Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sticker Shock-$3 a gallon gas? Some links
various FR links | 03-17-04 | The Heavy Equipment Guy

Posted on 03/17/2004 2:08:40 PM PST by backhoe

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1059185/posts
Summertime shocker: Gas could hit $3 a gallon
Chicago Sun-Times ^ | 1/16/04 | Lucio Guerrero
http://www.oilcrisis.com/magoon/
 
 
Oil Hits One-Year High [at $37.80 per barrel]
Source: Reuters
URL Source: http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml? type=businessNews&storyID=4579593
 
 
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1098993/posts
Oil At New Highs - Opinions wanted on synthetic oil
MSNBC ^ | 3-16-04 | Jason Rines
This seems like this could be our ace in the hole...
Anything into oil
Stephen den Beste on this process
Anything Into Oil
http://www.discover.com/issues/may-03/features/featoil/
http://www.changingworldtech.com/home.html
 
 
 
Oil Races $1 Higher
CNNFN ^ | 3-15-2004 | Reuters
 
 
 
 
4 DOLLARS A GALLON FOR GAS BY ELECTION DAY - BREAKING ON DRUDGE RADIO
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
To find all articles tagged or indexed using calpowercrisis, click below:
  click here >>> calpowercrisis <<< click here  
(To view all FR Bump Lists, click here)
 
 
I've been saying for years the way to revive and restore the economy ( and it would have headed off these oil price problems as well ) was to-
1- drill for gas & oil like crazy- onshore, offshore, and in Alaska
2- go nuclear for power
3- convert stationary plants to clean coal technology
4- slash taxes and regulations like crazy
 
 
Wow- just in time for $3 a gallon gasoline...
 
 
Gas seen hitting $2 per gallon
Washington Times ^ | Tuesday, March 9, 2004 | By Tom Ramstack
Don't forget the knee-jerk reaction of all left wing liberals when it comes to energy--
First, they just lie. They always lie. They start every single argument with lies. They paint ANWR as some pristine wildlife refuge where all of our cute furry animals are sitting in green fields frolicking with each other.
Second, their history of bad predictions that never panned out are never brought up. All of this garbage was brought up decades ago with drilling in Purdhome Bay and the pipeline.
Third, the left  demands energy independence but can't get their brains out of the toilet long enough to realize what it will take to do so. They won't allow nuclear, coal digging, oil drilling, offshore rigs, etc. But they instead throw out more decade old arguments about solar power and wind power (unless those windmills are off the coast of Martha's Vineyard and ruin a liberals view).
-more-
When I started driving in 1977 the price of regular was $ 0.58 per gallon.
God forbid we drill Alaska...
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Most of the price of a gallon of gas is from taxes. But don't hold your breath waiting for any pol to suggest a cut. I heard three retail clerks talking the other day about how we should tap the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Like that would fix everything. Sheesh. People are so unbelievably clueless.
 
 
U.S. sees cause for concern over gas
Yahoo ^ | 3/5/04 | James R. Healey and James Cox
 
The $1.60 or so a gallon we are paying is about 80 cents gas and 80 cents tax. Europeans $4.00 a gallon is 80 cents gas and $3.20 tax.
 
Most of the price of a gallon of gas is from taxes. But don't hold your breath waiting for any pol to suggest a cut. I heard three retail clerks talking the other day about how we should tap the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Like that would fix everything. Sheesh. People are so unbelievably clueless.
 
 
 
Other ideas?
 
 
Oil from Coal....Boon, Bane, or Boondoggle?
various links | 12-31-01 | backhoe
 
 
 
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1098832/posts
Students Gas Up Buses with Fryer Oil
Washington Post ^ | March 16, 2004 | Leef Smith


TOPICS: Extended News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: backhoe; biodiesel; energyprices; ethanol; gasprices
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 951-962 next last
To: AdamSelene235
My response was to those saying the dollar was falling and that's what's causing the cost of oil to go up. The dollar doesn't go as far and oil supplies have remained fairly constant. Yes, the price per bbl has gone up. No doubt.
51 posted on 03/18/2004 6:54:47 AM PST by IYAS9YAS (Go Fast, Turn Left!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: tinamina
No, all the fuel in Boise comes up from Salt Lake via pipeline (sometimes in from other areas by truck). The refinery being off line in WA has no impact on us here directly. The pipeline only flows north. They are trying to get to a point where it can flow either direction to allow gluts in one area to be spread to other areas.

I just think we're getting gouged in Idaho.

52 posted on 03/18/2004 6:59:11 AM PST by IYAS9YAS (Go Fast, Turn Left!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: mrsmith
I guess we always will be as long as drilling and nukes etc. are banned.

Oh, long after that as well. All intertemporal decisions have been priced into the forward contrats traded on futures markets --- even in the present set of constraints such as drilling restrictions. None of the posters is even addressing the presence of futures: it's all about the past and present, and the sky-is-falling present is so much worse than the sunny-sky past.

Even if you remove drilling restrictions, people who today refuse to learn economics and institutions of capitalism will continue to do so.

53 posted on 03/18/2004 7:06:10 AM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: OneTimeLurker
I am certainly glad that you do not just lurk any longer: FR can benefit from people like you who know the value of the facts. Too many here fancy themselves conservative and aspire to purely socialist views when it comes to economics.
54 posted on 03/18/2004 7:08:11 AM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar
The first time gas went up around 1979, the bankers printed huge ammounts of money Bankers do not print money.

to compensate. For what? Why would bankers care about the oil prices?

This gave us 21% inflation during the Carter years. Those with debts benifited from this as wages went up also! And those without debts did not benefit from wage inflation?

And the point of this enumeration was... what exactly?

55 posted on 03/18/2004 7:11:07 AM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Steve_Seattle
Someone on the radio was predicting $5/gallon by summertime. Oh yes, I distinctly remember those good time: spring of 2000, spring of 1995, spring of 1991, spring of...
56 posted on 03/18/2004 7:13:11 AM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Made In The USA
Tonight when I fill up the tank, I'll let the guy at the Mobil station know... Whether he knows or not, you do not suffer as threads like this allege.
57 posted on 03/18/2004 7:14:47 AM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: AdamSelene235
This is the price you pay for allowing the government to dominate and control your economic life.

That's propaganda. Domination must be defined even to be discussed --- something you do not bother to do and replace with nice-sounding, insendiary phrases.

Markets do not provide public goods, and we hire the government to provide them. By itself, it is not at all act of submission. Naturally, any contract grants privilages and imposes duties, so to partake of public goods you as individual do forgo certain freedoms.

Having common currency, including that which is "faith-based," in a public good.

Any libertarian statement such as yours is nonsense as long as it does not even bother to address provision of public goods.

58 posted on 03/18/2004 7:19:50 AM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: IYAS9YAS
What I don't get is, even though the cost of oil isn't rising, the fuel price in Idaho is through the roof

The prices are not based on cost: they are based on supply and demand. They rise if demand goes up or supply goes down.

59 posted on 03/18/2004 7:22:34 AM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: IYAS9YAS
I went to Manchester, NH and relative prices were cheaper by almost 25 cents/gallon just last weekend. It's more populated and definitely has a demand higher than Idaho. What the heck gives?

Delivering into a less densely populated area is more costly (per galon, per customer), and that is one of the things you pay via higher prices. The second is that the greater demand in a more populated area brings more competition that, once there, lowers the price. By comparison, there is less competition in a less populated area: in a tiny town you are stuck with Uncle Joe who opened a station next to the General Store some thirty years ago...

Price differentials are due to differences in market characteristics, which affect both the demand and supply side and, ultimately, cost --- but not the cost of producton of oil.

60 posted on 03/18/2004 7:27:40 AM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Eva
A major problem is that we no longer have a single totally US oil company.

You confuse citizenship with trade, Eva.

While we as individuals may care about the citizenship of those with whom we trade, we all would lose a great deal if we imposed citizenship to which you refer in your post on COMPANIES.

61 posted on 03/18/2004 7:31:04 AM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Made In The USA
Agree, and the confiscation your speak of is relentless. Blind... all too blind...

If you do not see me pumping gas at the gas station and ONLY see that I am handing my money over to the attendant, you might similarly think that he robbed me.

You would be equally wrong in that case, of course.

62 posted on 03/18/2004 7:33:03 AM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark
I understand that. There is plenty of supply here. Demand has tapered from it's high in 1999. Price is up considerably since. What we actually have in this area is one major owner who runs three brands (Chevron, Texaco and Shell). Everyone waits to see how he's gonna price his fuel for the day and then sets theirs.

Get away from his stores and the local competitors and the prices drop significantly.

63 posted on 03/18/2004 7:37:51 AM PST by IYAS9YAS (Go Fast, Turn Left!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: AdamSelene235
Petronski:(b) on a logarithmic scale;
AdamSelene235:Ugh....This speaks volumes.

Yes, Adam it does: you apparently are uncomfortable not only with economics but also with logarithms if you think of them as level of education beyond reading.

If you knew anything about prices, you would know that that is a relative notion, and their ratios make more sense than they themselves. And it is changes in ratios that are captured by a logarithm.

Now, you prefer something else: arbitrarily singled out notions and measures that don't measure anything. Well, as COBOL programmers used to say in ancient Rome, purgamentum init, exit purgamentum: garbage in, garbage out.

Of course, if one puts a you-should-love-liberty slant on garbage, you expect it somehow to be transformed into a philosophical thought...

64 posted on 03/18/2004 7:40:24 AM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Petronski
How about posting a chart of M3 Money Stock (a) over thirty years; (b) on a logarithmic scale; (c) that starts at zero.

Oh no, Mr. Petronksi: this may uncover facts, you cannot do that with a libertarian. Plus, knowledge of logarithms immediately give you away as an elitist and thus disqualifies you from "feeling the pain of the masses." You should not have admitted to knowing logarithms... They don't even use them is business schools any more.

65 posted on 03/18/2004 7:43:03 AM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark
No, I was referring to the takeover of ARCO by BP. ARCO was a totally US company, with a totally domestic supply of crude. There was no foreign currency involved and no foreign markets either, to drive up the price of oil. BP stated at the time of the take over that they wanted to see a single price for oil in all their markets, that they hoped to raise the price of gasoline in the US to the same price that they pay in Europe. That was $4/gal at the time.
66 posted on 03/18/2004 7:43:38 AM PST by Eva
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark
An accurate graph as I have described would also cut down on the fear factor. And if we do that, how will they ever sell more gold? Gold! GOLD!!!
67 posted on 03/18/2004 7:45:03 AM PST by Petronski (Kerry knew...and did nothing. THAT....is weakness.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: JTG
Suggestion. Buy more fuel efficient cars, people.

This suggestion is hardly practical: it presupposes the ability to process information and, more importantly, take responsibility for one's own actions. The suggestion and motivation of the oroginal post on this thread is much more practical: b---ch and moan about the markets, evil Fed, stupid government... Don't you see how much more practical THAT is?

68 posted on 03/18/2004 7:46:53 AM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Eva
No, I was referring to the takeover of ARCO by BP. I understood what you were refering to, although I did not know the specific example you had in mind.

You have an erroneou perception that oil companies are insulated in those countries where they drill:

ARCO was a totally US company, with a totally domestic supply of crude. There was no foreign currency involved That's what you think. It would've been terrible if their finance department did not trade currency futures, and I would be VERY surprised if their shareholders and directors allowed that for long. Oil and gas are international markets, and even if you sell only in Montanta you are subject to price oscillations that are smoothed out by forward currency contracts. In addition, a domestic oil company tips into spot oil markets when they are short in supply or have excess volume.

and no foreign markets either, to drive up the price of oil. The price for oil was not determined by ARCO. It was determined by demand and AGGREGATE supply.

BP stated at the time of the take over that they wanted to see a single price for oil in all their markets, that they hoped to raise the price of gasoline in the US to the same price that they pay in Europe. And you thing that ARCO, being good Americans they were, would not want the same thing?

In addition, you misunderstood what BP said: it is a well-managed company and I cannot believe that someone could say such a silly thing, which would cause laughter even in an MBA class...

69 posted on 03/18/2004 7:57:24 AM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Petronski
Gold! GOLD!!!

Yeh... That's the ticket...

Snake oil is also good, I hear. Unfortunately, it was all confiscated by the Fed, masons, and international Jewish bankers as part of enslavement of the American people. Otherwise I would definitely buy some: a solid investment.

70 posted on 03/18/2004 8:00:03 AM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark
Thanks a lot! That's a great compliment.
71 posted on 03/18/2004 8:10:59 AM PST by OneTimeLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark
What you said about ARCO was true after Lod Cook retired as CEO, but under his leadership the company was more interested in preventing a takeover than in pleasing stock holders. With this in mind, Cook increased the debt to value ratio to a such a high level that a take-over was unattractive. The idea was to keep the company going, rather than please the stock holders. After the embargo of '78, ARCO pulled out of all it's foreign holdings and concentrated solely on it's Alaskan oil, purposely to be free of the OPEC pressure. ARCO was one of those companies that people were proud to work for, because they seemed to believe that doing the right thing was the only way to do business. (At least in the divisions that my husband worked) The other companies didn't like ARCO because they made them look bad.
72 posted on 03/18/2004 8:11:25 AM PST by Eva
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Steve_Seattle
"Someone on the radio was predicting $5/gallon by summertime. I wonder if OPEC would do that to undermine Bush's re-election.."


BS maybe $3 in CA but $5? C'mon.

Yes, OPEC would prefer Kerry.
73 posted on 03/18/2004 8:12:02 AM PST by raloxk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
"1- drill for gas & oil like crazy- onshore, offshore, and in Alaska 2- go nuclear for power 3- convert stationary plants to clean coal technology 4- slash taxes and regulations like crazy>>>
"

that is a solution but not for 2004. More like 2010
74 posted on 03/18/2004 8:13:14 AM PST by raloxk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark
The price for oil was not determined by ARCO. It was determined by demand and AGGREGATE supply.

I forgot to explain my remarks on this. Another poster was claiming that the weak dollar was the cause of the price rise. There is no foreign exchange involved in the sale of domestic crude. Also, the philosophy of the board changed to a more market conscious strategy after the Lod Cook left. They reversed everything that Cook had done and basicly prepared ARCO for the takeover by BP, for which they were paid handsomely.

75 posted on 03/18/2004 8:21:47 AM PST by Eva
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark
Markets do not provide public goods,

There is no such thing. Is a polio shot a public good to the one child in a million who dies from it? Is a highway a public good to the man who loses his farm for it?

and we hire the government to provide them.

Hiring refers to a voluntary process. You are referring to a non-voluntary process based on violence not collaborative activity.

Naturally, any contract grants privilages and imposes duties, so to partake of public goods you as individual do forgo certain freedoms.

Please provide evidence that I have signed such a contract.

Having common currency, including that which is "faith-based," in a public good

Not for young folks trying to purchase inflated housing. Or old folks being robbed of their benefits and savings via inflation. Remind me how falsifying the CPI is a public good?

76 posted on 03/18/2004 8:36:16 AM PST by AdamSelene235
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: backhoe
3- convert stationary plants to clean coal technology 4- slash taxes and regulations like crazy

The 4 makes the 3 superfluous as you will be able to go dirty like crazy.

77 posted on 03/18/2004 8:40:00 AM PST by A. Pole (<SARCASM> The genocide of Albanians was stopped in its tracks before it began.</S>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark
If you knew anything about prices, you would know that that is a relative notion, and their ratios make more sense than they themselves. And it is changes in ratios that are captured by a logarithm.

The ratio of what to what?

Now, you prefer something else: arbitrarily singled out notions and measures that don't measure anything.

What do you propose we use a unit of monetary measure? Lord Greenie himself has rejected all the M's and MZM.

78 posted on 03/18/2004 8:42:50 AM PST by AdamSelene235
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark
Gold! GOLD!!! Yeh... That's the ticket... Snake oil is also good, I hear.

Actually just plain dumb steel, copper, soybeans or oil have been sufficient for the last several years.

Now why is that?

Could it have something to do with the fact the Feds probably have more unfunded liabilities than all privately held wealth in America?

79 posted on 03/18/2004 8:48:13 AM PST by AdamSelene235
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Eva
What you said about ARCO was true after Lod Cook retired as CEO, but under his leadership the company was more interested in preventing a takeover than in pleasing stock holders.

Eva, "prevewnting" a takeover IS in the interest of shareholders. Takeovers cannot be prevented altogether: poison pills increase the price, which is in the interest of the shareholders.

Sound like you'be been subjected to a great deal of anti-management rhetoric from armshair generals in your company: somehow, even if one's expertise is limited in makign two-sided copies, he still knows best what is good for the company --- having never seen its books even!

With this in mind, Cook increased the debt to value ratio to a such a high level that a take-over was unattractive. And what happened to the price of the stock?

The idea was to keep the company going, rather than please the stock holders. I would think that to let the company function as a going concern IS the mains interest of the shareholders.

After the embargo of '78, ARCO pulled out of all it's foreign holdings and concentrated solely on it's Alaskan oil, purposely to be free of the OPEC pressure. That is a bet the company made, like many strategic decisions management faces.

ARCO was one of those companies that people were proud to work for, What people are proud of is the function of their psyche and often has little to do with the object of pride. Witness, for instance, the pride of a parent in her or his child: it is there even when the child's achievements are average. There is nothing wrong with that (in fact it's great for the lucky child) but it has nothing to do with the child itself.

In those times, Eva, Americans were generally proud of their corporations. The same was true about people who worked for GM, GE, aerospace industry: you were a part of something big, you were making America great. A generation before that, Americans were proud of their country in general, but by '70s the civil rights movements not only achieved equality for minorities but went further and imposed guilt and shame on Americans. We were no longer proud of our country and ashamed of what "we" have done to the VIetnamese, blacks, women, Latin Americans: the leftists have won that territory. However, we were still proud of our corporations.

Well, the battle continued and granted more victories to the left, which after patriotism went on to dismantle other insitutuions: family, parenting, primary education (liberal arts higher education is dead since 1050s) -- and, finally, capitalism itself. The change in attitude manifested itself in 1987-1989 or so with a notable increase in labor turnoover: loyalty to companies has disappeared. Companies have responded, of course, by cutting costs in that area --- from reduced benefits to "hotelling" (office-sharing).

You may or may not see the point in the specifics I offered, but the main point is valid: whether employees feel good or bad working for the company has nothing to do with the company's strategy in the global market. This is simply because people do not know management, although they believe they do --- just because they observed their managers (sort of like fancying oneself being an engineer just because you've seen a car or better yet --- drove one!) Havig very little reason of that kind, people liked working for ARCO in 1970s and they do not, as you say, now --- with equally little reason.

Most certainly, this feeling has nothing to do with the company strategy or country of incorporation.

80 posted on 03/18/2004 8:50:22 AM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark
Ok, the information about how the company operated under Lod Cook came from letters that he put out to the employees. Those letters also stopped with his retirement. ARCO stock was never what was called a growth stock,even in the nineties when the board philosophy changed.

What I meant by saying that people were proud to work for ARCO is that they stood behind you when you did "the right thing", when you put safety and environment above the bottom line. Their philosophy was that the right way was the best way to operate and in the end, the most profitable. My husband held almost every position in the company (ARCO Marine)at one time or another starting in employee relations, to Manager of Fleet staffing and payroll. He did training, and labor negotiations as well as administrating the contracts. He did the environmental job and is now in operations. The company is much different now, but still the best, most respected in the industry because the philosophy of the Marine division never changed.
81 posted on 03/18/2004 9:06:56 AM PST by Eva
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Eva
Another poster was claiming that the weak dollar was the cause of the price rise. He did not: he merely said that the net result is neutral.

There is no foreign exchange involved in the sale of domestic crude. YOu are correct, of course. But this does not mean that foreign exchange does not affect the price.

Also, the philosophy of the board changed to a more market conscious strategy after the Lod Cook left. They reversed everything that Cook had done and basically prepared ARCO for the takeover by BP, for which they were paid handsomely.

Now you finally said it! In the increasingly socialist atmosphere of the present-day America, one freely offers a libel that the management is interested in being taken over because they allegedly receive a lot of money.

I cannot even count the angles, each of which shows how patently wrong this view is! Firstly, suppose that management is indeed benefiting from a takeover. So what? All of the shareholders do so too: the price offered for a company is almost always greater than the current stock price by a significant amount. To benefit shareholders is the jib the managers were hired to do and, if they do it well -- they get paid for it. What's wrong with that?

Secondly, the argument is a logical fallacy: you see and state the fact that managers benefited from the sale of the company and substituted with the fact that that was the ONLY thing that moved them. If I enjoy driving my car and thus benefited from buying it --- it must be that I purchased it to the detriment of my family. Silly, of course.

Demagogues around you use such argument all the time: it is a favorite of Pat Buchanan, for instance. He observers that some of our actions abroad, such as invasion of Iraq, benefit Israel (we weaken or destroy Israel's enemy) and claims that this is WHY we did it in the first place. What is the connection with that country? Clearly, Bush or Cheney cannot have any, so it must be Jews in the administration (who are expected, according to him, to sell out their own country for the sake of Israel): he uses "neocon" as a synonym for Jew.

Leave aside the (im)moral implications of Buchanan's argument and observe that it is logically incorrect: Buchanan starts with "Israel benefits from war in Iraq" but then substitutes it with "only Israel benefits from war in Iraq." This is a logical fallacy.

Friends of your husband do the same when they start with "management benefits from the sale of the company" and substitute it with "only management benefits from the sale of the company." It is the same argument, and it is equally incorrect and equally wrong: just as Buchanan defames Jewish members of Bush's administration by accusing them of betraying their country, the argument against management accuses them of betraying the shareholders. As I said, this is factually incorrect and immoral. And, incidentally, I do not find ignorance to be a sufficient excuse: if one does not know, one should not speak at all rather than speak falsely.

The reason for your not hearing opinions and facts such as those expressed in my post is a deep one: this knowledge has been removed from your textbooks and from the press. According to the press, everything American is bad, and what is more American than capitalism itself? What is more American than the corporations that FOUNDED this country? Indeed, how many people today, when thinking about the Hudson Bay Company or Virginia Company, connect them with the present-day corporations? How many people think of Harvard College (University) as the longest continuously functioning corporation in the U.S.? Hardly any, despite, the ironic fact that Hudson Bay is even still in existence.

Thirdly --- and finally, for I am going to stop here --- the claim that the company officers prepared it for "takeover by BP, for which they were paid handsomely" is also not quite correct. Surely, you have heard about the huge bonuses and severance they received. As I said earlier these two are different animals: a bonus, just like yours or mine, is a reward for the job well done in behalf of the shareholders. Severance pay, which is also like yours or mine and differs only in quantity -- the famous "parachutes" made infamous by the press and other socialist provocateurs --- are large as sums of money but they are not as great as the compensation the managers would've received if the company had NOT been taken over. In other words, if you compare the pay to your salary, it is a huge sum; but if you compare it to the pay the officer would've received if he stayed on his or her job --- that pay is not so great. It is often on the level of one year compensation. When IBM was downsizing in late 1980, it was paying that AND MORE to every person who was layed off.

It sad to see that conservatives do not even recognize when they repeat, however innocently, socialist mantra. That is why I think we shall see socialized medicine and then everything else within a generation. There is no one left who would be proud of capitalism to defend is --- or even know what it is. .

82 posted on 03/18/2004 9:45:45 AM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: AdamSelene235
Markets do not provide public goods, There is no such thing.

You exhibit what Dostoyevky called arrogance of ignorance. As if it were not bad enough that you delve into matters of some complexity without taking economics at least at the intermediate level of college --- you declare that things you do not know and clearly do not understand do not even exist.

You have no idea how foolish you look when you say things such that quoted above. Perhaps you should stop: you already have both feet firmly placed in your mouth.

83 posted on 03/18/2004 9:49:57 AM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark
You exhibit what Dostoyevky called arrogance of ignorance. As if it were not bad enough that you delve into matters of some complexity without taking economics at least at the intermediate level of college --- you declare that things you do not know and clearly do not understand do not even exist. You have no idea how foolish you look when you say things such that quoted above. Perhaps you should stop: you already have both feet firmly placed in your mouth.

The original subject was the "public good" of a Centrally Controlled Currency. I think its plain to see that there will be winners and losers in such a system. It isn't good for everyone. Its also fairly easy to understand our current system allows the government essentially an unlimited budget. Unlimited budgets lead to unlimited government. Perhaps you're like most physicists and have spent your entire career as a glorified welfare queen and dare not bite the hand that feeds you.

You have done nothing to address my points concerning the falsification of the CPI, or the recent increases in the prices of commodities, or even the measure of money itself.

All you have done is adopt a psdueo-sophisticated posture and call me names.

Congrats on reading Dostoevsky. I'm soooo impressed.

84 posted on 03/18/2004 10:38:09 AM PST by AdamSelene235
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: All
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1100601/posts
Oil prices rise to 13-year high, threaten economy
The Washington Times ^ | March 18, 2004 | Patrice Hill
85 posted on 03/18/2004 12:19:25 PM PST by backhoe (-30-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1100928/posts
The New Reason For Pain at the Pump
Tech Central Station ^ | 03/19/2004 | Ben Lieberman
86 posted on 03/19/2004 1:03:54 AM PST by backhoe (-30-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: civil discourse
With gas prices like these, PR is not needed, other than to mention horizontal drilling. Anyone I talk with wants to start drilling. Only enviro-wackos, an extreme minority, are opposed to ANWR drilling. Such fanatics wouldn't vote GOP anyway. Let them eat our dust.
87 posted on 03/19/2004 2:07:24 AM PST by Arthur Wildfire! March (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/833678/posts?page=1969 Backhoe's latest links)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark; backhoe
My apologies to backhoe for your lack of vision. Backhoe's links portray genuine concerns the average voter has, particularly the swing voter. Backhoe reminds us of the dust covered solutions that conservatives have been offering in a new light. It was well done, a great issue Bush could run with. And besides, I personally believe that low oil prices create jobs, which is why I bookmarked it.
88 posted on 03/19/2004 2:13:06 AM PST by Arthur Wildfire! March (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/833678/posts?page=1969 Backhoe's latest links)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March

89 posted on 03/19/2004 3:42:49 AM PST by backhoe (-30-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

Comment #90 Removed by Moderator

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
My apologies to backhoe for your lack of vision.

That is your call: you can call it lack of vision, or you can call being somewhat informed.

Backhoe's links portray genuine concerns the average voter has,

Of course. Equal Rights Amendment was also a genuine concern of the leftists in the '70s. Anti-corporate and anti-capitalist propaganda is their concern today as well. It is genuine, all right, but has nothing to do with either our traditions or reality.

Same with oil prices: to talk about them without even knowing what price is --- well, it may be a genuine concern but it should be addreseed either in the classroom or local bookstore.

Further, as a conservative may be concernred with interferernce of the government into the oil industry and questioning whether environmental protection went too far. This is not the same thing as scaring people with high oil prices. That is intellectually dishonest.

Backhoe reminds us of the dust covered solutions that conservatives have been offering in a new light. SOme of these solutions are offered to nonexistent problems.

I personally believe that low oil prices create jobs, which is why I bookmarked it.That's great. Do you believe in gravity? DO you form beliefs about results of chemical reactions? How about hypotheses about the shape of the Earth --- perhaps, you believe it to be squere?

There is no need to form beliefs ahout things that are known. And, in addition, who besides Marx and Lenin said that creation of jobs is a virtue that has to be pursued?

91 posted on 03/19/2004 11:19:12 AM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: All
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1101367/posts
Gas at $2? How About $3.78 (1979) or $10 (1920)?
Bloomberg Terminal | March 19 | Thomas R. Keene
92 posted on 03/19/2004 12:54:18 PM PST by backhoe (-30-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1102323/posts
Oil Price Soars to $38 on Global Security Issues, Algeria Says
bloomberg ^ | March 21, 2004 | Sean Evers
On the upside, at $38 a LOT of oil wells in Texas and Oklahoma can start pumping again.
93 posted on 03/21/2004 4:52:57 AM PST by backhoe (Drill ANWR- drill offshore- drill the lower 48- go Nukes! Burn coal...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1102359/posts
Gas Prices Too High? Well, E85 ethanol blend is 40 cents cheaper
GF Herald ^ | Mar. 21, 2004 | Lisa Davis
94 posted on 03/21/2004 6:06:34 AM PST by backhoe (Drill ANWR- drill offshore- drill the lower 48- go Nukes! Burn coal...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark; backhoe
"How about hypotheses about the shape of the Earth --- perhaps, you believe it to be squere?"

No. I do not believe that the earth is square. But I'm very glad that Columbus had the vision to anticipate the fears of his crew. So must we anticipate the fears of voters. There is nothing intellectually dishonest about saying that drilling in ANWR can ultimately help us, not only with gas prices but also with immediate jobs, immediate diplomatic leverage, and even immediate tax revenue.

My aunt was scared being alone. Her son could have shown her statistics to make her feel safe. Instead, he got her a dog for protection. Was he being intellectually dishonest?
95 posted on 03/22/2004 3:11:15 AM PST by Arthur Wildfire! March (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/833678/posts?page=1969 Backhoe's latest links)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark
"And, in addition, who besides Marx and Lenin said that creation of jobs is a virtue that has to be pursued?"

Oh, I don't know. Alexander Hamilton and his trade policy.

96 posted on 03/22/2004 3:14:02 AM PST by Arthur Wildfire! March (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/833678/posts?page=1969 Backhoe's latest links)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
My aunt was scared being alone. Her son could have shown her statistics to make her feel safe. Instead, he got her a dog for protection. Was he being intellectually dishonest?

Of course not! But this is different from screaming, "Buy dogs! Crime rate may hit 3 per block by the summer!"

It is this --- the original post on this thread --- to which I referred as intellectually dishonest.

97 posted on 03/22/2004 11:52:28 AM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: All
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1103919/posts
Coal trend should spur new technology
The Missoulian ^ | Tuesday, March 23, 2004 | editorial
98 posted on 03/23/2004 3:31:10 PM PST by backhoe (Just an old Keyboard Cowboy, ridin' the TrackBall into the Sunset...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1103926/posts
Pluthermal power
The Asahi Shimbun ^ | March 23,2004 | editorial
99 posted on 03/23/2004 3:33:34 PM PST by backhoe (Just an old Keyboard Cowboy, ridin' the TrackBall into the Sunset...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tinamina
Might have something to do with that refinery that's offline in Anacortes WA...6 weeks, with 500,000 gallons a day not coming into the market. Employee error, no consequences except to you. (us)

See, what I don't get about that argument is that there doesn't seem to be any shortage of gasoline at the pumps. No stations with signs saying "OUT OF GAS." No fewer cars at the stations lining up to fill up. No fewer cars on the road at rush hour. By all empirical indications, there's just as much gas as there ever is. It just costs more.

100 posted on 03/23/2004 4:05:09 PM PST by Heyworth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 951-962 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson