Gasoline is still too cheap...

You guys are taking all the fun out of it.

Of course, it depends WHERE you race, too. You DON'T race on city streets in Bosotn and run over an expectant mother, killing her and her fetus...

Exactly. I have two dead acquaintances to show what can happen.

Name calling is the most predictable response of the witless. Your response speaks more acrimoniously about you than anyone else.

Thank you.

Speaking from personal experience?

That won't happen. They're open-minded so we speak all the time. I just don't agree in wasting earth's natural and limited resources while doing so.

Very funny! Either that or "LOOK OUT!" I would personally like to see that happen too. A type of Scarlett Letter, if you will.

In some jurisdictions there IS a law against leaving your vehicle idling when no one is in it. It cuts down on joy riding and theft, too.

I tend to speak from the point of frugality, not cheapness. Just because I could AFFORD a new Lexus does NOT, repeat NOT mean that I will go out and buy one. My 99 Camry 6 cyl works quite well, thank you. Just because I can AFFORD a larger house does than mean that I will buy one: 2800 sq. ft., on 2 levels, is more than enough for Mrs. Sharx and me. I usually make ONE grocery shopping trip a week. Frankly, there is seldom any VALID reason to make more. I combine this trip with the weekly trip to return and pick up material from the PUBLIC library. It sees idiotic to BUY books or CD's or DVD's, play them ONCE or twice and then waste space storing them when I can BORROW all the material I want for $12 a year in library fees. Catch: I have to wait a while for the new hits to appear: big deal. A LOT of people could learn to have a little patience, deferring instant gratification. I could go on and on: then there are the BILLIONS a year frittered away on booze, cigarettes and gambling. The health consequences of using those materials are an additional point. Why not, once a day, simply pull out some paper currency and burn it? Same thing.

Smart man.

Wait one. This isn't about what is sensible or reasonable, it's about one person telling another how the first person can use his own property. No one has the right or the knowledge needed to decide what is right or wrong for everyone else.

I never once defended any of the things ViperKiller's bitching about. I don't claim that they are good ideas. I've been trying to say that ViperKiller has no lock on intelligence and he isn't qualified to dictate to me how I live my life, spend my money or dispose of my property.

Jack

The hell you say!!!

Nixon tried that in the '70's. Didn't work then (gave us lines blocks long waiting to get at the pumps) and it won't work now. You can't make me sell my widgets for less than it costs me to make them. You can pass a law limiting the price I can charge for them but you can't pass a law that makes them.

If you want to live in that kind of economy, move to a dictatorship.

Jack

It certainly never hurts.

Good point. Consider it added to the list.

I never claimed to have a monopoly on intelligence. Where will you find me saying so? My original post was an observation on the contradiction of what people do. Missed the point didn't you? When did you hear me say "people should do this?" Never. You got defensive probably because you fall in line with some of things I was pointing out.

I think you need to read my original post again and think about it without personal bias. For emphasis, I never said you should live your life in a certain way and that I'm the smartest person in the world. Again, read with an open mind and no bias.

According to the available figures from the US Department of Commerace, the oil companies earn around 17c per gallon, the station operaters around 7c. On the other hand the federal government earns 18.4c a gallon in taxes and the state governments an average of 36c in taxes,on every gallon. LOL

mike

According to the API, it is just below 29 cents per gallon that states make (weighted according to volume sold), including all sales taxes and fees.

Maybe the problem isn't that you are going to the US Department of Commerace. I think the Department of Commerce or the Department of Energy would be a better place to look. ;-)

According to this article, the oil refineries were making profits of $39 per barrel. Considering that there 42 US gallons in a barrel, that is a profit of 93 cents per gallon in California. And normal profit was around 45 cents per gallon.

Just what is the URL of this Commerace Department website, anyway?

And, according to Congress, the average spread between a barrel of gasoline and barrel of gasoline is $30, which is higher than the historical average of $8 to $9.

Gee, it seems that oil companies are taking extra big profits.

Jeff

But that's exactly what you ARE suggesting. You want to set the price of widgets, you don't want the market place to set the price. Regardless of what price is set, the very fact that the widget producer isn't in charge of his bottom line means that he can't control the very aspects of his business that he needs to control to stay in business. You may allow him to make a good profit this week/month/year, but if his costs go up, you will lag behind in allowing him to raise his price. In just a short time, there won't be anymore widget makers nor widgets.

And, what

Two thoughts in that paragraph.

1. Nixon was dealing with oil prices that had been artificially inflated because the middle east created crude shortages by not selling their product. We are today dealing with prices that are inflated, maybe not for the same reason as in the 70's but the effect is the same. Nixon put price controls on petroleum products in an effort to hold costs down to the consumer and reduce the damage to the economy. The end result was that oil companies couldn't make a profit, so they held back the product (why sell at a loss). Result, long lines and rationing. If Nixon had let the market set the price, their would have been enough fuel to go around. Yes, the price would have been high but that wouldn't have been the fault of "Big Oil".

1. California's problem with electric power shortages is a direct result of regulation, not deregulation. The power companies were allowed to sell their generating plants in order to generate operating capital that price controls wouldn't allow them to recover from their customers. The new owners of the power generating plants sell their power where it will bring the most dollars, and that isn't in California for the above reasons. Couple that with the fact that you guys in California won't allow ANY new generating plants to be built and suddenly you find yourself in deep shit without a shovel and it's my fault. Hell, I've never even been to California.

Now you're completely off the deep end. No manufacture can charge whatever he wants. If his price is too high, nobody will buy his product. But if his supply is limited to somewhere below what the demand is, he needs to reduce the demand as well as generate new money (income) in order to invest in increasing his production. Higher prices will reduce demand while at the same time, generate incentive to make more of the product.

The cost of crude oil IS a direct production cost, just like the cost of electricity.

I don't know where you're getting your info but crude prices are near all time highs, over $78 a barrel.

I get the feeling that I'm talking to a brick wall here. You don't know what you are talking about and appear to have limited knowledge of economics. If you think that there is such a thing as "Big Oil" or "Big Energy" then pull the covers over your head cower down in your bed. The truth is that YOU are "Big Oil". You own stock in oil companies through your retirement funds, if you have a job. Do you enjoy your "windfall profits"?

Jack