster rate than the US. http://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?c &vf
Jeff
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Apples to oranges, small, faster, average. I don't own a farm but I own farm stocks. What I said was; "There is not a country in the world that even approaches our annual increases in GDP" and all that it encompasses. A large portion of the European economy is social spending, that why our increases in GDP in almost twice their smaller DP Sure we use more fuel but our farms are up to fifteen times as productive as any in the world. Many still use hand labor and animals to farm for goodness sake.
If one company sells 100 widgets on which they earn $100 and another sells 10 widgets on which they earn $100, and they both increased their sales by ten, which is selling the most widgets and which is growing faster? In which company would you want to own stock? ;)
mike

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I see you edited what I said, without indicating that fact. How intellectually dishonest of you.
I guess you can't explain why some countries in Europe are able to have similar economic activity (when messured in millions of dollars) for less energy. I guess you can't back you claim that the US feeds half the world. You talk about how big the economy is. Big deal. What counts is GDP per capita, not total economy. But that measure, Europe is bigger. And the third world is growing faster than the US. So what if we use machines on farms? They use them in Europe too. Sadly, there are too many areas of the world where they can't make enough food. Or feed everyone. Tonight, I will go to bed full. Hundreds of millions of kids will go to bed hungry. Including many in the US.
In the case of the widgets, I would rather own stock in the company selling 10 widgets and making $100. When it makes ten more widgets, it will make $200; the one that makes $100 widgets makes only $110. The smaller company is growing at a rate of 100% vs. 10% for the big one. That is why small companies often sell at a price that represents a higher relative price compared to the larger one.
Of course, small, growing countries, like those in Asia are growing faster than the US. Already, US is becoming less important in the financial world while Hong Kong and other cities are becoming more important.
Personally, I don't care which country is the best one. What I care about is which are growing more and how the countries are treating their citizens. Considering that hundreds of thousands of US citizens are in Iraq, thousands go hungry every night, the educational system doesn't do that great a job (the high school graduation rate in big cities is abotu 50%), many thousands are in jail, millions don't have insurance, and the income of poor and middle class people is not growing nearly as fast as the rich people, there is a lot to do in the US. Again, America is a great country. But there is a lot of work to be done.
Jeff
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
One is free to believe whatever one chooses, no matter how convoluted ones logic. As for me I would choose not to be a partner in any of your stock trades ;)
mike

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That's the best you can do?
I guess it is.
Jeff
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
EXXONMOBILE $500 Billion Profit for 2006
LOL, Liberals want to buy "eco friendly" stocks, go ahead.
I'll get a 30% return and the Libs get a -5% return and wonder why that gov't check is 1/10th of their earnings.
On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 10:45:24 -0400, "Mike Hunter"

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Bob Brown" <.> wrote in message

Actually, the return on ExxonMobile over the last two years has been a total of about 25%, so about 12% annually, including dividends. And ExxonMobile had a profit of about $69,000,000,000 not $500,000,000,000 as you claim.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/hp?s=XOM&a &b!&c 05&d&e!&f 07&g=m
Next time, when numbers are readily available, please to make them up.
BTW, I was aware of ExxonMobile's profit because I own their stock.
Jeff
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The $500 Billion number was reported on EVERY network newscast and was in nearly every newspaper in this country.
If I made a mistake, it was listening to and reading the news.
PROFIT MARGIN is not the same as PROFIT..you KNOW that but want to play games.
Play by yourself.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Bob Brown" <.> wrote in message

Really? Where did they get the money? ExxonMobil's total revenue for the 2006 year was about $378 billion.

My memory is not perfect. No one's is. That is why I check my figures and facts, especially when it takes less than a minute with the internet.
Quite frankly, I didn't remember what the profit was (although I remember it was something like $600 a *second*). So I looked it up.

You can read minds. Very good. But you need to take more lessons. You're not doing a good job.

Have a lovely day.
Jeff
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 18:11:16 -0400, "Mike Hunter"

China has for several years now.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 13:50:29 -0700, "Scott" <homealone.com> wrote:

Nuclear power is probably the most efficient and clean source of energy man has created yet enviro's have successfully made it into a horror story of death.
And the fact that we cannot explore for oil in Alaska will keep us dependent on those countries which do not care about our poor needing cheap energy.
I think we should put a lot of the gas price/energy price blame where it belongs...Environmentalists and the lobbying they've done for 3 decades.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Bob Brown" <.> wrote in message

Yeah, certainly the accidents at Three Mile Island and Chernoble had nothing to do with it. By the way, where is the nuclear waste stored long-term?

The amount of oil that could come from Alaska is, at most, a small fraction of the world's oil supply. It would barely affect the price of oil.

And the oil companies certainly have not lobbied at all for the right to drill in places with very little in the way of royalties.
There are several reasons why oil is so expensive. The bottom line is that the world-wide demand for oil is growing as the third world nations, especially India and China are using more oil.
Jeff
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I hear and see that "small fraction" quote all the time. Funny thing is, the oil companies have far different data on the supply in Alaska. In fact, don't you think the idea that oil companies desperately want that oil in Alaska might tend to make you think that their is a LOT of oil there?
I've read of 100 year supply estimates from only Alaska. Not just ANWR, I mean all of Alaska.
Also, drilling for oil is so terrible that middle-eastern countries suck oil from the ground anywhere they can find it. Why isn't greenpeace sending people to the middle-east informing them of their doomsday?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bob Brown <.> wrote:

Funny thing *is* that you are lying. The quotes about "small fraction" are from the Department of Energy, and are correct.

Show me some of that data! You are lying. It doesn't exist.

You "read" it? In what, a comic book? Get real and stop lying.
We've been drilling for oil in Alaska since the 1940's. We don't have what you are claiming, and there is no data to suggest it exists.

You don't know the difference between the climate of Saudi Arabia and Prudhoe Bay???
Or you are lying about not knowing...
--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) snipped-for-privacy@apaflo.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 02:17:56 -0800, snipped-for-privacy@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote:

First off, I didn't call you a liar so could you give me the same respect? Second, Alaska is HUGE, nearly half the size of the 48 states. We have not explored all of Alaska mainly because of laws passed forbidding it. Also, if their is no oil in Alaska to speak of, then why are Oil companies constantly begging the gov't to let them explore ALL of Alaska, not just ANWR???
No one will ever answer that.
It's like saying the crime rate in New York City is very high therefore New York State is a dangerous place to live.
I would hope would could discuss the oil deal without the drama.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bob Brown <.> wrote:

I have no respect whatever for someone who posts lies. The alternative is to suggest you are so dumb and ignorant that you don't know and can't learn any better...

Look son, I live in Alaska. I've seen most of it first hand. Do not pretend to lecture me with *false* statements about what it is or is not.
It is not "nearly half the size of the 48 states". It isn't even half that.

There you go again, lying for effect. That simply isn't true, and we do *not* have laws forbidding exploration in much of Alaska, much less most of it. Indeed, the only parts that have not been explored are those where nobody wants to explore!

Nobody has said there is "no oil in Alaska to speak of". Why do you make up such obvious false statements?
That statement is just as idiotic as you previous ones claiming there is some significant fraction of the world's supply of oil in Alaska (there isn't), or that it could supply the country for 100 years (absurd), or that the oil companies have data showing that (lets see you find *any* data showing *any* of those statements to be even close to true).

When is that?
You are indeed ignorant. You apparently haven't noticed that oil companies are not even asking to drill in ANWR! (The State of Alaska is where all the noise about ANWR comes from, not the oil companies.)

How can someone answer such an idiotic statement in a way that you will understand?
The oil companies *are* able to explore almost anywhere they choose. They simply do *not* choose to drill in very many places for some rather obvious reasons that are well known to everyone. They choose to drill many wells only in areas where it would be profitable to discover oil!
Which is to say, if all they can find is 500 million barrels, and it requires 100 miles of pipeline to produce it... *nobody* is interested! And *that* is why nobody is drilling in most parts of Alaska today.
You may have noticed that they are currently drilling a lot of exploratory wells just north (in the offshore areas) and just west of the current production facilities in the Prudhoe Bay industrial complex. They have long since poked hundreds of holes south of it and just east of it.

That is true. Did you have a point?

You need to stop making up your own set of facts. Nobody needs the drama created by your fabrications.
--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) snipped-for-privacy@apaflo.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 23:15:55 -0800, snipped-for-privacy@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote:

I posted opinion and asked for a civilized debate on the subject. It is no longer allowed to debate a topic unless you agree with a Liberal point of view.
If I had quoted the Liberal version of the oil crisis then you would nod your head at the screen.
Obviously you feel a great NEED to call people names and insult them just because they have an opinion on something.
NOTE:I'll stop but you should at least acknowledge that I didn't stoop to your level of name-calling and insults.
bye.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bob Brown <.> wrote:

You claimed to state facts. Except you knew, or should have known, that they were not true.

Oh, whine. You are now arguing that only liberals tell the truth!!!
Lets be very clear:
1) You lied to start with. 2) You were called on it. 3) Now you tacidly admit you lied, by not even attempting to support your statements. 4) Instead you want an ad hominem discussion.
Stick with the topic, and stop trying to evade and obfuscate.
--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) snipped-for-privacy@apaflo.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bob Brown <.> wrote:

You say a lot of really funny things. "Efficient" and "clean" my ass. It creates waste products that are deadly poison to everyone and can't be neutralized for thousands of years.
Thank whoever it is that has been successful at making the horror story public knowledge, because they have save the lives of your descendants.

You make these things up as you go? Where do you get the idea that we can't explore for oil in Alaska? We've been drilling like crazy since the 1940s! Your ignorance is astounding.

Go ahead and blame whoever you feel like. You are just hiding your head in the sand and refusing to deal with reality.
--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) snipped-for-privacy@apaflo.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.