Solution to gas prices: Nationalization

Page 1 of 5  
Comrade Hugo Chavez nationalized his oil industry and what to the Venzuelans get? 12 cent a gallon gas, that's what!
What are we waiting for?
As for the auto industry pain and suffering, it is clear now that private
enterprise can no more compete in the car manufacturing market than they could send a rocket to Mars. Projects that large are in the realm of the Government. It takes the combined national resources of a large Government to build cars and we must face that fact square in the face or become the dust bin of history in-so-far as this industry is concerned.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
| Comrade Hugo Chavez nationalized his oil industry and what to the | Venzuelans get? 12 cent a gallon gas, that's what! | | What are we waiting for? | | As for the auto industry pain and suffering, it is clear now that private | enterprise can no more compete in the car manufacturing market than they | could send a rocket to Mars. Projects that large are in the realm of the | Government. It takes the combined national resources of a large Government | to build cars and we must face that fact square in the face or become the | dust bin of history in-so-far as this industry is concerned. |
But is that price comparable with the value of Venezuelan currency? What does 12 cents equal in US currency? And aren't they Socialist there?
Natalie
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On May 23, 2:18 pm, "Wickeddoll"

natalie, george o. was being sarcastic but - seriously - ppl. have a tendency to confuse " socialism" and "comunism"----------------all scandinavian countries, germany, france, even canada have a SOCIALIST type of economic/political system----cuba and n.korea, and ( formerly) soviet bloc are where the COMMUNISM ruled; nationalization of oil industry - as well as nationalization of health care system - will not make us freaking communists......... just get real, people! what it will is just taking the burden off our wallets............
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote in message

*shrug*
Seems that no matter what societal structure you have, there is someone/some group ready to rip you off.
Natalie
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 23 May 2007 11:34:12 -0700, snipped-for-privacy@apk.net wrote:

Have you checked the tax rates in those countries? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Retired Shop Rat: 14,647 days in a GM plant. Now I can do what I enjoy: Large Format Photography
Web Site: www.destarr.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On May 23, 11:34 am, snipped-for-privacy@apk.net wrote:

Good points. Here in somewhat socialist Canada (definitely NOT communist), the government did nationalize one oil company quite a few years ago and the integrated oil company PetroCanada was born. It's a completely publicly traded company now, like Exxon, etc... I can't say that it had any effect on gas prices, then or now. What does have a large effect on price is taxes (of which we have lots more up here) and the silly price of crude oil as determined by those neurotic oil commodity traders who are driven by fears of shadows and other matters of doom and gloom everywhere.
That said, oil is a valuable chemical and it's selling well below it's "true" value, I think. If you want to bring down prices, then you have to demand less, and that means smaller cars, smaller engines, better fuel efficiency, more public transit, more bike riding, walking, etc. In other words, a change in the way we do things. Cheap gas and oil isn't a right.
Dave
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Interesting subject for debate. What is the true value of oil? Who should benefit from any money when it is sold? Oil had been in the ground for billions of years as a natural resource. Who should divvy it up and take the money traded for it?
You can argue that the actual cost of a gallon of crude is essentially $0. Refiners should be able to recoup costs and make a profit on the processing of it, but what after that?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Edwin Pawlowski wrote:

The survivors of those killed in Iraq should get a lifetime supply of free gas. ;)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Edwin Pawlowski wrote:

??? You can say that about anything that is mined or grown (the only difference between mined or grown is that most of the time, for something that is grown, human effort has to be put into it before you can even access or process it). Somewhere, there has to be human effort put into it to turn it into an accesible and/or useable product. I guess I'm not sure what your point is there beyond the obvious.
Any commodity has actual costs above the $0 cost of actually having it sit in or on the ground. Above the actual costs (labor, materials, marketing, etc.), hopefully there's pure profit for someone willing to invest and take the risk - otherwise (short of slave labor or dictatorship, which sometimes are the same thing) it's just going to sit there.
Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Right, but before that time, the oil is sitting there for a billion years. The cost of the oil itself is $0 as long as it sits there. The cost of raw material is the same in 2007 when we pay $3.30 a gallon for the finish product as it was in 1962 when we paid 19 for hte same gallon. Nothing has changed in the pool of oil. Sure, some is easier (cheaper) to get to the refinery than others, but above that cost, what?
The change, over the years, of the selling price is the cost of obtaining, converting, and delivering the final product. Add some profit and what should gas really sell for? The $3 we pay, the $6 in much of Europe, or the 25 Chavez is charging? Will we conserve at $8 and squander it at $2?

My point is, what should gas really sell for and who should be getting the money above processing cost. You hear some twit say gas should be $10 a gallon, other want it for next to nothing.

So, answer the question. What should gas be selling for? You must have an opinion.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

IMHO, I agree with what you said earlier. The cost of the entire process (from ground to pump), plus a little extra for profit is enough.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Edwin Pawlowski wrote:

We're really having a disconnect here.
What about, say bread. The raw materials are in the ground sitting there. They're free. Add some seed, then a miracle occurs and you get wheat. Then another miracle occurs and you have bread. So - $0.10 a loaf ought to be about right.
What about a professional service - say a bridge design. The consulting engineer's out of pocket is maybe $100 for paper and ink. So how does he get to charge tens of thousands of dollars for something that, by your philosophy, only cost him $100?
What do you do for a living? Let's put your value added work to the same test as you want to put to the oil companies.
Like I've said, I'm not a fan of the oil companies, but let's be fair.

The engineer pays $100 for paper and ink that used to cost $25. Why isn't he only charging a couple hundred dollars for his services? Plug in any endeavor you want to - including whatever it is you do for a living. Your argument is ludicrous.

By the same general rules as any other for-profit endeavor. Again - let's put your job to the same analysis. I don't think we want to start telling each other what we have the right to charge. The market decides that.

I have no idea - I don't know enough about the business. I would not even venture a guess. I do know that if a competing viable form of energy were to be found, the price - by free market rules - will come down.
Fact is, they are making around 10% profit. Back to my original question - what's wrong with that?
Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

My philosphy? I did not state what anything should sell for, but opened a discourse for everyone to contribute. You seem to think I'm saying it shoudl be cheap. I'm not against profit at all. I own stock in oil companies so I do want them to make a healthy profit.

Yes, let's be fair. They should make a profit. There are people that have stated that gas should be selling for $10 or more a gallon. What I'm asking is it they want to make a case for that, whee should that money go? The oil companies? The land holders? The goverment? There are others that think gas should sell for pennies. Maybe it should. The cost of raw material has not changed for a billlion years, only the cost of retrieving and processing it. Unlike you loaf of break, oils is just sitting in the ground whereas a farmer must plant and grow wheat at some expense.

What argument? I'm not arguing anything, I'm asking a question that you don't have the asnwer for. I'm not stating what I think gas should sell for at all. What I do for a living is ofer my services and knowledge. I get what I can for it. Gas is a product and the raw material itself, the crude oil, is there for the taking.

Hey, now you are catching on to the discussion here. I'm not suggesting anything. I'm soliciting opinions. Some have been brought forward over the past six months or so.. Some thing gas should be selloing for less, others for more. I'm just wondinering how they arrived at their conclusions. Especially from the poster here that said gas is not selling for its "true value". I'm asking what that "true value" is and how it was arrived at. Somehow you seem to have missed that part early on.

Nothing. As I said. I'm a shareholder. 15% would be better. Why do you think I'm against charging what it cost and a good profit? Rather than discuss a statement made by a poster here, you've become confrontational, or at least defensive when I never took a position either way. It still goes back to the OP and his "true value" of oil.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Edwin Pawlowski wrote:

2006 Oil Profits 119 billion 2006 Election Cycle: Federal Campaigns: 18.9 million Federal Lobbying: 123.8 million State of California Campaigns: 91.6 million
March 06: Last month, the Bush administration confirmed that it expected the government to waive about $7 billion in royalties over the next five years, even though the industry incentive was expressly conceived of for times when energy prices were low.
"The big lie about this whole program is that it doesn't cost anything,'' said Representative Edward J. Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat who tried to block its expansion last July. ''Taxpayers are being asked to provide huge subsidies to oil companies to produce oil, it's like subsidizing a fish to swim.''
But on Aug. 8, Mr. Bush signed a sweeping energy bill that contained $2.6 billion in new tax breaks for oil and gas drillers and a modest expansion of the 10-year-old ''royalty relief'' program. [end quotes]
It will be interesting to see how and by whom *this* current bill is killed:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-01-18-house-oil_x.htm
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
F.H. wrote:

To quote a great President, "There you again." Just thorw the raw dollar numbers out and ignore the fact that it is a respectable 10% profit. That's the dishonesty I was referring to earlier.
Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bill Putney wrote:

LOL, now we're in the land of subjective.

Again, subjective but at least understandable. :)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Not nationalization which will only create an unresponsive Gov. bureaucracy.
I suggest the oil company excess profits go into a Gov. controlled carbon offset fund. Not a totally private carbon offset fund because the con artists like Gore will get their hands into it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
who wrote:

LOL, we wouldn't want any "con artists" involved in the oil business, that's for sure.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Edwin Pawlowski wrote:

I don't see the difference. There are costs in doing both (there are costs in getting the oil out of the ground just as there are up-front expenses that the farmer incurs before he has access to the processable raw material). The costs are different than each other, but nevertheless they are costs. What difference does it make at what point in the process the expense occurs. Again - I'm really missing the point there.

And there is expense in the taking just as the farmer has expense before he has access to his raw material. Again - what is your point there?

Sorry - I'd have to look back at what it was I was initially taking issue with. I'm just having trouble getting the point of some of your statements about the oil just sitting there for the taking, as if there are no costs involved there in contrast to the farmer who has up front expenses before he can harvest his wheat.
Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yes, you missed the point so no sense trying to have an intelligent discussion about it.
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.