2
   

Why Do Higher Gas Prices Anger You?

 
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 08:42 am
Ridiculous idea.

The lack of newly built refineries has much more to do with profits for the oil companies than it does environmentalism.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 08:49 am
It's probable that some of that Alaskan crude would have to be sold overseas, the refineries in Washington couldn't handle that much.
We're using 30 million bbls a day so a 10 year supply unearthed doesn't buy us much time.
It's just so short sighted JW. We need to get off fossil fuels not hector conservationists.
It'd be better if we don't open the fields and the price of gas jumps to the point where inventors and scientists are prodded to make more breakthroughs in propulsion design.
We just can't see the trees for the forest.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 03:04 pm
panzade wrote:
It's probable that some of that Alaskan crude would have to be sold overseas, the refineries in Washington couldn't handle that much.
We're using 30 million bbls a day so a 10 year supply unearthed doesn't buy us much time.
It's just so short sighted JW. We need to get off fossil fuels not hector conservationists.
It'd be better if we don't open the fields and the price of gas jumps to the point where inventors and scientists are prodded to make more breakthroughs in propulsion design.
We just can't see the trees for the forest.


That is a good idea,but you arent thinking it thru.
While it is a good idea to find alternative fuels,and it is a good idea to reduce our dependence on foreign oil,there MUST be more domestic exploration and production,and here's why...

The higher fuel prices go,the higher diesel prices go.When they get to high,the trucking industry will start parking trucks.
When that happens,the prices of EVERYTHING,from food to clothes to construction materials to medicine to bottled water will go up,some as much as triple.
That will put even more of a burden on the economy.

Are you sure you want that?
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 03:14 pm
And the companies who can't sell their products will try to find a way to bring the cost down. So rather than having one warehouse to cover an 800 mile radius (totally made up number) they will keep one for every 400 or 300 mile radius to make their supply lines shorter. Instead of one factory for the whole country, they might build one on each coast (read increase in jobs) etc...

I'm obviously not an economist, but people and businesses adapt as soon as they know that they have to. This is no different.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 03:23 pm
Re: Why Do Higher Gas Prices Anger You?
squinney wrote:
Are you bothered by gas prices? If so, why? Do your reasons aline with those stated in the article, or the ones I proposed?

No, I'm not bothered by high gas prices. And quite frankly, I think Americans are crybabies for complaining that $3/gallon is expensive. Here in Germany, we pay more than $5 per gallon. Few here find it outrageous. On a slight tangent, prices like ours are the minimum you would need to comply with the Kyoto Protocol, which I believe you think Bush should ratify.
0 Replies
 
Acquiunk
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 03:31 pm
Re: Why Do Higher Gas Prices Anger You?
Thomas wrote:
[
No, I'm not bothered by high gas prices. And quite frankly, I think Americans are crybabies for complaining that $3/gallon is expensive. Here in Germany, we pay more than $5 per gallon. Few here find it outrageous.



The problem with this argument is distance, or space. I get the feeling that few Europeans understand just how large the US is. In most parts of the country, New England excepted, you have to drive long distances to get anywhere. Europe, in my experience, is much more compact.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 03:43 pm
Re: Why Do Higher Gas Prices Anger You?
Acquiunk wrote:
The problem with this argument is distance, or space. I get the feeling that few Europeans understand just how large the US is. In most parts of the country, New England excepted, you have to drive long distances to get anywhere. Europe, in my experience, is much more compact.

1) As it happens, I have spent enough time in America to know how big it is. 2) The distances I have to drive in my daily life don't depend on the size of my continent. They depend on where I live, where I work, where I shop, and some other locations I can choose more or less freely. Most Americans, betting that oil would abound forever, have made extremely wasteful choices about those things. They have lost their bet. And now, instead of paying their dues, some of them are demanding that the oil companies and the government bail them out. I don't see why either of them should do such a thing, and I have little patience for the populist attitude that they should.

(I am now reading page 5 of the thread, and I see that Free Duck has making many of the points I intended to make.)
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 03:43 pm
Maybeso. But Europe has been coping for decades. In the late '60s, I could walk from base to the Strassbahn, as I believe it was called, ride to Mainz, and catch a train to Wiesbaden. Now, I'm 150 miles to the nearest train station. Anyway, I guess there's a station in Albuquerque. We've a bit of catching up to do, and better sooner than later.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 03:44 pm
In the seventies me and my neighbors just switched plates and bought gas whenever we felt like it. Made the odd and even thing work.

Now that's adapting.

My youngest male cub said that the school buses won't run if we run out of gas. He seemed happy until I suggested to him that we'd just have the teachers post assignments online.

He didn't like that kind of adapting.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 03:46 pm
roger wrote:
Maybeso. But Europe has been coping for decades. In the late '60s, I could walk from base to the Strassbahn, as I believe it was called, ride to Mainz, and catch a train to Wiesbaden. Now, I'm 150 miles to the nearest train station. Anyway, I guess there's a station in Albuquerque. We've a bit of catching up to do, and better sooner than later.

But you do have Greyhound, don't you?
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 03:59 pm
Greyhound makes a 100 mile trip last eight hours. Literally. It is not a viable choice.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 04:03 pm
If that's true, it's a big, fat business opportunity for anyone who can drive a bus for 100 miles in less than eight hours.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 04:08 pm
FreeDuck wrote:
And the companies who can't sell their products will try to find a way to bring the cost down. So rather than having one warehouse to cover an 800 mile radius (totally made up number) they will keep one for every 400 or 300 mile radius to make their supply lines shorter. Instead of one factory for the whole country, they might build one on each coast (read increase in jobs) etc...

I'm obviously not an economist, but people and businesses adapt as soon as they know that they have to. This is no different.


That wont work.
Most produce is grown in the San Joaquin valley in central California.
It is then trucked to every state,and every major city.
If trucks stopped hauling food into NYC,then NYC would be completely out of food in all of its warehouses and grocery stores in 3 days.

Even if companies did build warehouses every 300 miles,those warehouses must be supplied.
That would still mean that trucks would have to haul in their goods from all over the country.
And by reducing the distance that a company's trucks traveled from their warehouses,you would then need more trucks to cover the same amount of territory.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 04:23 pm
Ditto BLT on Greyhound. And yes, it does sound like a big, fat opportunity, especially with the long waits and early checkins at the airports.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 04:26 pm
roger wrote:
Ditto BLT on Greyhound. And yes, it does sound like a big, fat opportunity, especially with the long waits and early checkins at the airports.


Imagine the money available to someone who ran a bus service that was not only timely but didn't smell like bedfarts, urine and vomit?
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 04:30 pm
mysteryman wrote:
Most produce is grown in the San Joaquin valley in central California. It is then trucked to every state,and every major city.
If trucks stopped hauling food into NYC,then NYC would be completely out of food in all of its warehouses and grocery stores in 3 days.

That's the way it currently is. But two generations ago, New York city got its food from places like upstate New York. This changed when transportation costs declined. It can change back when they rise again.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 04:34 pm
Thomas wrote:
mysteryman wrote:
Most produce is grown in the San Joaquin valley in central California. It is then trucked to every state,and every major city.
If trucks stopped hauling food into NYC,then NYC would be completely out of food in all of its warehouses and grocery stores in 3 days.

That's the way it currently is. But two generations ago, New York city got its food from places like upstate New York. This changed when transportation costs declined. It can change back when they rise again.

Well you see Thomas, in places like California and Arizona and New Mexico and Florida where all that produce is grown (yeah the climate is a factor) but you see Thomas in those places we got all kinds of like, illegal aliens aka migrant workers.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 04:36 pm
double post deleted
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 04:36 pm
Thomas wrote:
mysteryman wrote:
Most produce is grown in the San Joaquin valley in central California. It is then trucked to every state,and every major city.
If trucks stopped hauling food into NYC,then NYC would be completely out of food in all of its warehouses and grocery stores in 3 days.

That's the way it currently is. But two generations ago, New York city got its food from places like upstate New York. This changed when transportation costs declined. It can change back when they rise again.


Thats true,but then you lose the variety and selection you have now.
You wont be able to get fresh oranges in wintertime,or grapes,or many other varieties of fruits and produce that cant grow in NY in the wintertime.
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Aug, 2005 04:37 pm
Well, NC govenor announced serious need to conserve gasoline here in the state. Evidently we have two pipelines that feed the Southeast from the gulf. Due to electrical outages from the hurricane, those aren't pumping. We may have two days worth of gasoline in North Carolina / South Carolina, but they aren't sure exactly how much is in the line at this moment.

Some stations are already closed down due to being out of gas. Governor has also asked people to reconsider holiday weekend plans due to the shortage.

Gas went from 2.87 when we filled up today, to 3.05 five minutes later at the same station, and they are anticipating 3.25 tomorrow if not sooner.

People will be adapting FAST here if the electricity stays off down there.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.13 seconds on 03/18/2025 at 01:35:05