1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Fill er up, Ayatollah

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by The Big Ragu, Jun 26, 2007.

  1. alleyallen

    alleyallen Guest

    Wasn't apologizing for having an opinion. I was apologizing because it's clear you didn't understand me when you went on a lengthy discussion about the economics of it and my post was simply a matter of "I care not why, I only care how it impacts me."

    Don't know how to be any clearer than that.
     
  2. statrat

    statrat Member

    Yes, Yes and Yes! That and making Oregonians pump their own damn gas...
     
  3. BTExpress

    BTExpress Well-Known Member

    Yes, it would "make things easier", but at what cost?

    Where does the state gets its money to recoup the money lost by suspending gasoline taxes?

    A suspension of gasoline taxes likely will mean INCREASED DEMAND . . . which will mean MORE EXPENSIVE crude oil and is what you don't want when dealing with a finite resource.

    Any solution must start with reduced demand. And if you can't change the miles you drive, you sure as heck can purchase a used Corolla in order to get the 38 mpg necessary to reduce demand.

    New rule:

    There cannot be simultaneous threads salivating over an iPhone while at the same time bemoaing the cost of gasoline. That's like saying, "I've got money to burn . . . but I don't want to use it to burn gasoline."
     
  4. The Big Ragu

    The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

    Easy with the rational talk, BT.
     
  5. alleyallen

    alleyallen Guest

    The absolutists have spoken, it appears. All other arguments and sentiments must therefore fall by the wayside.
     
  6. the fop

    the fop Member

    What I never understand is while the oil companies are taking these record profits, why are their refineries not up to speed? What happened to reinvesting in the product? With increased demand and record profits, isn't it reasonable to expect some sort of upgrade in refining capacity?

    Also, in the Midwest, we pay extra for the so called summer blend, the environmentally friendly formula which takes refining capacity offline every spring as they gear up to produce it. With prices already what they are, aren't we at the point where we should stick to this formula year round?
     
  7. Guy_Incognito

    Guy_Incognito Well-Known Member

    I actually agree that the wisest course of action for the politicians is to do nothing, but it bugs me to see them calling the oil companies greedy, when they are turning the more obscene profit.
     
  8. BTExpress

    BTExpress Well-Known Member

    Not really.

    But we all have our crosses to bear.

    You have seen gasoline prices double since 9/11.

    I have seen my homeowners insurance quadruple in that span.

    Gasoline prices may be concern No. 1 in your world. They don't even make Top 10 in mine . . . And I drive a gas-guzzling V8 car 22,000 miles a year.

    The "record profits" is because of "record demand."

    If you make 10 cents per gallon profit regardless of price, your profit will be tied to gallons used.

    What's odd is Americans using record gallons and then screaming about the providers of these gallons making record profits.

    If Apple sold a record number of iTunes downloads this year, I would assume it would show "record profits" for its iTunes division.
     
  9. alleyallen

    alleyallen Guest

    BTE, gasoline prices are not my No. 1 concern in the world. So many things financial concern me. But this thread isn't about homeowner's insurance, is it? Nor is it about water/sewage/trash taxes or property taxes, is it? It's about gas prices...

    What got me was your absolutist statement that a person damn well could afford a more fuel efficient used car, which is a crock if I've heard one. Not everyone's financial situation mirrors yours, and for some of us, we're in a fiscal position where we really are at the mercy of others: the mercy of milk producers, electric companies, oil companies, etc., ad nauseum. The ability of the average person to affect a change is vastly overstated, and overrated. My ability to use public transportation is nonexistent because the mode is nonexistent.

    My ability to buy a more fuel-efficient car is non-existent because I'm carrying a mortgage by myself.

    Try and remember that while others rail about people's complaints against prices, the people screaming for relief actually, y'know, need the relief.
     
  10. The Big Ragu

    The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

    BT, Plus, I don't see anyone willing to subsidize the oil industry in leaner times.

    Demonizing oil companies makes no more sense than demonizing any other type of company for its earnings. Exxon-Mobile is the largest company in the U.S. It does more than $100 billion in sales in a quarter, so when its clocks in with $10 billion worth of earnings, it is a matter of scale, not gouging. The bigger the company, the bigger the bottom line. There are plenty of industries with higher profit margins than the oil companies. Beverage and tobacco companies earn about twice the profit margin that the oil companies do, but no one would claim that coca-cola is "gouging" them.
     
  11. alleyallen

    alleyallen Guest

    Does demonizing anything, especially unjustly, make a lot of logical sense? No.

    But when that's about all you have at your disposal, people go with what they know.
     
  12. Guy_Incognito

    Guy_Incognito Well-Known Member

    I'm agreeing with you, and saying I'm annoyed by the grandstanding politicians who are getting tough on greedy CEOs.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page