Gas prices Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Edit Profile

FerrariChat.com » Off Topic Archives » Archive through May 09, 2003 » Gas prices « Previous Next »

Author Message
ross koller (Ross)
Intermediate Member
Username: Ross

Post Number: 1121
Registered: 3-2002
Posted on Monday, April 28, 2003 - 4:28 am:   

arlie, my suggestion to you to stop embarasssing yourself, was not a defense of ceo's. frankly, every person is capable of saying and doing stupid things, ceo's and tv station engineers included.
nevertheless,you just don't get how things work, and given your responses to those trying to explain things to you, you probably never will either. thats fine. ignorant, but fine. at least we all know how to categorize your future statements.
Jere Dunham (Questioner)
Member
Username: Questioner

Post Number: 492
Registered: 1-2003
Posted on Saturday, April 26, 2003 - 10:31 am:   

On this, you and I agree totally 100%
Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member
Username: Arlie

Post Number: 1060
Registered: 5-2002
Posted on Friday, April 25, 2003 - 6:42 pm:   

Jere, DES has to be an alien. How could a real human stay awake 24 hours a day to be on Ferrarichat?

Jere Dunham (Questioner)
Member
Username: Questioner

Post Number: 488
Registered: 1-2003
Posted on Friday, April 25, 2003 - 6:22 pm:   

And I wondered why Des knows so much about these alien conspiracies. He almost gave himself away.
Maybe he can help me raise a little of that gold stuff that I will not put in a bank.
Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member
Username: Arlie

Post Number: 1059
Registered: 5-2002
Posted on Friday, April 25, 2003 - 5:51 pm:   

"And on your statement about unions. You are doing a complete about face here. First you jump on everyone saying they are necessary to combat the deplorable working conditions and now you say you do not need anyone to represent you and that your place voted the union out in 1983. Which side of your mouth do you decide to talk out of each day?"

Understandable that you view my statements as a "double standard". But realize that the working conditions of MY company were NOT "deplorable" back in 1981 when I was hired. (or ANY time for that matter.) THEREFORE, I did not need anyone to represent me. But as we have seen in the curent American Airline fiasco, attempts at abusing the "little guy" workers still continue. And the really sad thing is that the abusers, like the American Airline CEO, may have to resign to keep the company looking good, but they will never REALLY suffer. They will walk away with a fat bank account and 2 or 3 retirement homes and perks that are worth more than the average person's yearly salary. So there is really no justice for their attempts at abusing the working class.
Actually, the aliens did not master mind the banking system. The fact is, aliens do not use money. They learned how to synthesize gold artificially eons ago. So a gold based economic system means nothing to them. Ask DES. He's an alien!


Jere Dunham (Questioner)
Member
Username: Questioner

Post Number: 486
Registered: 1-2003
Posted on Friday, April 25, 2003 - 4:36 pm:   

Arlie,

Thank you very much for the enlightening exchange.

I am glad you got to work so closely with your CEO. I guess that makes him different from all the other "fat cats" out there. I believe if you will check, most of the CEO's have a very good understanding of their businesses and an awful lot of responsibility lies on their shoulders. The media even said that Don Carty was an excellent manager/CEO with an oustanding understanding of how an airline works. He just made an unforgiveable mistake and now he is paying the price. I do not condone what he did and if I worked for A/A I would probably want him out also. But, not all CEO's fall into that category. I believe yours builds a case for that. You seem to like him and I do not see you classifying him the way you classify all other CEO's.

And on your statement about unions. You are doing a complete about face here. First you jump on everyone saying they are necessary to combat the deplorable working conditions and now you say you do not need anyone to represent you and that your place voted the union out in 1983. Which side of your mouth do you decide to talk out of each day?

Nosey questions? Maybe. I would just like to know where someone gets his information and what they base it on. I have a much easier time accepting your assertions if you base them in fact and backed up.

And my bank account pin number??? Banks, I don't believe in them. You see they are just all a big conspiracy masterminded at Area 51 with the aid of the aliens taken from Roswell New Mexico. Just ask Des, he can tell you about them.

Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member
Username: Arlie

Post Number: 1055
Registered: 5-2002
Posted on Friday, April 25, 2003 - 2:49 pm:   

Jere, not that it's any of your business, but I have worked side by side with the OWNER/CEO of our company. He spent several months of on-the-job training in the trenches doing each and every job in this building during his orientation period. His father wanted him to have personal hands on experience with every job to get a real feel for what his employees go through. I spent several days working with him.
As for your questions, they don't mean a thing. Just link over to Foxnews.com like I suggested and you will read for yourself about the antics of the fat-cat CEO types who get full of themselves. Not my fault that you and Ross can't read plain english.
As for unions, I live in a right-to-work state. For almost a year, I was the ONLY person in my department who refused to join the union because I didn't NEED anybody to represent me. NOBODY represented me when I came knocking on their door looking for a job, I did it by myself. So I figured that I was capable of keeping a job BY MYSELF. Again, not that it's any of your business, the other employees voted the union OUT back in 1983. It's been that way ever since.

As for your number 6 question:
"Are you having fun watching the responses you get from your apparent disregard for the questions presented to you????"

I don't make it a habit of answering nosey questions from semi-strangers on an open forum.

Jere, what did you say your bank account PIN number is?



Mike B (Srt_mike)
Junior Member
Username: Srt_mike

Post Number: 145
Registered: 12-2002
Posted on Friday, April 25, 2003 - 2:41 pm:   

Arlie,

Nobody ever said that some CEO's aren't bad. The topic of discussion was gas prices, but you kept changing the topic and now you're arguing that management and CEO's are greedy "fat cats". It's sort of like you asking me what kind of car I drive and my response is "yes it IS a beautiful day today!". Why don't you stick to the topic????

As for Carty, he appears to be a devious person. He didn't do anything illegal. He took a gamble and he paid the price. Now he has no job. That's capitalism at work. You say that is the "truth of how the world works". That's like saying "poor people are criminals... thats the fact of life".

Arlie, you are the most pessimistic person I've ever seen! I wonder how many employees of AA have been fired or resigned over the years for falsifying employment applications, theft, dishonesty and other things... I bet a lot! But the only one you focus on is the CEO and claim they are all "greedy fat cats" and prove it by the actions of one?

Arlie, you won't accept it, but it's people like you that cause alot of these problems in the first place. Those employees who are so venemous towards management are the reason exceptionally strict conduct is mandated in so many workplaces. Do you keep your bosses on their toes by threatening to run to the shop steward if they don't give you the ergonomic chair that the guy down the hall got, or don't give you the mandatory 3% annual raise regardless of performance? The irony is priceless.
Jere Dunham (Questioner)
Member
Username: Questioner

Post Number: 485
Registered: 1-2003
Posted on Friday, April 25, 2003 - 2:22 pm:   

Arlie,

I hope the "fat-cat CEO" who owns the station where you work doesn't get wind of your attitude toward the upper level people. He just might not understand your understanding of things.

I love how you avoid all questions to you by skating around them. So, just a few more.

1.Are you now or have you ever been a union member or employee????

2. Are you in a management position???

3. Do you own your own company????

4. Are you a salaried employee or is your pay based on production and merit????

5. Are you ashamed to tell us what you do???

6. Are you having fun watching the responses you get from your apparent disregard for the questions presented to you????
Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member
Username: Arlie

Post Number: 1054
Registered: 5-2002
Posted on Friday, April 25, 2003 - 2:06 pm:   

Ross said:"arlie, stop posting on this while you still have a micron of credibility on other subjects. what you don't know about how the world works would max out our bandwidth."

Hey Ross, I know what I saw on the news last night. The CEO of American Airlines resigned because he was caught red handed trying to use the money from the lower level employees to save the airline and feather his secret nest without their knowledge. No he's out of a job. That's exactly the kind of CEO fat-catting that I've been talking about.

From Foxnews.com: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,85167,00.html

"Employees voted last week to accept concessions but reacted angrily when they later learned that the company had approved bonuses and pension payments for top executives. The company canceled bonuses for the top seven executives but left in place the $41 million in pension funding for 45 executives.

Carty apologized for not disclosing the executive perks sooner, but his relationship with employees was beyond repair, union leaders said."

Hey Ross, what were you saying about my comments regarding fat-cat CEOs? I suggest you go over to Foxnews and read it for yourself. Sounds like you can't accept the truth about how the world works yourself.



Jere Dunham (Questioner)
Member
Username: Questioner

Post Number: 476
Registered: 1-2003
Posted on Friday, April 25, 2003 - 8:33 am:   

Arlie,

If you will allow, I would like to reply to your "union" statement. Unions, in the beginning were formed to do just exactly as you say. They were started to help workers organize against deplorable working conditions and give the employees a voice with the management and ownership. As I said, "in the beginning."

Unions have become very large and complex organizations that have changed over the years just like everything else has. In fact, many companies are not unionizing now as management now knows that in order to keep good employees, they must offer decent wage packages along with benefits and good working conditions. Nissan Motors Corp. is an example of this. When they opened their American production plant, it was opened non-union. The Auto Workers Union came in and tried to get the workers to vote the union in but they were voted down. The workers said that they were receiving better treatment there than many of the plants that are part of the union.

If you have not been a member of a union or an employee of one, you probably do not completely understand the workings of them and can probably get yourself in deep water by speaking on things you do not have a full understanding of. BTW, yes, I have been a union member of two different unions and in 1968 was a union shop steward for the RWDSU (Retail, wholesale department store union). I got to be involved in labor negotiations and settlements and had to help resolve disputes between the members and management so I believe I have a little experience in what you were bringing up.

Unions no longer are needed to make sure the workplace is a safe place to work. Osha does a OK job of overlooking that. The wage issues are not as big an issue anymore. The NLRB will help oversee any employee disputes in that area. Too often today, unions use their numbers to try to force things through intimidation and threats of strikes. Not exactly why they were founded.

And Art, I must agree with Mike B and Randall that there are differences in ability, training, skill and the like that make some in the workforce more expendable than others. That is just the way it is. Someone properly trained in accounting and finance with good human relations skills will do better in the role of CFO than someone trained in say electronics and computer science. It is just the way the world works. Unfortunately for some, they have not received enough training or have not raised their skills to the required levels to make them almost irreplacable (and we know no one is irreplacable).

And yes, there will always be someone who makes more money, drives a faster cars, collects more toys, has a better looking wife or girlfriend (or both) or many other such things. It is just like driving on the freeway. No matter how fast we drive, there will be someone who has to pass us and drive faster. I try not to judge people by their income. I would rather not know what they make or are worth. If I base things on money, I am seriously limiting the wonderful relationships that could be had. Money does not make the person. I like to think that I could have a friend who works in the very lowest skilled profession and a friend who is CEO of some very large company. It is the person, not their station.

And just so you'll know, no I am not a CEO, CFO, COO of anything except maybe my home but then again the Chairman of the Board (my wife) may not agree with that. I put in a lot of hours to make what I do and I know it is miniscule compared to the majority on FC. But, I like you, have been on this planet long enough to have had the opportunity to experience a lot of different things and make a lot of mistakes along the way that I hopefully learned from.

I ask a lot of questions and offer up my opinions but I know they are just that--opinions. And like they say, "Opinions are like a**holes, everyone has one."
ross koller (Ross)
Intermediate Member
Username: Ross

Post Number: 1109
Registered: 3-2002
Posted on Friday, April 25, 2003 - 4:40 am:   

art, there are refs all over the place in california, as you say, but if there was somebody who thought they could get the mogas to the place where the price was set 20cts higher, for less than that 20 cts and thereby undercut the others by a few pennies, they would. unless you are talking about some middle-of-f,,,-nowhere backwater where there are 2 stations and the owners are brothers.
as far as the cal energy crisis, so far the feds have not found any illegal action the part of the energy companies, other than enron. the rest were manipulating the system but that is within the rules. the settlements that have been reached so far amount to about 10% of what you and cal have claimed for, and that is only because they wanted to get you guys off their backs. but that is a whole seperate argument.
my point was more to the fact that the cal system of capping consumer prices on the one hand and ignoring the market fluctuated prices of the raw material is just plain stupid, and will eventually result in another one of these crisis in the future, except there won't be too many energy companies to blame since virtually nobody wants to trade there anymore, and nobody is going to build you any new power plants in that environment. (btw, cal credit risk is now classified as worse than some third world countries now.)

arlie, stop posting on this while you still have a micron of credibility on other subjects. what you don't know about how the world works would max out our bandwidth.
Mike B (Srt_mike)
Junior Member
Username: Srt_mike

Post Number: 142
Registered: 12-2002
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 9:34 pm:   

But Art, that only holds true if, as you hinted at - better could mean "more money", "better genetics", etc. I hope that's not true, because I started with nothing, and my family is not "connected" to anyone. So by that definition, I'm probably one of the WORST people ever to live! :-)

What exactly did I accuse Arlie of? The only thing I think about him is that he is wrong in his reasoning about gas prices - completely wrong. I don't think I accused him of being a worse person. I was simply saying to you that I find it ironic that you saw that in my posts, because it makes it appear that maybe you judged Arlie to be the things you feel others are judging him to be.

Maybe I am wrong. Still curious as to what makes Arlie tick and why he's so pissed about gas prices.
arthur chambers (Art355)
Intermediate Member
Username: Art355

Post Number: 1419
Registered: 6-2001
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 7:40 pm:   

MikeB:

You missed the entire point of each of my comments. Sorry about that. While Arilie may or may not do the things you have accused him of, his points are valid in some of those instances.

As to the world being set up for the better and brightest. I never said better equaled intelligence. Sometimes better is just being a member of the lucky sperm club. I suggest that in the full context of my comments. However our system is set up for those who are "better" than their competition, whether it be smarter, harder working, etc. The point that I made wasn't that, it was that generally once someone had a little success, they sometimes forget the common man. You apparently missed that point. Sorry about that.

I never intended to judge and my point was that we shouldn't judge each other, there is always someone better. Sorry you missed that point.

LMAO

Art
Mike B (Srt_mike)
Junior Member
Username: Srt_mike

Post Number: 141
Registered: 12-2002
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 7:17 pm:   

<<1.>>

First of all, Marie Antoinette never said that - since we're hot on clarifying what is and is not an urban legend.

Second of all, Art, how do you figure the "world is set up" for those who are smarter, better, etc? What is "better" anyway? Ironically, the USA is one of the few places where inherent intelligence doesn't buy you a whole lot. Hard work pays off.

<<<2.>>>

Would you not agree that many times unions circumvent supply and demand? My cousin is a plumber. When he does "union jobs" he gets paid 8 hours a day but rarely works that many hours. He also gets paid almost double what he does on non-Union work. I recently was FORCED to pay "union rate" for some electrical work we had done at a client site. Cost to install "electrical outlet" - $210. What did the guy do? Plug in an extension cord and say "here ya go!". Please. Unions had a function a long time ago. Today, they are, for the most part, a hinderance to their members and serve to create mediocrity and stifle individual accomplishment. Art, how many Unions have you been a member of? I've been a member of 3 (not by choice).

<<<3.>>>

Wrong. The difference is most on this board are not complaining about those who make more than they do. If you want to at someone, be prepared for some bitching back. I have the highest regard for what anyone on this board makes. If you have what it takes to earn $20MM a year, more power to you! You accuse others of juding Arlie, but Art, the irony is that YOU are the one judging here! Nobody judged Arlie. Some asked what he does for a living. Not to make fun of him, but to get some insight into his background. Arlie is the one judging well off people, calling them "fat cats" and saying things like "if you guys are all so rich that you can afford....". The facts are plain and simple - Arlie is the one doing the judging.

<<4.>>>

He disparages hisself. I have seen insult, name calling, evasion and constantly switching arguments from Arlie. I have not seen this from the other side.

Is Arlie supposed to get a break because he's not one of the rich intelligentsia? Art, ironically you are the one saying he isn't in that group. He may very well be... I believe you may have judged him (and others) prematurely.

How ironic.
arthur chambers (Art355)
Intermediate Member
Username: Art355

Post Number: 1418
Registered: 6-2001
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 6:24 pm:   

Jere:

Arlie is an engineer at a TV station in lovely Arkansas. Having said that, some of the points he makes are valid. Both you and Dave are far more articulate then he, but he does make some good points:

1. The world is set to for those who are smarter, better etc. Arlie doesn't believe that this is fair. I've spent most of my life pounding on those who believe that just because they are a little better, have better jobs, have more money, that they can do what they will. Most of the time I've been successful at that enterprise. The reaons why I did that is because those in power generally forget what the average person needs to do to get along. I'm constantly reminded of the famous: "Let them eat cake." from the beheaded woman, Marie something.

2. The issue of strikers is how unions are able to attempt to even up the playing field. We have various statutes regarding Fair Labor Practices. I have yet to see, or hear someone in business who abides by those laws. It is not infrequent for an employor to deliberately refused to negotiate in good faith over an agreement, because of they can get by the NLRB, they can then impose their own working conditions.

3. We do keep score in how much we earn. Having said that, I'm sure that no matter who you are, someone here makes more than you. I recall telling someone about some of the things that I did, and he advised me that he paid 6.5 million in taxes that year. Obviously more than I earned, but I suspect that perhaps I may make more than an awful lot of people on this board. Point being, no one here is the absolute best at anything, there is always someone better. Pointing out someone who may not earn as much as you, just points out your own insecurity.

4. I generally do not agree with Arlie much, I think that he does rant a bit, however, he has made a point or two, and to disparage him detracts from this board.

IHMO

Art

Randall (Randall)
Member
Username: Randall

Post Number: 361
Registered: 1-2003
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 6:15 pm:   

Now the curiousity has finally gotten to me...
Arlie, why won't you answer anyone's questions? How old are you? What job do you have?
Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member
Username: Arlie

Post Number: 1052
Registered: 5-2002
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 6:07 pm:   

"Unions (which are the entities that go on strike) are an attempt to circumvent supply and demand by banding together to allow an immediate halt in supply and thereby extort concessions from folk."

Strange, I've been thinking all these years that the basic original purpose of unions were to demand basic decent working conditions and wages and eliminate the work force abuse that was so prevelant before the 1920s.
Thanks for clarifying this for me. Though I'm sure that several MILLION workers would not agree with you.

"More likely a bunch of entrepreneurial companies would offer trash services for a price, and people would soon forget about the trash guys. At least that's how I see it."

That's not what happened in Memphis in 1968. The sanitation workers went on strike to bring to light the deplorable conditions and wages that they were working under. Martin Luther King traveled to Memphis to help their plight. He gave his life for the cause of civil rights and decent treatment. That's alot more than any fat cat CEOs have done.


Jere Dunham (Questioner)
Member
Username: Questioner

Post Number: 475
Registered: 1-2003
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 5:53 pm:   

I've had all the fun I can stand for one day. I am going home. Maybe, but I doubt it, Arlie will attempt to post an intelligent answer to at least one of our questions.

See ya,
Mike B (Srt_mike)
Junior Member
Username: Srt_mike

Post Number: 138
Registered: 12-2002
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 5:48 pm:   

Lenin, I mean Arlie,

In a capitalistic society like the one we live in, if the trash workers went on strike, the corporations would have to find more people to take out the trash. Supply and demand. Unions (which are the entities that go on strike) are an attempt to circumvent supply and demand by banding together to allow an immediate halt in supply and thereby extort concessions from folk.

I don't think Microsoft would be closing down if the sanitation workers went on strike. More likely a bunch of entrepreneurial companies would offer trash services for a price, and people would soon forget about the trash guys. At least that's how I see it.

Arlie, why won't you answer anyone's questions? How old are you? What job do you have? Why do you have such a bad case of "little man" syndrome to the point where you loathe anyone who makes anything of themselves because they did it "on the back of the little man"????
Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member
Username: Maranelloman

Post Number: 1284
Registered: 1-2002
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 5:45 pm:   

Upload


Keep flailing, Arlie. You'll hit a target sooner or later.

Jere, you're probably correct. Sigh.
Jere Dunham (Questioner)
Member
Username: Questioner

Post Number: 473
Registered: 1-2003
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 5:38 pm:   

Dave,

I don't think he has the ability to come back with a good answer to any of these questions.

Perhaps we have someone here who has not seen enough of the world to have really secured his maturity in it.

Just my thoughts, but his choosing not to answer some very simple questions gives me the indication that he cannot do so intelligently. But then, not much of what he has been saying has been very intelligible anyway.
Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member
Username: Arlie

Post Number: 1051
Registered: 5-2002
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 5:36 pm:   

"Some people are more expendable." That statement could go right up there with the infamous Nazi excuse. "We were just following orders." Or right next to "Let them eat cake" by Marie Antoinette.

"How about taking a janitor and replacing Bill Gates? I'll bet Microsoft stock would really soar..." And I bet that Microsoft's empire would grind to a halt if the Seattle sanitation workers went on strike like they did in Memphis back in 1968. Or New York many years ago. Suddenly the little guy was VERY important. Were your CEOs helping to clean up the garbage that was lying on the sidewalks? Or did the importance of the "worker" suddenly become more apparent and important to the overall business world?

Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member
Username: Maranelloman

Post Number: 1283
Registered: 1-2002
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 5:31 pm:   

Arlie, do NOT misquote me.

I said OPEC determines the price of OIL, not gas. However, between the price of oil and TAXES, Arlie, you have 80%+ of the price of gas. The rest is refining, transporting, retail overhead, etc. There is margin at each step, just like there is with EVERY product sold in a multi-tier distribution model. Any of this ringing any bells inside your noggin?

And, still waiting, Arlie. Methinks you are not man enough to answer... That's too bad.
Randall (Randall)
Member
Username: Randall

Post Number: 358
Registered: 1-2003
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 5:29 pm:   

That's not eliteism, it's reality. Some people are more expendable. It isn't because they're bad people, it just has to do with training, education and potential. I've been doing my job for several years, I'm trained in many areas and fully qualified all I can. Compared to a new guy that can't do anything, I am more valuable. When a business is firing people, they pick the people that are more expendable.

As far as who determines the price of gas, I think a lot of people have input (OPEC, CEO's, taxes and especially the consumers) But until it gets over $3 a gallon, I see no reason to be upset. We have extremely cheap gas for the type of country we live in.
Jere Dunham (Questioner)
Member
Username: Questioner

Post Number: 472
Registered: 1-2003
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 5:24 pm:   

And let's take the clerk out of the mailroom and put him in place of the CEO. I'll bet he can do that job real well. How about taking a janitor and replacing Bill Gates? I'll bet Microsoft stock would really soar...

Yes Arlie, unfortunately some employees are more expendable than others. Some just happen to be better qualified to do the job at hand than someone else.

Knock, knock, is anyone home???????
Jere Dunham (Questioner)
Member
Username: Questioner

Post Number: 471
Registered: 1-2003
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 5:20 pm:   

Does anyone hear someone speaking???????????

Hmmmm, who could that be??????????????

We're waiting Arlie. Does something deter you from answering a few simple questions??????
Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member
Username: Arlie

Post Number: 1050
Registered: 5-2002
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 5:15 pm:   

Saying that OPEC determines the total price of a gallon of gas is like saying that farmers determine the price of a box of breakfast cereal or a loaf of bread. You guys don't actually believe that, do you? Saying that workers are more expendable than CEOs is getting dangerously close to the old Animal Farm addage: "Some animals are MORE equal than others."
That's about as far away from the American ideal as anyone can get. Smells of eliteism to me.

Jere Dunham (Questioner)
Member
Username: Questioner

Post Number: 470
Registered: 1-2003
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 5:12 pm:   

Oh, and Arlie,

Randall is in the military now. He is not a CEO but I think he knows of which he speaks. Are you going to attack him also because he does not necessarily agree with you and your rants??

Anyone else been in the military sometime in the past???????
Randall (Randall)
Member
Username: Randall

Post Number: 357
Registered: 1-2003
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 5:06 pm:   

It's just the way of life. As you go up the chain the job often (not always) gets better and so does the pay. Look at fast food, the people that cook and work the counter have terrible jobs, just ask anyone that's ever worked it. The manager has a better job, does less and gets paid more. Then there's the owner, who has it better once again.

Comparing soldiers to CEO's is like comparing apples to oranges. How about E-1 soldiers in the field to O-5 officers in an office? Do you think the E-1 that can be replaced in a second is worthy of more pay than that officer?
Jere Dunham (Questioner)
Member
Username: Questioner

Post Number: 469
Registered: 1-2003
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 5:03 pm:   

Arlie,

You tap dance real well. You sidestepped every question I posed to you. And now you bring in the military. Hmmmm, Art was in the military and is doing well now. Should we attack him because he does well??? I believe Charles said he was in the military also at one time. He seems to be doing well. Let's attack him also. I was in the military also. Would you like to attack me.

Maybe you should do a little research before you start opening your mouth. You know, some of these CEO's you despise so much could actually be heroes themselves. They just did it earlier. And many are supporting our troops by offering to keep their employment going for the reserves and still giving full benefits and all even though it is not required. I do know that Mark Cuban here in Dallas (Dallas Mavericks owner and internet multi-multi-millionaire) has started a fund for the families of those killed in Iraq and is taking care of them. Attack him too Arlie, while you attack everyone else who has made something of themselves.

Now just one more time.....

What kind of business are you in???

Are you a CEO????

Are you of the age to do these things?????

How much money are you worth in the business world per year?????
Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member
Username: Maranelloman

Post Number: 1282
Registered: 1-2002
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 5:00 pm:   

Arlie, none of what you found on BP's web site at all contradicts what I have stated. The Mideast is in what BP calls Africa.

By the way, you seem to have an especially rigid hard-on for BP. Did they fire you?

And none of what you posted acknowledges the most important FACT here: namely, that OPEC determines the price of crude, not BP. So place the blame where it lies, Arlie.

We're still waiting for the answers to the questions we've asked you. I have answered your questions. Now, kindly have the courage, intestinal fortitude, and good manners to do the same.
Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member
Username: Arlie

Post Number: 1049
Registered: 5-2002
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 4:39 pm:   

Amazing how people expect a desk bound CEO to be worth multi million dollar salaries, but an American soldier with a rifle can lay his life on the line in a jungle or a desert conflict for a paltry few dollars a month. I wonder how many fat cat CEOs would gladly donate a huge chunk of their salary to provide a better salary for the freedom fighting American GIs that made his lifestyle possible? Instead, those CEOs constantly try to figure out ways to avoid taxes for themselves and their companies, increase their perks, or move their corporate headquarters to someplace like the Bahamas. (like Stanley Tools was trying to do.) And if we're lucky, the truth about all those perks will come out in the divorce court papers (GE).
Jere Dunham (Questioner)
Member
Username: Questioner

Post Number: 467
Registered: 1-2003
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 4:27 pm:   

Arlie,

What kind of business are you in????

Do you need to make a profit to stay in business????

Do you have research and development cost???

Do you have to acquire land in order to operate your business???

Do you have employees that rely on you for support and benefits along with a decent wage and working environment????

Do you have to pay government imposed taxes and duties????

Do you have shipping and handling charges that you must pay???

Do you really have any idea what these and other items it takes to run a business (office supplies, advertising, unemployment taxes, business equipment, utilities etc) all add up to???

Or are you just someone who likes to sit in the wings and complain because someone makes too much money???? I hope you one day make a lot of money and maybe then you will understand that in order to make money, you have to spend money.

And your remark about a CEO should be glad to make 50K a year. This only tells me of your maturity level and that you really have little in the way of comprehension of how things really work. A man to guides a company from little to riches deserves to be paid in accordance to what he does. The stock holders demand that they get a good return on their investment or his head could roll. Say you have a company with 10,000 employees and they all make a decent living and are satisfied with what they get. The stockholders are pleased because the CEO directs the company to an 8% growth the first two quarters in a down market. The company produces $460M in revenue that is taxable and the city, county, state and nation that it is in love the amount they receive. If he can do this for so many, don't you think he deserves a good return, and no $50K is not good. A man this good deserves to receive at least $1M plus any stock options that he might accrue. This is the kind of CEO you want running your company and you pay him accordingly. If he does not produce, then you take appropriate action to enhance his performance or see him seeking somewhere else.

What would you want for yourself if you were in this position??? Would you settle for $50K a year? If you say yes, I can see that you have very low expectations of yourself. If you have low expectations of yourself, you are setting yourself up for failure and it will probably happen.

Think about it.
Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member
Username: Arlie

Post Number: 1048
Registered: 5-2002
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 4:24 pm:   

Dave, what your saying concerning British Petroleum doesn't quite jive with their website.
http://www.bp.com/company_overview/profile/energy.asp

From their website:

BP embodies all these characteristics. Our market capitalization, capital employed and return on capital place us among the world's leading companies. Each day we generate almost three million barrels of oil equivalent production, of which 62% is oil and 38% natural gas. We rank in the top three in terms of reserves in the global oil and gas industry. We have well-established operations in Europe, North and South America, Asia, Australasia and much of Africa.

More than 70% of our profits are generated in Europe and the United States. Our financial strength allows us to compete globally for large-scale projects that offer the opportunity to create distinctive returns. Today we have leadership positions in exciting new developments in Africa, South America, Asia and the Caspian region."

With all those operations completely OUTSIDE of any area of conflict that might disrupt the flow of oil, why would they have to import their oil from a questionable supply source like the Iraq area during the middle of a war? They wouldn't. So even if the flow was disrupted from the Middle East and Venezuela, they still have the rest of their global operation to draw oil from. If they decide that they ONLY want to obtain their oil from Mexican or American sources or wherever, that's their business. And wouldn't it be convenient for them if that help maintain a shorter supply and a higher price per gallon???



Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member
Username: Maranelloman

Post Number: 1281
Registered: 1-2002
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 4:14 pm:   

Oh, and Arlie? While you are pondering all of this, I have one other question for ya:

In addition to your lack of outrage at the FACT that 25% to 33% of the price of gas consists of TAXES, where is your outrage that the price of oil is 100% totally controlled by a pack of 3rd world sh!tholes who clearly have contempt & outright hatred for their #1 customer, the US? Where is it, Arlie?

I guess it's a lot easier for you to blame the CEO of an oil company for the bizarre fluctuations of gas prices--the title of this thread--than to lay blame squarely where it belongs: (a) ever-increasing demand by people unwilling to conserve even 5%; (b) greedy government taxers; and (c) 3rd world a$$clowns in OPEC.
Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member
Username: Maranelloman

Post Number: 1280
Registered: 1-2002
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 3:55 pm:   

Arlie, I will type s-l-o-w-l-y so you will understand: BP may have rigs all over the world. But it supplies its US wholesale operations via supplies in Mexico, Venezuela, and the Mid East. That is a FACT. As is the FACT that the name on the retail gas station has no bearing on whether that station sells gas from its parent company's wells. They all sell & resell crude--that's why it's called a COMMODITY, subject to world market pricing.

Arlie, perhaps you should become even remotely familiar with the way oil companies actually operate day-to-day BEFORE you start your left-wing knee-jerk ranting about how unethical they are. BTW, I have absolutely no connection to any oil company whatsoever, and never have. I do own stock in a few--hence my basic familiarity with where their supplies come from & the backgrounds of their executives.

Still waiting for you to answer the questions posed to you. Do you have the stones to answer, Arlie? It doesn't appear you do, so far.

Upload

Upload

Upload
Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member
Username: Arlie

Post Number: 1046
Registered: 5-2002
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 3:48 pm:   

Dave, you need to check the archives for the original posting concerning the BP question. Reference was made to many of their offshore oil rigs being in areas FAR removed from any Iraq or Venezuelan situations. I would search the archives for that posting, but you DEMAND answers immediately. I didn't think that you could stand the wait.

Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member
Username: Maranelloman

Post Number: 1279
Registered: 1-2002
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 3:44 pm:   

Arlie, do not confues the name BP (which recently merged with Amoco, by the way) with where its oil comes from. The US gets oil from the old Amoco side of the house, which means Venezuela/Mideast/Mexico, just like everyone else.

See how easy answering reasonable questions is, Arlie? Still waiting on YOUR answers, holmes.
Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member
Username: Arlie

Post Number: 1045
Registered: 5-2002
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 3:41 pm:   

Notice the continuing silence in regards to the subject of British Petroleum's offshore rigs which are nowhere near any war zone or Venezuelan uprising. I ask again, what's their excuse for raising prices during the Iraq war? Giant squid invasion?

Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member
Username: Maranelloman

Post Number: 1277
Registered: 1-2002
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 3:31 pm:   

Randall, you are right. Venezuela is one of our 2 largest suppliers--or was, before the disturbances against their Marxist president cut off the flow. And this happened right in peak demand period: one of the coldest winters in decades. But don't tell that to Arlie. He would expect the importers, wholesalers, and retailers to sell at a loss when supply is thin because they should not be able to recoup their increased costs if it means they make an "unfair" (as defined only by him) profit.
Erik (Teenferrarifan)
New member
Username: Teenferrarifan

Post Number: 38
Registered: 2-2003
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 3:26 pm:   

Guys I just want to say that I drive an SUV and although I wish gas were cheaper I know that for $60 I can last a month on a tank of gas. Its like $15 bucks a week and that is for one of the biggest and lowest gas mileage vehicles around. I don't make that much money being a student, but It is not that tough to make sure I have enough. If you owned a VW you could go twice as far for a lot less. Does a 25 cent increase in gas really screw up your budget? Gas stations should be able to make money.
Erik
Randall (Randall)
Member
Username: Randall

Post Number: 353
Registered: 1-2003
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 3:26 pm:   

I thought the gas prices were creeping up earlier because of the problems in South America? I've heard we get a lot of oil from them also.
Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member
Username: Maranelloman

Post Number: 1273
Registered: 1-2002
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 2:36 pm:   

Keep flailing, Arlie. And keep ignoring the reasonable questions posed to you. Heaven knows, we wouldn't want the facts to get in the way of your Kruschev-like bleating.

Upload
Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member
Username: Arlie

Post Number: 1043
Registered: 5-2002
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 2:30 pm:   

You guys make ME laugh sometimes. I wonder how some of you guys manage to get your shirts on in the morning with all that stuffing inside of them.
You guys seem to equate stating the facts with complaining. Watch many of the nightly newscasts during the past year and you will see stories about the high cost of gasoline. It was creeping up during the Iraq war. And for what legitimate reason? The "threat" of shortages due to war? The "supposition" that supplies "might" run low during the war? Sounds like a whole lot of "supposin'" and "maybe-ing" or anything else that could be dreamed up to raise prices. Don't know why you guys can't see that. The airline industry sees it. The motel industry sees it. The average Joe sees it. You guys must be so wealthy that you never even have to look at a gas station price sign. Everybody else in the country sees it. Prices have dropped in my area about 7 cents or so since the Iraq war. I guess the oil companies can't use the "threat" of war shortages as an excuse to keep those prices up any longer. Maybe an alien spacecraft invasion will be the next excuse.

arthur chambers (Art355)
Intermediate Member
Username: Art355

Post Number: 1410
Registered: 6-2001
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 2:27 pm:   

Arlie:

I try to either run or bike about 30 miles per week. What's wrong with that? You could get a double benefit: fitness, and transporation. Most neighborhoods don't get dangerous until the light is gone.

Art
arthur chambers (Art355)
Intermediate Member
Username: Art355

Post Number: 1409
Registered: 6-2001
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 2:25 pm:   

Ross:

Get your facts straight:

1. the refineries are in Northern California. Richmond and north on the SF bay has refineries. There are refineries in the south also. There are no extra travel costs. In fact, when questioned, the oil companies used the excuse of higher land costs. When it was pointed out that they'd had the land for quite a while, everybody got very quite. In my humble opinion, its price fixing pure and simple. Our elected officals have been taking too much of their money, and don't have the balls to go after them.

2. As to the energy crisis: Fact: all of the firms selling energy, including some municipalies engaged in price fixing, fraud, etc. to drive the price up. Despite repeated requests that the Feds do something (which under the law, the feds were REQUIRED to do) they kept posponing any action. Finally, after California's complaining for almost a year, the feds finally did what they were legally responsible to do. There was a federal investigation, and they found that Enron, and a substantial portion of the other energy company engaged in illegal acts, designed to raise the price to the State of California, utilities, etc. Those acts were in violation of both the Sherman anti trust act, and the California Unruh Act. The federal energy commission has recommended or ordered a refund of about 2.0Billion. California believes the true number is about 10Billion. Watch what happens in the litigation, I bet they get close to the 10 Billion.

As to the problem with energy: 100% of the California legislatures voted to privatize our system. That's right 100%, R & Ds. Too much money given by business interests. I'd make it illegal, with strong penalties.

Art
Mfennell70 (Mfennell70)
Junior Member
Username: Mfennell70

Post Number: 123
Registered: 7-2001
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 1:45 pm:   

Hah! No cable TV for me. I have cable Internet but I plan to write it off on my taxes.

I also live 8 miles from work (choices: smaller home, not working in Big City) and bike about 1/2 the time (another choice).

See Arlie, it's not so hard, though surely more work than just complaining.
Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member
Username: Maranelloman

Post Number: 1262
Registered: 1-2002
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 8:17 am:   

Randall, good post. Hawaii is a unique case, as it costs so much to transport refined petroleum to your islands. Gas prices have always been & probably always will be high.

Arlie,, conspicuous by absence are your outrage at taxes being 25%-33% of the retail price of gasoline, and your willingness to conserve to reduce the clutch the "evil fat cat" oil company execs have on your wallet. Here you are, on a Ferrari chat board, complaining about the suppliers of gasoline. That irony is priceless. As is your unwillingness to live closer to your work. I agree, it is tough to bike from suburbia to a job in the Big City. So, why not do what millions of Americans do? Move close to work, so you can walk, bike, or take mass transit? I guess it is easier & more fun to b!tch about someone making a legitimate profit from a product you refuse to consume less of than to actually make a change to fix things! Gosh, I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning!

And here's some fresh meat for your Brezhnev economics lesson: cable TV companies. Arlie, unlike oil companies, there is NO raw material cost, NO commodity fluctuation, NO new material do seek & extract (in fact, cable infrastructure has probablt all been amortized off years & years ago), NO susceptibility to wars, politics, or most disasters, and in every major city , there is a true, gov't-endorsed monopoly. And guess what? Despite all that (and how that fits into your Castro-like model of why the prices of cable TV rates should be therefore near zero), cable TV rates are higher than they have ever been, and have risen & continue to rise at 2x-3x the rate of inflation. Also unlike oil. Oh, and the "fat cat" cable execs truly are do-nothings: there are no physical risks to delivering cable TV--all they have to do is keep 500 channels flowing. Kind of like the water example you used earlier.

I will wait patiently for your vituperative outrage at the "greed" of cable TV rates.
ross koller (Ross)
Intermediate Member
Username: Ross

Post Number: 1099
Registered: 3-2002
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 4:54 am:   

arlie, you make me laugh. you are so out of your depth i hope you can swim. thx dave and mike for making the salient points.

art, to answer you cal question quite simply, since i gather that you didn't read my first post, the price differential of 20cts/gl between northern and southern cal is probably more/less transport and logistics based. ie more refining capacity in socal so to truck it north would cost money.
as far as the energy crisis in cal was concerned, the price manipulation was possible because of the rules that cal set-up. capitalism being what it is, and traders doing what they are paid to do, means any and every loop hole will be maximized. in cal the power companies are capped on the prices they can charge their consumers. this takes away the natural consumption inhibitor in a free market, namely that it costs more. and yet, the prices that the power companies have to pay for raw materials ie nat gas, fluctuate according to the market. this is a recipe for bankruptcy for the power companies in cal, and why nobody in their right mind will build any new plants out there either (which in case you missed it, is why there is a power shortage to begin with). and this set-up is grey davis' work.
Randall (Randall)
Member
Username: Randall

Post Number: 349
Registered: 1-2003
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 12:09 am:   

Man do I feel left out. I thought this post was all about gas prices.

I agree with MikeB. about alternatives to driving. Some areas it's not convenient as others, but I didn't drive a car for 3 years in here, just to save some money. You can always go with hybrid or mopeds if biking is too inconvenient. And by not driving so much, it will help to drive gas prices down, improve the environment, less dependencey on foriegn oil, less wear on roads and so on.

As far as taxes go, I couldn't care less. Our gas prices are awesome (LOOK I SAID SOMETHING POSITIVE!) and I have no complaints. In fact, if tomorrow we could have a great mass transit system here(Hawaii) I would be willing to pay up to an extra dollar per gallon.

As far as price fixing, the gas stations or whoever kind of have you by the balls. But as long as people keep buying, why shouldn't they keep charging? Hawaii always has a lot of trouble getting prices to come back down once they've gone up, and I know a couple years ago it was the local stations keeping the prices high to make some money.
Mike B (Srt_mike)
Junior Member
Username: Srt_mike

Post Number: 131
Registered: 12-2002
Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 8:51 pm:   

Arlie,

There is a difference between 'poor people' and 'bad neighborhoods'. I worked and had friends in lots of poor neighborhoods and I never felt unsafe going there. You saying all CEO's are "fat cats" who screw the little guy shows you have zero understanding of this subject. In your world are all black guys NBA players or muggers, all asian people are horrible drivers, and all CEO's fat cats screwing the little guy? If so, I feel bad for you - you need to get out there and experience life and stop feeling sorry for yourself.

As for being unable to ride a bicycle - so why not get a moped then? Why not get the most efficient vehicle that allows you to do what you need to do? And if you won't, then stop bitching about gas prices!

I LOVE my fast gas guzzling cars. Looking forward to picking up my almost-new 550 in another 6 weeks or so, and I will love every mile and smile when I fill it up, knowing those gas prices are CHEAP compared to what they could be based on supply and demand.

You're the guy who is uptight about gas prices. Why do you hang out on this site? And you (conveniently) forgot to answer the questions posted to you... what's up with that?
Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member
Username: Arlie

Post Number: 1039
Registered: 5-2002
Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 7:50 pm:   

"I saw a poor guy on the news who murdered a 7-11 clerk and stole the money from the cash register. Should I say all poor people are therefore criminals and should be in jail?"

So I guess that you wouldn't mind taking a late evening stroll with your wife and kids through the deserted downtown area of some of our large cities? Now don't be narrow minded and ASSUME that there might be homeless poor people, bums, vagrants, crack addicts, and mental wackos roaming the streets looking for victims. Just enjoy the walk with the family. Don't think that any harm will come to you. That would be narrow minded thinking.

"I'm pretty sure you can get from A to B without going on the highway - and it will be more scenic and healthier too."

Somehow, I don't think that a leisurely bicycle ride through gang turf would be conducive to good health.

Mike B, how ironic that you seem so worried about fuel efficient vehicles on a bulletin board devoted to high performance Ferrari sports cars.

Perhaps I could drive a 12 cylinder Testarossa. I could remove the spark plugs from all but 4 cylinders in a balanced pattern. Maybe I could figure out a way to pipe in Greenpeace approved air freshener to the unused cylinders and help improve the air quality on an 8 to 4 ratio as I drive.

Mike B (Srt_mike)
Junior Member
Username: Srt_mike

Post Number: 130
Registered: 12-2002
Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 7:37 pm:   

Arlie,

Equating all "fat cats" together because of what you saw with AA is a little disingenious. I saw a poor guy on the news who murdered a 7-11 clerk and stole the money from the cash register. Should I say all poor people are therefore criminals and should be in jail? How can you slam oil company execs just because their counterparts at AA tried to get away with a sneaky move?

As for not being able to ride a bike... I didn't realize the roadway system was so bad that the highway was the only path from A to B (A being home and B being work). Would you want to ride your bicycle on the highway? I'm pretty sure you can get from A to B without going on the highway - and it will be more scenic and healthier too. If you must go on the highway, why not get a very small and efficient motorcycle? Or if you must have a car, a hybrid vehicle?

You have multiple options for taking yourself out of the "slave to gas prices" pool, yet you appear not to avail yourself of them? Why not?

I'm curious - what kind of car do you drive Arlie? Will you tell us? I'm betting a few here will bust a gut when you tell us - only because I bet it ain't fuel efficient or not as fuel efficient as it could be!

That in itself is a bit hypocritical.
Tom Bakowsky (Tbakowsky)
Member
Username: Tbakowsky

Post Number: 348
Registered: 9-2002
Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 7:25 pm:   

Arlie you are right. I think along the same lines as you. Most people know that once you get to a certain level in a large company your pay goes way up but your responsabilites go down. I know a few corprate execs that bring thier toy's..er cars to me to service. I ask if thier busy or how's work..and they respond with I don't know ask my secritary. These guys seem to have more time to go play golf and take out "clients" then anyother business person I know. They have also told me that they wish they had something to do because they are board silly!!
Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member
Username: Arlie

Post Number: 1038
Registered: 5-2002
Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 6:59 pm:   

"Could you not bicycle to work?
No, because the nation's road and interstate highway systems was designed in an era when the CAR was KING. So most municipalities were laid out 50 years ago without mass transit in mind. So that's what we have to work with. And that pretty much makes a car and GASOLINE a mandatory requirement.

"Isn't it more a rant expressing a chip on your shoulder about people who are well off but do not, in your opinion, deserve it? If those "fat cats" just sit around picking the color of their new Caddy, and really have no talent, why don't you become one of them?"

How soon people forget the nightly network newscast that ran a few minutes earlier. As a reminder: American Airlines is teetering on the edge of bankruptcy because of hidden perks and pension plan contracts that were only available to the "upper crust" of the organization. The fat cats were happy to keep their mouths shut and save their own hides and their own pension plans at the expense of the concessions made by the flight attendants and other workers. But the truth came out that once again, fat cats were trying to use the little man to their advantage. Now the CEO is on the hot seat, and the whole company may be down the drain. Time will tell.

This isn't a case of "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em". I'm not a hypocrit. I want no part of being wealthy if it requires being a lieing, doubletalking, manipulator who climbs to the top of the heap on the backs of the working class and then reaps the benefits at retirement time as the workers shuffle off to the welfare line because they can't make ends meet.

As for discrediting myself with every post, I never knew that I had any credit to begin with.



Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member
Username: Maranelloman

Post Number: 1255
Registered: 1-2002
Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 6:45 pm:   

You may be right...but I do not believe that is true. I thought the consolidation of distributors has occurred during the Davis administration.

But either way, the Dems have controlled the Legislature forever, and they are responsible for this sort of thing. That is what I meant.
Mike B (Srt_mike)
Junior Member
Username: Srt_mike

Post Number: 128
Registered: 12-2002
Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 6:45 pm:   

Art,

I'm pretty sure the "R" stood for "retarded". Honest.

LOL just kidding.
arthur chambers (Art355)
Intermediate Member
Username: Art355

Post Number: 1401
Registered: 6-2001
Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 6:41 pm:   

Dave:

Our gas situation was created when a guy by the name of Wilson was governor. There was an R after his name on the ballot, honest.

Art
Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member
Username: Maranelloman

Post Number: 1254
Registered: 1-2002
Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 6:37 pm:   

Art, you may be right...but there are NO barriers to entry in that market! No one is forcing this situation! As I mentioned much earlier in this thread, the State of Ca. allowed the consolidation of gasoline wholesalers in Ca. to one-- a true monopoly. That is why you can only get 91 octane swill---and pay out the a$$ for it, too. You want change? Find out why a state ENTIRELY controlled by Democrats allowed this situation, which f_cks the little guy (whom the Demo's are always claiming to represent) right in the a$$. And then ask them why they tax gasoline so much.

Arlie, I observe the continuation of your hypocritical ignoring of the 30-55 cent taxes that are in every gallon we buy, and of your lack of willingness ot conserve, and finally of your ignorance of basic economics. All I will say to your absurd post is that you have absolutely no clue whereof you speak. None. Zero. Zilch. And your blind hatred for oil companies (did one fire you for insubordination, Arlie?) is obscuring your ability to make any coherent arguments in support of your goofy claims. So keep flailing away. You discredit yourself with each post.

:-)
Mike B (Srt_mike)
Junior Member
Username: Srt_mike

Post Number: 126
Registered: 12-2002
Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 6:32 pm:   

Arlie,

You are not suggesting the gasoline is more vital to human survival than water, are you? What more basic need do we have than water?

As for "having to pay" - do you really? Could you not bicycle to work? Or carpool? Or take a bus (i.e. carpooling)? Or get a home or apartment close to work (or work close to your home or apartment) and walk or bike to work? You have a TON of say over what you pay for gasoline. As Dave says, you don't even need to be a consumer of it at all! Why not buy one of those hybrid vehicles? Or better yet, get a moped that will get 70+MPG all day long.

Your point about pilots being underpaid proves out what I say - since when has responsibilty been an indicator of salary? Some of the most highly paid have little responsibility (actors, sports professionals).

In a free market system, you charge what the market will bear. I own my own business - and let me tell you, NOTHING gives me a woody more than when I see a big gap between what it costs me to make something and what I can sell it for.... ESPECIALLY when there is a large market for said product.

Arlie, what profession are you in? Unless you are a social worker, volunteer worker, or some other similar worker, you have NO right or reason to complain about what things cost. I bet your livelihood is directly related to the differential between what something costs to make and what it sells for.

This really isn't about oil prices, is it? Isn't it more a rant expressing a chip on your shoulder about people who are well off but do not, in your opinion, deserve it? If those "fat cats" just sit around picking the color of their new Caddy, and really have no talent, why don't you become one of them? Surely it would ease your troubles if you were making $10MM+ a year after those fat-cat bonuses, no? Let me guess - it's all about who you know, right?

I don't mean to sound condescending Arlie, but I really am having a hard time buying (pun intended) that you believe what you're posting. The huge irony is that Gasoline prices are kept artificially LOW for the people of this country, and you're complaining that they're too high! Pure comedy!
arthur chambers (Art355)
Intermediate Member
Username: Art355

Post Number: 1398
Registered: 6-2001
Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 6:32 pm:   

Manchester England regular gas 4 pounds per gallon.

Art
arthur chambers (Art355)
Intermediate Member
Username: Art355

Post Number: 1397
Registered: 6-2001
Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 6:25 pm:   

I hate to do this, but I must. Arlie, in his own way has raised a very good point. All of you guys keep talking about a free market economy. We don't have that here. What we have is a market that while is not a monopoloy, is very, very close to one. The produce is made by a very few, and that can cause one, or two of them to be able to lead the market through various little tricks.

An example of that type of logic is that in Northern California the price for regular gas is usually about .20/gallon more than that of Southern California. This could not occur without the concurrance of the distributors, i.e., price fixing. Just because we can't prove it doesn't mean it isn't happening.

If we truly had a market place economy, someone from Southern California would be bringing fuel to Northern California, and sooner or later the price(s) would equalize. Hasn't happened. The only way that can occur is that the market price leader doesn't allow it to happen.

Before you call me all sorts of names, remember the claims made by the State of California that the engery companies were price fixing to raise the cost of gas and electricity. Everyone called them all sorts of names. Federal investigation, California has to sue to get access to the facts. They found, guess what classical price fixing and market manipulation.

I still agree that Arlie needs to live in a communist country, even though he's right in this argument.

Art
Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member
Username: Arlie

Post Number: 1036
Registered: 5-2002
Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 6:11 pm:   

"Consider the CEO of an oil company, who is responsible for billions in assets, and hundreds of millions of shareholders who expect him to deliver the beans each quarter. So you think he should make, what, $50k a year? Yeah that sounds fair. "

Why doesn't that sound fair? It's not like those oil company execs actually have any life or death decisions to make. A 747 airline pilot has the actual lives of HUNDREDS of passengers in his hands. So his salary should be at least equal to an oil company executive, or even more. Perhaps a few million dollars a year maybe? A few million dollars wouldn't even equal the perks of some of the executive CEOs in some big corporations.

My real issue is NOT that some people make alot of money. The real issue is the way that we SUPPOSEDLY admire the traditional "work ethic", yet the people who make the most money are the big shot fat cats that never do anything more strenuous than pick up their telephone to announce the latest lay off of the people who REALLY do the work.

As for spring water: If some person wants to pay $4 a gallon for spring water, let him do it. But remember that he doesn't HAVE to spend that much. He can get good water straight out of the tap at that is purified by the local water system.
So anybody can get water at a cheap price in modern America. You aren't REQUIRED to pay the big money. But since most modern people ARE required to drive to work everyday and ARE required to buy gasoline, where is their alternate source for cheap gasoline? There isn't any.
Also, to get really technical, water is a naturally occuring compound. Gasoline is an artificially produced hydrocarbon that has to be refined from crude oil. That's why water is 1 or 2 cents a gallon and gasoline is 25 cents a gallon; or at least it should be. But the oil companies have to charge 6 times that amount to recover their "expenses". I guess that since those new Cadillacs are more expensive than they were years ago, then those oil company CEOs have to gouge a little more to ride around in comfort.

"I would venture that most oil company execs started out doing the dirty work in the industry 30 years earlier." Maybe they worked for a few years in the oil fields, maybe not. Does that give them the right to waste corporate money on elaborate perks while the current oil field workers have the spectre of "layoffs" over their head?

"I will bet you big money that every oil company's execs regularly travel to remote location to see for themselves what they & their share holders are investing tens of billions on:"

I'm sure they travel to those remote locations on regular airlines like a normal working class guy would do. Certainly they aren't flying in a corporate jet with a corporate jet pilot who makes less money than he does?




Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member
Username: Maranelloman

Post Number: 1253
Registered: 1-2002
Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 5:58 pm:   

Arlie, you are just plain full of it. Substitute any other industry name for "oil company" in your nonsensical rant, and some parts of it would be just as true.

Methinks you have a hard on for oil companies in particular (for some reason not clear to us), and their management, and are hypocritically unwilling to take on (a) your own consumption, or (b) the largest part of gas prices--BIG GOV'T TAXES. Why is that, Arlie? You work for the government, and hate someone who earns more than you do?

And as for this absurd question: "When was the last time that any upper level oil company executive actually paid a visit to an offshore oil rig and got a taste for the real work that makes his product possible????" I would venture that most oil company execs started out doing the dirty work in the industry 30 years earlier. Check out most oil company annual reports, and you will find this to be true (unless you are allergic to facts).

In addition, I will bet you big money that every oil company's execs regularly travel to remote location to see for themselves what they & their share holders are investing tens of billions on: new places to extract oil so that whiners like you can complain about the prices w/o being willing to consume less, demand less taxation on gasoline, or even observe the most rudimentary fundamentals of economics.
Jere Dunham (Questioner)
Member
Username: Questioner

Post Number: 451
Registered: 1-2003
Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 5:44 pm:   

Arlie,

I believe that you are not an independent businessman, are you? Independent businessmen who own their own businesses do not harbor resentment toward someone making a profit on good or services. Fact is, they want them to. It is good for the economy overall. It trickles down.

And the percentage of profit being made by oil companies on gasoline is actually a small percentage. Like Mike said, look at bottled water. How about jewelery, perfume, clothes and the like. Do you complain if you go buy a Versace suit? How about some Bragano shoes or a Rolex?
The oil companies do it on volume. Millions upon millions of gasoline consumed means millions upon millions of gasoline need to be bought and sold. Cut down on the amount of gas being used and a glut will occur. What happens when a glut occurs? Like Dave said, prices go down.

The next time you want to complain about a 5% to 10% markup for profit on something, don't. People who are in business to provide goods and services deserve to make a decent living just like you expect to. And if you don't want them to, do not go asking for anything for yourself. Don't accept the next raise or promotion. It will only aid in reinforcing the argument against you if you do. Freeze prices or reduce them on commodities? Then freeze your wages or reduce them. That is the only way a free enterprise market will work. Profits need to be made to secure future research and development, marketing, standing behind warranties and affording people a decent quality of life. Or go to a socialistic nation and let the government decide just how much we need and provide for us.
Mike B (Srt_mike)
Junior Member
Username: Srt_mike

Post Number: 125
Registered: 12-2002
Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 5:25 pm:   

Arlie,

If you really feel that oil companies are gouging the average joe, then you might find yourself more at home in a socialist (communist) society where the people are all supposed to be equal and the government gives you what you need at a "fair" price.

It seems your *real* issue is that some people are making alot of money. Why are you against that? Consider the CEO of an oil company, who is responsible for billions in assets, and hundreds of millions of shareholders who expect him to deliver the beans each quarter. So you think he should make, what, $50k a year? Yeah that sounds fair.

As for why gas prices fluctuate.. it's been explained already. Why does the stock market fluctuate based on war news when the vast majority of companies listed in the market have no direct ties to anything to do with war. I can see why Lockheed or Raytheon would change, but why does Dell change? It's because that is how a free market works. Same with oil prices. It's got more to do with speculators and traders than it has to do with what Mobil decides to gouge you for this month.

And Arlie, how much do you pay for a gallon of spring water at your local yuppie store? Around here it's something like $3.99 a gallon. When exactly was the process of refining water perfected? I think they make water from compressing hydrogen and oxygen together in massive reactors under huge temperatures and pressures... I mean those water reactors are everwhere around here! It's not like the stuff just trickles down a mountain. Yet they charge $3.99/gal for it. In the history of mankind, what process has had more time and attention to be perfected than the supply of water? And yet it still costs $4/gal? Why?
Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member
Username: Arlie

Post Number: 1035
Registered: 5-2002
Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 5:10 pm:   

"The price of gasoline is actually LESS, inflation-adjusted, than at almost any time in US history"

But is it as cheap as it could be and still provide a fair profit for the oil companies?
Not likely, because the mantra is GOUGE to the MAXIMUM that is possible. Somebody has to pay for that new Cadillac that the oil company executive is buying this year. (Can't drive a 2 year old Cadillac because,...well,...that just looks bad.) And I will repeat the question again: When was the last time that any upper level oil company executive actually paid a visit to an offshore oil rig and got a taste for the real work that makes his product possible????
They'd probably rather watch a videocassette documentary about oil rigs from the comfort of their high rise offices (Completely outfitted with expensive leather furniture, courtesy of the corporate bank account. Wouldn't want to actually spend that extravagant money on increased wages for the people on those oil rigs who actually do the REAL work, would we?)


"gasoline, whose raw material is subject to the fluctuating vagaries of political interference, govt regulations, wars, world politics, natural disasters, terrorism, accidents, demand, supply, and on and on, FLUCTUATES."

Why is it that gas prices fluctuate every time the threat of war rears its ugly head in the middle east? On another thread, somebody mentioned that British Petroleum gets most of its oil from offshore wells that are nowhere near the middle east. And there are plenty of BP stations around here. So where's their justification for increased prices?

"Comparing VCR's & super unleaded is like comparing ash trays & TV Guide. No correlation."

You are correct. There is no comparison between the current technology required to build a VCR or DVD player with the ANCIENT technology that was developed 75 years ago to refine petroleum. Since the oil companies have had nearly 100 years to build the refineries, develope the distribution networks, and build their service stations, the infrastructure has LONG been established. So their product, oil and gasoline, should be even less expensive than current developing technologies.

"More newspapers than ever are sold these days, yet the price keeps going up. Wanna know why? Wood pulp/newsprint is a COMMODITY whose world price FLUCTUATES." Is that why the cost of the local newspaper, the Arkansas Democrat, DOUBLED once the other local newspaper went out of business several years ago. Eliminate the competition like the oil companies do, and you can GOUGE as much as you like. The oil company lobbyists do their part in Washington to help out. EPA laws are requiring smaller "mom and pop" service stations to dig up their old metal underground gasoline storage tanks and replace them with EPA approved fiberglass tanks. This is a HUGE expense to the smaller gasoline stations. The small station around the corner from where I live could not afford the expense. They closed down the station after about 40 years in business. Do you think that the BIG oil companies and their franchise operated gas stations are unhappy with these "mom and pop" stations going out of business? And do you think the Big oil companies like those stiffer EPA regulations going into effect that cause their competition to close down??? I think they like it. Eliminate the competition any way you can and keep those prices up. More money for the CEO's new Cadillac, or Ferrari.

Jere Dunham (Questioner)
Member
Username: Questioner

Post Number: 449
Registered: 1-2003
Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 4:41 pm:   

Arlie,

Now if the gas stays in the tanks underground for a month (which it doesn't unless it is a very little use station), what happens when the gas price goes down? Should he wait until the gas that he already has on hand that he paid 10 cents a gallon more for runs out or go ahead and mark it down the 10 cents a gallon like the new gas? If you do not like him to mark it up as soon as it goes up, you should not be upset when he does not immediately mark it down when the price for new gas lowers. First in first out economics. It all washes out. He makes a few cents more on the increase and he loses a few cents on the decrease for gas that already exists in his tanks. I ask you, if you owned the station and were making about 5 cents per gallon profit, would you go ahead and mark the older higher priced gas down and lose 5 cents a gallon or keep the price up to make the 5 cents you were hoping to get when it was delivered to you?

BTW, most stations of any size consequence get gas at least twice weekly.
Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member
Username: Maranelloman

Post Number: 1252
Registered: 1-2002
Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 4:36 pm:   

Arlie, maybe it's because oil is a COMMODITY whose world price FLUCTUATES. Ever tracked the price of a newspaper? More newspapers than ever are sold these days, yet the price keeps going up. Wanna know why? Wood pulp/newsprint is a COMMODITY whose world price FLUCTUATES.

Arlie, use some econ 101 here. The price of gasoline is actually LESS, inflation-adjusted, than at almost any time in US history (except in the Peoples Republik of Kalifornia).

Yes, there is greed involved in any capitalistic business. How else to motivate entrepreneurs to enter markets?? But your economic argument is flawed: only SOME products drop in price over time. Comparing VCR's, whose raw materials keep getting cheaper & cheaper, and gasoline, whose raw material is subject to the fluctuating vagaries of political interference, govt regulations, wars, world politics, natural disasters, terrorism, accidents, demand, supply, and on and on, FLUCTUATES. As does our pump price. Is this sinking in yet? Comparing VCR's & super unleaded is like comparing ash trays & TV Guide. No correlation.

And, again, I reiterate---no, I guar-on-tee, Arlie: if everyone in America consumed 5% less gasoline (not that hard, based on my daily observation of the gluttonous waste of fuel in this country), (a) prices would plummet to encourage more consumption, and (b) we would become totally non-dependent on those a$$clowns in the Mideast who all want to kill us. In fact, Arlie (a) occures every time prices get toohigh or demand drops in the US, as OPEC drops prices for a while to encourage demand.

Think, Arlie, think!

Oh, and where's your rage at those 50 cents a gallon taxes, my friend? Waiting!Upload
Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member
Username: Arlie

Post Number: 1034
Registered: 5-2002
Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 4:21 pm:   

"Do you get it yet? Want lower gas prices? DRIVE LESS!!"

No Dave, I don't get it. How come every other industry LOWERs the price on its product as production and sales increase, but the oil industry RAISEs it's prices at every chance? VCRs cost $2500 when they first came out in 1975. But thanks to big sales and increased technology, they cost $50 at any Wal-Mart. So why does a gallon of gas cost SIX times what it did back in the sixties? Doesn't quite make sense, does it?
The same problem occured in, of all places, the breakfast cereal business a few years back. It came to light that farmers were making about 5 or 10 CENTS from the corn and wheat inside a box of Post cereal that sold for five DOLLARS. It made the newscasts and SUDDENLY, Post cereals were running touchy feely advertisements and lowering their prices on their products. When the greed came to light, the prices dropped. But people CAN buy another brand of cereal, or eat oatmeal instead. But the gasoline and oil market is much more necessary and choices are limited. In other words, they have the consumer "over a barrel" so to speak. So they make up their excuses and charge whatever they want whenever they want.


Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member
Username: Maranelloman

Post Number: 1250
Registered: 1-2002
Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 4:17 pm:   

Oh, another thing, Arlie. While you are ranting & raving, I missed your outrage at the $0.30-$0.55 the feds & the states tack on to wholesale gasoline in TAXES? Wouldn't it be a lot easier to buy gas if it were 55 cents cheaper without tax? And these taxes keep creeping up--and NEVER go down (unlike the price of the raw material). I would advise lobbying for a drop in gasoline taxes before you rail on legit companies selling a product that you demand more of each & every year.
Red (Redhead)
Junior Member
Username: Redhead

Post Number: 214
Registered: 12-2001
Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 4:11 pm:   

Just paid $2.35 in Los Gatos,CA for Premium.
Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member
Username: Maranelloman

Post Number: 1249
Registered: 1-2002
Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 4:06 pm:   

Arlie, almost all true. 2 points: (1) oil companies are typically public; their boards set their executives' pay, like it or not. Want them ot take a big pay cut? Either buy less of their product or buy a bunch of their stock & propose your changes at the annual meeting. (2) really want to hurt the "evil" oil companies & make them drop prices? Refer back to the following words of my previous post: "If people drove less, carpooled, and refused to buy enormous trucks/SUV's for everyday transportation because they want to "feel safe" or "haul stuff" or "be up high" (all of which make me laugh hysterically), then demand would drop & SO WOULD PRICES. Do you get it yet? Want lower gas prices? DRIVE LESS!! And get 100 of your family & friends to do so as well. Pass it along, and before long, you have a full-fledged national trend. But it will sadly not happen. Why? 'Cause most folks are like you: they want their cake & eat it too. They want merchants to not charge market prices, instead of adopting ANY sort of conservation or sacrifice whatsoever on their own wasteful lives." They want to blame the "evil" oil company, instead of even considering consuming less.

Capisce? You have the power. Instead of b!tching about it, DO SOMETHING! I do!
Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member
Username: Arlie

Post Number: 1033
Registered: 5-2002
Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 4:00 pm:   

No Dave. What I really want is for giant corporations to stop spewing their continuous lines of hogwash to the little people. "Enron is in great shape, trust your pension plans to us". Or, "Worldcom is a great company". Or the latest hogwash from American Airlines, "Hey flight attendants, take a pay cut to save the airline. (But please ignore the fact that the CEOs have hidden secret sweetheart deals and contracts to protect their hides in a manner that is far different from the "working class" employees."

That all goes hand in hand with the constant excuses from the oil/gas industry that always manages to find an excuse to raise prices one more time. If it's not an alledged "energy crisis" it's a threat of war in the Middle East. Or a strike in Venezuela. Or a pending swarm of giant oil-eating locusts, etc. How about this RADICAL THOUGHT. Maybe the oil company executives could take a big PAY CUT and live like normal people for a while. I wonder how many oil company big shots have ever even ridden in a gasoline delivery truck or worked the night shift at a gas station. Or did any of the grimey work on an offshore oil platform.

Mfennell70 (Mfennell70)
Junior Member
Username: Mfennell70

Post Number: 121
Registered: 7-2001
Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 3:43 pm:   

SO, Arlie, what's a fair profit? Once there was a time when my company wouldn't touch anything that didn't have a 50% margain. I wonder what gas prices would be if they had a 50% margain?

My neighbor owned a gas/service station for years. He tells me it's a shitty way to make a living. Most of their profit, such as it was, came from service, not gas. It's kind of difficult to "gouge" when your customers can and will go to any of a dozen different stations to save a nickel a gallon. In the end, his real profit came from appreciation of the real estate.

Maybe you should look into it if you're so sure everyone's getting rich.
Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member
Username: Maranelloman

Post Number: 1246
Registered: 1-2002
Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 3:32 pm:   

Arlie, news flash: since this isn't the former Soviet Union, capitalism rules here.

You are right--no one forces a gas station to raise prices when his supplier does, on fuel already in his tanks. And not doing so may give him a competitive advantage, eh? Heck, we see this all the time: gas stations 200' apart selling gas for 10 or more cents difference in price. I will always buy the cheaper one & reward that merchant. But realize that an average urban gas station gets re-fueled about every 2 days. That gas in their tanks doesn't sit there long.

As for your comment: "What's the line between fair profit and gouging profit?" Well, arlie, what do you think it is? I will bet you that 280 million Americans will give 280 million different answers. The CORRECT answer is "what the market will bear". Like it or not, this is the truth.

If people drove less, carpooled, and refused to buy enormous trucks/SUV's for everyday transportation because they want to "feel safe" or "haul stuff" or "be up high" (all of which make me laugh hysterically), then demand would drop & SO WOULD PRICES.

Do you get it yet? Want lower gas prices? DRIVE LESS!! And get 100 of your family & friends to do so as well. Pass it along, and before long, you have a full-fledged national trend.

But it will sadly not happen. Why? 'Cause most folks are like you: they want their cake & eat it too. They want merchants to not charge market prices, instead of adopting ANY sort of conservation or sacrifice whatsoever on their own wasteful lives.
Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member
Username: Arlie

Post Number: 1032
Registered: 5-2002
Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 3:23 pm:   

"horsefly, gas prices are not set by the oil companies, they are set by people like me - traders. the price fluctuates on the exchanges 24 hrs/day based on whether there are more buyers than sellers. the oil companies tack on whatever they have set as margin (usually pretty small or negative - most gas stations make their money on the minimart), and thats it."

So basically your saying that everybody gouges the consumer for as much as he can stand? And tell me, how can the gasoline that's been in the underground tank at my local station for several weeks SUDDENLY go up in price overnight? That gasoline was bought and paid for several weeks ago, yet you would have us believe that it's selling price is contingent upon TODAY's oil prices. Sounds like heads I win, tails you lose.
The consumer, as always, gets shafted with alot of doubletalk excuses from the system.


"well low supply of this type and the voracious demand of the clogged freeway state, means (usually) the highest prices on the usa mainland. its simple economics voted through by the same people who complain about the resultant high cost. sorry, you asked for it."

Sorry, but the old "supply and demand" excuse is another one of my pet peeves. Just because supply is low and demand is high DOES NOT mean that a particular company HAS to raise it's prices, does it? I mean, if a guy is selling toasters for $10 and suddenly the international demand for toasters causes the price to soar to $50, that still doesn't REQUIRE that the $10 toaster seller has to raise his prices. It just means he can now GET GREEDY and raise his prices. He could just as easily sell his toasters for $10 and sell them more quickly.
Supply and demand should be re-written to read, supply and demand and GREED because that's what it's really about. Just because you CAN sell your gasoline for $2 a gallon doesn't mean that you HAVE to. What's the line between fair profit and gouging profit?



ross koller (Ross)
Intermediate Member
Username: Ross

Post Number: 1090
Registered: 3-2002
Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 8:46 am:   

some of you amaze me, or should i say, dismay me.

horsefly, gas prices are not set by the oil companies, they are set by people like me - traders. the price fluctuates on the exchanges 24 hrs/day based on whether there are more buyers than sellers. the oil companies tack on whatever they have set as margin (usually pretty small or negative - most gas stations make their money on the minimart), and thats it. and if you want to talk inflation....the all time lowest price for a gallon of gas in the usa was around 11cts back in the teens...if you extrapolate that into todays dollars you get somewhere like $1.20, so the fact that prices have only risen a little above that tells you that your gouging theory is wrong. and don't forget to add the 15-45 cts of state tax (depending on the state).

the difference in prices in various states (other than tax differences), are usually due to delivery issues and specification issues. delivery is a no brainer, so i won't bother expalining.
specifications are very complex, and the most complex are the ones in california. this is largely driven by the carb people and the voters in general who have agreed to have the spec on exhaust and oxygenates to be the tightest on earth (this is not an exageration). there are therefore very few refineries in the world who can make carb spec gas or diesel. you have all heard of supply and demand? well low supply of this type and the voracious demand of the clogged freeway state, means (usually) the highest prices on the usa mainland. its simple economics voted through by the same people who complain about the resultant high cost. sorry, you asked for it.

currently prices are reasonably high, but because of numerous factors. iraq was just a sideshow, only about 10pct real impact and a now greatly declining psychological impact. the biggest 2 factors for high prices at the moment are the venezuelan strike that shut down their system for several months (they are the major supplier to the usa), and the extreme cold of last winter which sucked up all the available refining capacity for heating oil. throw in that the war talk created the steepest backwardation since the first gulf war, and you had zero incentive for anybody to build any stocks. so now we have usa stocks of everything at 25 year lows.
in other words the supply/demand situation in the usa is extremely tight and therefore easily subject to trader/weather/political etc induced spikes.
i said this on another thread about 2 months ago, that i thought mogas prices in the usa would reach some pretty high numbers this spring and summer, and they are here. there might be some respite during may, but if the usa keeps consuming as per last year, average prices will be around $1.80 and cal could pay as much as $3/gl.
don't worry, i will b paying about $5/gl and suffering with you.
Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member
Username: Maranelloman

Post Number: 1228
Registered: 1-2002
Posted on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 4:44 pm:   

Hahahahahahahaha! And all you get out there on the Left Coast is 91 octane swill. Why? 'Cause there is now only ONE gasoline distributor for the whole state of Kalifornia, and thus there is no competitive pressure to offer better product! And the state "government" turned a blind eye to this monopoly!!!

93 octane Premium here...for $1.49 a gallon. 'Nuff said!

:-)
Jack Habits (Ferraristuff)
Junior Member
Username: Ferraristuff

Post Number: 122
Registered: 4-2003
Posted on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 4:42 pm:   

Dave,

>>>have your government drop their usurious gasoline taxes, and your prices will come to about where US prices are...

They won't listen....

In fact, we don't even have a real government here at the moment...

Jack
"The Don" (Mlemus)
Advanced Member
Username: Mlemus

Post Number: 4111
Registered: 8-2002
Posted on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 4:40 pm:   

$1.99 for regular in LA
arthur chambers (Art355)
Intermediate Member
Username: Art355

Post Number: 1375
Registered: 6-2001
Posted on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 4:37 pm:   

In SF and Bay area, now 2.06/gallon of regular. Plane fuel: Now at 2.76/gallon. I hear that in some parts of Texas, etc. regaular is 1.30, and avgas is 1.99/gallon.

Art
Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member
Username: Maranelloman

Post Number: 1226
Registered: 1-2002
Posted on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 4:32 pm:   

Shell Super Unleaded here: $1.499 a gallon

Jack, have your government drop their usurious gasoline taxes, and your prices will come to about where US prices are...
Tim N (Timn88)
Advanced Member
Username: Timn88

Post Number: 2875
Registered: 6-2001
Posted on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 3:51 pm:   

recent gas prices where i live
gas
Drew Altemara (Drewa)
Junior Member
Username: Drewa

Post Number: 129
Registered: 2-2002
Posted on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 3:50 pm:   

OPEC meeting is this Thursday to set production quotas. Nothing shocking expected but this should set the tone for prices over the next month or so.
Jere Dunham (Questioner)
Member
Username: Questioner

Post Number: 433
Registered: 1-2003
Posted on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 3:49 pm:   

I just paid $1.62 for 93 octane premium at lunch today. Regular was $1.41. Saw it on Denton highway in Watauga for $1.34 at 7-11, Race Trac and Q.T.
Jack Habits (Ferraristuff)
Junior Member
Username: Ferraristuff

Post Number: 120
Registered: 4-2003
Posted on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 3:29 pm:   

Still at around 4.75 here....
DES (Sickspeed)
Advanced Member
Username: Sickspeed

Post Number: 3525
Registered: 8-2002
Posted on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 3:23 pm:   

Got unleaded the other day for $1.65, though it's usually around $1.79... :-)
Randall (Randall)
Member
Username: Randall

Post Number: 335
Registered: 1-2003
Posted on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 3:19 pm:   

Still $1.97 here.....
Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member
Username: Arlie

Post Number: 1020
Registered: 5-2002
Posted on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 3:03 pm:   

"They" are conditioning you. They raised the prices higher for so long, that now you think that the regular prices are cheap. So they will maintain those "well above a dollar per gallon" prices for as long as they can. There is no more a shortage of oil today than there was 1 year ago or 5 years ago. Continuous market manipulation by the oil companies to keep the price higher. Gasoline was 25 cents a gallon 30 years or more ago, and all that oil has been in the ground for 100 million years. If technology has improved so much in the last 30 or 40 years, how come the process of refining oil into gasoline has gone UP in price? If so, it's the only technology that has INCREASED in cost as time has passed. Pure marketing hogwash on behalf of the oil companies. If the oil companies were in charge of audio and video technology, VCRs and DVD players would cost $3000 today.


Erik (Teenferrarifan)
New member
Username: Teenferrarifan

Post Number: 36
Registered: 2-2003
Posted on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 2:38 pm:   

Here in southeastern PA I have noticed gas prices have dropped about 10+ cents for a gallon of regular in the last 2-3 weeks. Will this keep going on? Has anyone else noticed gas prices falling. While in New Jersey(ocean city) I found gas at 1.45 for regular. These are almost last summer prices.
Erik

Add Your Message Here
Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | Help/Instructions | Program Credits Administration