Solution to gas prices: Nationalization

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')

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

Again, subjective but at least understandable. :)

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.

LOL, we wouldn't want any "con artists" involved in the oil business, that's for sure.

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

Umm - OK - maybe someone much smarter than I will explain the point of your statement: "The cost of raw material has not changed for a billlion [sic] years, only the cost of retrieving and processing it. Unlike you [sic] loaf of break [sic], oils [sic] is just sitting in the ground whereas a farmer must plant and grow wheat at some expense."

You *appear* to be saying that there is something unique about the cost of getting oil out of the ground that makes it insignificant and/or impervious to inflation, while the farmer's cost of planting and harvesting wheat are more real and are more subject to inflation.

If that was not your point (which, if it is, is void of all logic), maybe someone besides you (to illustrate that your point was obvious to anyone, besides yourself of course, with more than an ounce of intelligence) will explain (1) exactly what the point of your statement was, and (2) how much perfect sense your statement makes in explaining why the dollars spent by a farmer taking the steps necessary to be able sell or harvest his wheat are different in nature than the dollars it takes to get the oil out of the ground, and why both cannot equally be considered costs of getting the raw material to the next step, which is processing of said raw material to turn it into a useful/sellable product.

Anybody?

Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')

OK - I'm seeing one point that I may have momentarily missed, but even with that accounted for, it doesn't make your point any more valid. I guess what you're saying is that the farmer's up front costs of planting have no counterpart in "creating" the oil. IF that is your point, it is moot. There are costs for "manufacturers" of both bread and oil - all subject to inflation - involved in getting it into a sellable form. The fact that the relative size of those costs at the different sub-stages prior to the point of consumer end-user purchase does not change the fact that there is a total bottom-line inflation-sensitive cost for getting both products to market.

Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')

The cost of oil is the same. The cost of getting it has changed. You brought wheat into the conversation. We're taling oil prices here.

Never was the point. You long ago missed the point.

Why do yo keep bringing wheat into a discussion about the "true value" of oil. Go pack to the post before mine, where a poster said oil was not selling for its "true value" Keep the wheat and bread in the supermarket. Guess your argument is a "straw man" :)

Bill., the point of the original question was long ago lost. It has nothing to do with wheat, oranges, apples or how much profit a supermarket makes on watermelon. I never denied they have costs, were subject to inflation, or that oil companies should make a profit. There was a question about oil being sold for its "true value" and I questioned what that was. I'm sure most everyone has long ago lost interest in the subject. You missed the subject. There is no point in trying to go back to refine anyone's point about anything. Good luck with the farm and I hope your crop does well this year and you sell it for a large profit. Your farm subsidy check went to David Letterman anyway.

LOL. But......., did any country ever invade a sovereign nation to

*help* them harvest their wheat and fix it so they "helped" (for a reasonable price) for the next few decades? Can wheat really inspire that sort of altruism?

Moonbat alert.

Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')

You have me confused with someone else.

Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')

That was quite an expose on the CBC. Only an ultra-liberal would be so dishonest as to not be able to distinguish between a wall built by a communist country for the purpose of keeping its citizens from escaping to freedom from a wall built by another country to prevent illegal aliens from, among other things, stealing services that they never paid for in lieu of going thru a legal process to become citizens. Truly amazing and disgusting.

Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')