Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2014 22:29:01 GMT -5
I really don't care, I don't like it personally since we're talking billions of dollars that harms the general public Which portion don't you care about? Or is it all the items I mentioned? "I don't care" shouldn't be a default answer. In 1972, the newly formed OPEC discovered that controlling the price of oil (which at the time was about $20.00 a barrel) was not only an economic, but a political ploy to use against any (western) country, a ploy that exists to this day. The simple explanation is: " Give us money, and we'll sell you our oil." This simple explanation in part explains why Saudi Arabia. a country well known for human rights abuses (especially against women) continues to be a US ally, even though we sell them our top-of-the-line military hardware.
Shutout, if it wasn't for the oil, the Middle East would be little more than a footnote in world history, with the exception of the British and UN resolutions to create Israel in 1947.
The Middle East countries have been fighting each other for over 5,000 years, oil or no oil.
I care, although the people running this dog and pony show don't give a rat's ass.
|
|
|
Post by husagafella on Oct 24, 2014 22:33:03 GMT -5
Which portion don't you care about? Or is it all the items I mentioned? "I don't care" shouldn't be a default answer. In 1972, the newly formed OPEC discovered that controlling the price of oil (which at the time was about $20.00 a barrel) was not only an economic, but a political ploy to use against any (western) country, a ploy that exists to this day. The simple explanation is: " Give us money, and we'll sell you our oil." This simple explanation in part explains why Saudi Arabia. a country well known for human rights abuses (especially against women) continues to be a US ally, even though we sell them our top-of-the-line military hardware.
Shutout, if it wasn't for the oil, the Middle East would be little more than a footnote in world history, with the exception of the British and UN resolutions to create Israel in 1947.
The Middle East countries have been fighting each other for over 5,000 years, oil or no oil.
I care, although the people running this dog and pony show don't give a rat's ass.
Thanks for the swing down memory lane Friend. That answers none of Shutout's questions or why American oil doesn't guarantee cheap American gas in the global oil pricing model being discussed on this thread.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2014 22:49:57 GMT -5
In 1972, the newly formed OPEC discovered that controlling the price of oil (which at the time was about $20.00 a barrel) was not only an economic, but a political ploy to use against any (western) country, a ploy that exists to this day. The simple explanation is: " Give us money, and we'll sell you our oil." This simple explanation in part explains why Saudi Arabia. a country well known for human rights abuses (especially against women) continues to be a US ally, even though we sell them our top-of-the-line military hardware.
Shutout, if it wasn't for the oil, the Middle East would be little more than a footnote in world history, with the exception of the British and UN resolutions to create Israel in 1947.
The Middle East countries have been fighting each other for over 5,000 years, oil or no oil.
I care, although the people running this dog and pony show don't give a rat's ass.
Thanks for the swing down memory lane Friend. That answers none of Shutout's questions or why American oil doesn't guarantee cheap American gas in the global oil pricing model being discussed on this thread. I must have clicked the wrong button, as I was discussing history with shutout, and in no way, shape or form was I addressing you.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2014 0:37:56 GMT -5
No company is going to limit the marketability of its product in such a manner. Oil companies--be they giants such as Exxon-Mobil or BP, or smaller operations--do not bring oil to the market with the idea of losing money. Typically what they'll do is project higher prices in the future and look for a well to pay off over a number of years. Bigger oil companies have the resources to balance out the lean years with the good ones; smaller ones may not have such a luxury. If they were only allowed to sell their products domestically, they'd be out of business in a New York minute. There's also the factor of oil variability, meaning light or heavy. Light sweet crude, which is typically used for gasoline and diesel, fetches the highest price, while the costs for heavy crude, such as that from Canada's tar sands, can be considerably higher. I couldn't find any figures for how many bbls of light sweet the United States extracts, but I'd imagine it isn't enough to keep up with the demand for gasoline. Oil, like any other consumer good, is a commodity. For all of the variations and fluctuations in its price, the value of oil hasn't changed that much in decades. In 1935, for example, at the height of the Depression, a gallon of gasoline cost 19 cents, which would be $3.30 in today's dollars. In 1950, it was 27 cents, which is $2.65 in inflation-adjusted dollars. The price of gasoline may have gone up over time, but its actual value has done little more than keep pace with inflation. The U.S. government has ways to encourage oil companies to not pursue this course of action. There ain't no such animal. The fact is, the United States officially became a net exporter of crude oil as of 2012, I believe it was . That alone gives us better flexibility when dealing with the world's petro-states, but it also means that we now have a greater dependence on global oil markets not only as buyers, but as sellers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2014 0:52:00 GMT -5
No company is going to limit the marketability of its product in such a manner. Oil companies--be they giants such as Exxon-Mobil or BP, or smaller operations--do not bring oil to the market with the idea of losing money. Typically what they'll do is project higher prices in the future and look for a well to pay off over a number of years. Bigger oil companies have the resources to balance out the lean years with the good ones; smaller ones may not have such a luxury. If they were only allowed to sell their products domestically, they'd be out of business in a New York minute. There's also the factor of oil variability, meaning light or heavy. Light sweet crude, which is typically used for gasoline and diesel, fetches the highest price, while the costs for heavy crude, such as that from Canada's tar sands, can be considerably higher. I couldn't find any figures for how many bbls of light sweet the United States extracts, but I'd imagine it isn't enough to keep up with the demand for gasoline. Oil, like any other consumer good, is a commodity. For all of the variations and fluctuations in its price, the value of oil hasn't changed that much in decades. In 1935, for example, at the height of the Depression, a gallon of gasoline cost 19 cents, which would be $3.30 in today's dollars. In 1950, it was 27 cents, which is $2.65 in inflation-adjusted dollars. The price of gasoline may have gone up over time, but its actual value has done little more than keep pace with inflation. The U.S. government has ways to encourage oil companies to not pursue this course of action. There ain't no such animal. The fact is, the United States officially became a net exporter of crude oil as of 2012, I believe it was . That alone gives us better flexibility when dealing with the world's petro-states, but it also means that we now have a greater dependence on global oil markets not only as buyers, but as sellers.Ok, I understand the global economy thing, however if the US stops exporting oil, is the price going to hit $160 per barrel?
For some reason, I doubt it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2014 1:12:05 GMT -5
Ok, I understand the global economy thing, however if the US stops exporting oil, is the price going to hit $160 per barrel?
For some reason, I doubt it.
Daily global oil production is currently around 75 million barrels per day; the United States produces just under 5 million barrels per day. That'd be a pretty significant amount to take off the market.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2014 1:20:46 GMT -5
Ok, I understand the global economy thing, however if the US stops exporting oil, is the price going to hit $160 per barrel?
For some reason, I doubt it.
Daily global oil production is currently around 75 million barrels per day; the United States produces just under 5 million barrels per day. That'd be a pretty significant amount to take off the market. Nah. China would buy more from Russia. No biggie.
|
|
|
Post by husagafella on Oct 25, 2014 7:41:43 GMT -5
Thanks for the swing down memory lane Friend. That answers none of Shutout's questions or why American oil doesn't guarantee cheap American gas in the global oil pricing model being discussed on this thread. I must have clicked the wrong button, as I was discussing history with shutout, and in no way, shape or form was I addressing you. I must have been mistaken because I thought this was a public forum and didn't know I somehow wandered into your private message applications for you and your "friends".
|
|
|
Post by rentedmule on Oct 25, 2014 11:54:42 GMT -5
Daily global oil production is currently around 75 million barrels per day; the United States produces just under 5 million barrels per day. That'd be a pretty significant amount to take off the market. Nah. China would buy more from Russia. No biggie. Manipulate commodities at your own peril (and those of your producers). True story: In the 1970's the Carter Administration "punished" the Soviets for some 'state department' important reason by forbidding any wheat sales to the USSR. By the end of the day cheers could be heard all across Canada and Australia as their sales mounted at attractive prices. Another poster mentioned that it's ridiculous to think that an American producer can only service a domestic market. Crippling your performers is a bit silly for any government. Would you prefer to purchase a pound of rice in Tokyo or in an American market? Satisfying ones 'druthers' is very expensive for someone... usually the poor chap that produces.
|
|
|
Post by Ravenchamp on Oct 25, 2014 17:36:55 GMT -5
Kuwait urges Gulf reforms as oil prices fall Kuwait City (AFP) - Kuwait's finance minister on Saturday called for economic reforms by energy-dependent Gulf states to cope with a drop in oil prices that has hurt their public finances. Anas al-Saleh urged steps to tackle rising public spending, mainly on wages and subsidies, as well as efforts to boost the role of the private sector. "Comprehensive economic reforms, including reforming distortions in the public finances, should be enforced," he said at a meeting of regional finance ministers and central bank chiefs. Saleh said the Gulf states must diversify their economies and "reduce dependence on oil". news.yahoo.com/kuwait-urges-gulf-reforms-oil-prices-fall-004706835.html
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2014 23:41:55 GMT -5
Nah. China would buy more from Russia. No biggie. Manipulate commodities at your own peril (and those of your producers). True story: In the 1970's the Carter Administration "punished" the Soviets for some 'state department' important reason by forbidding any wheat sales to the USSR. By the end of the day cheers could be heard all across Canada and Australia as their sales mounted at attractive prices. Another poster mentioned that it's ridiculous to think that an American producer can only service a domestic market. Crippling your performers is a bit silly for any government. Would you prefer to purchase a pound of rice in Tokyo or in an American market? Satisfying ones 'druthers' is very expensive for someone... usually the poor chap that produces. Good example. Remember "price controls" on gasoline during the 1970s? Nothing like disincentivizing profit to depress supply.
Not that I'm defending oil companies, but the question I always pose to someone who claims they're price gouging is, "If the oil companies are really sticking it to us, then why doesn't gas cost $5 or even $10 per gallon?" The reality is that the ones profiting the most from gasoline are federal, state and local governments, which on average tack on an additional 50 cents to the price of a gallon of gas.
|
|
|
Post by rentedmule on Oct 26, 2014 5:08:12 GMT -5
Kuwait urges Gulf reforms as oil prices fall Kuwait City (AFP) - Kuwait's finance minister on Saturday called for economic reforms by energy-dependent Gulf states to cope with a drop in oil prices that has hurt their public finances. Anas al-Saleh urged steps to tackle rising public spending, mainly on wages and subsidies, as well as efforts to boost the role of the private sector. "Comprehensive economic reforms, including reforming distortions in the public finances, should be enforced," he said at a meeting of regional finance ministers and central bank chiefs. Saleh said the Gulf states must diversify their economies and "reduce dependence on oil". news.yahoo.com/kuwait-urges-gulf-reforms-oil-prices-fall-004706835.htmlWith respect I must say that Kuwait, and the other nation states that 'depend' upon oil need to change much more than their government policy regarding their "economy" (chuckles*). They must change their culture and entire societal baggage, otherwise any 'political' manipulation of a stupid policy is meaningless. Any meaningful and successful society dictates to government! They don't lurk around and lapdog upon some fashionable 'economic' trend that happens to make the rounds of international dinner parties. Any examination of the history of oil and the controlling society will lead one to believe that oil is more apt to be a curse than a blessing. What Kuwait and so many other societies need is not an economic policy and certainly not oil but a rational and motivated culture that can recognize, establish and support the social institutions required for a "diversified" (egalitarian) economy to even exist.
|
|
|
Post by rentedmule on Oct 26, 2014 5:29:07 GMT -5
Manipulate commodities at your own peril (and those of your producers). True story: In the 1970's the Carter Administration "punished" the Soviets for some 'state department' important reason by forbidding any wheat sales to the USSR. By the end of the day cheers could be heard all across Canada and Australia as their sales mounted at attractive prices. Another poster mentioned that it's ridiculous to think that an American producer can only service a domestic market. Crippling your performers is a bit silly for any government. Would you prefer to purchase a pound of rice in Tokyo or in an American market? Satisfying ones 'druthers' is very expensive for someone... usually the poor chap that produces. Good example. Remember "price controls" on gasoline during the 1970s? Nothing like disincentivizing profit to depress supply.
Not that I'm defending oil companies, but the question I always pose to someone who claims they're price gouging is, "If the oil companies are really sticking it to us, then why doesn't gas cost $5 or even $10 per gallon?" The reality is that the ones profiting the most from gasoline are federal, state and local governments, which on average tack on an additional 50 cents to the price of a gallon of gas.
I agree! Oil is the greatest 'milk cow' our various governments have ever had! The $.50+ is just the beginning (or end?) since that is only the retail tax collected. Up front is the tribute collected to 'get permission' to explore an oil field. Then the "stumpage" fee collected on each barrel pumped - then the huge real estate and other multiple taxes collected all through the refining and transportation and wholesale and retail chain. Sometimes I wish the critics of American oil would get their wish and then we could be like the intelligent modern societies such as Norway and Denmark and Japan and pay $9.00 per gallon. Hell, if retail gas were manipulated down to $1.00 per our union and government pension funds would collapse! But we would have to use the "savings" to fund the pensioners. (society is SO complicated!)
|
|
|
Post by Ravenchamp on Oct 28, 2014 16:24:55 GMT -5
Down to 2.89 now locally on average
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2014 16:46:44 GMT -5
The Mrs. and her sis were perusing through PA yesterday and were surprised to see that regular grade prices were well over $3.00 per gallon.
|
|
|
Post by Ravenchamp on Oct 28, 2014 22:28:09 GMT -5
The Mrs. and her sis were perusing through PA yesterday and were surprised to see that regular grade prices were well over $3.00 per gallon. Same in Baltimore near the high end areas like Greenspring Valley, still 3.20 a gallon
|
|
|
Post by shutout on Oct 28, 2014 22:44:30 GMT -5
Never really check the price. Just pull up and fill up. If both tanks are low I know it is going over a hundred dollars of diesel fuel easy.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Oct 29, 2014 8:34:30 GMT -5
With my Kroger $ .80 per gallon fuel points discount, I picked up 35 gallons yesterday for $ 1.90 per gallon... not bad... brings back memories of the Bill Clinton era...
|
|
|
Post by Cowboyz on Oct 29, 2014 9:23:43 GMT -5
Hubby paid $2.49 per gallon last week with points we saved.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2014 19:47:44 GMT -5
My truck runs well on regular, however the manufacturer recommends 92 octane for optimal performance. $2.95 for premium at the WAWA in Darlington today.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Oct 31, 2014 20:42:42 GMT -5
Regular... $ 2.29 in Brandon, MS... $ 2.65 in Laurel, MS...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 1, 2014 9:28:36 GMT -5
Never really check the price. Just pull up and fill up. If both tanks are low I know it is going over a hundred dollars of diesel fuel easy. If I was going to the DC Metro area, I always filled up as I was leaving home. Cheap gas down there is a rare as an honest politician.
|
|
|
Post by shutout on Nov 1, 2014 10:19:42 GMT -5
I think unpaid around $3.35 for diesel.
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Nov 1, 2014 10:52:15 GMT -5
I would think our homeland oil costs would be cheaper, no import costs. It's more difficult to get at it. Also, the oil companies support high prices by closing refineries attempting to match supply with demand, as good oligopolists do.
|
|
|
Post by com6063 on Nov 1, 2014 10:59:27 GMT -5
Why do you think it should be under one dollar per gallon? I don't see a need to have it a current costs, at all IMO they have enough profit Oil companies are in business to make money and earn a profit. That's capitalism.
|
|