Recent Comments

Powered by Disqus

Blogroll
«  
  »

Sons of bitches, the whole lot of ‘em

You know what pisses me off? (Screw you to anyone who just thought “everything”).

Check this article from Yahoo!. Particularly, the first few paragraphs:

Gas Prices Likely to Hit $2.15 by Spring
2 hours, 4 minutes ago

By H. JOSEF HEBERT, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON – Gasoline prices probably will jump an additional 15 cents this spring and remain well above $2 a gallon through the heavy driving season, forecasters say.

There’s also little relief in sight for crude oil prices, which are pushing gasoline costs higher. Crude prices probably will remain “near the high to mid-$40″ a barrel range well into 2006, the Energy Department’s Energy Information Administration said Tuesday.

Regular gasoline averaged $2 a gallon last week, 26 cents higher than a year ago, and crude prices have been above $50 a barrel, briefly surpassing $55 a barrel last week.

Nice. Gas prices are going up. But when did they go down?

Remember last year when we heard of the mythical $3 a gallon around the time gas prices were at $2.75? Apparently, gas prices just keep climbing. Somewhere between the hysteria over $3.00 and the speculation that it was because the Bush Administration was in bed with oil companies, all the “news” outlets lost sight of the steep price drop at the gas pump.

I guess they can only report on gas prices when they go up. As Jeff said in the comments of a prior thread: If it bleeds, it leads.

Source: AP via Yahoo!

Bookmark and Share
March 9th, 2005 | Category: In The News, Interesting
  • Patrick
    Wow. I kinda find myself agreeing with Vinny here. Probably for different reasons though.

    I get angry when I hear people bitching about gas prices. Consumers should not expect the prices of a non-renewable resource to remain stagnant while demand grows at an exponential rate. It defies basic principles of economics and logic.

    So perhaps raising gas prices that high would be good for the economy and consumers in the long run. It might force people to stop whining and actively seek cleaner and more efficient forms of energy.
  • RKB
    In 1972, my Dad bought a scientific calculator for a couple of thousand dollars. Today I can get the same thing for $20. Does that mean that Texas Instruments should start charging thousands of dollars for their calculators again? How much do you think a 27 inch color TV cost in '72?

    Just because we're paying less for something -- even in inflation adjusted dollars -- than we were thirty years ago doesn't mean that current value should match historic value.

    I'm not bitching about the prices, Vinny. I'm bitching about the profits.
  • Here's how you fix the gas price problem:

    Jack the price up to where it should be based on what it was in 1973. Doing so would put gas prices at approximately $6.73 a gallon. Now the price is no longer artificially low and we can all move on with our lives.

    Honestly, we really have nothing to bitch about. It's 1/3 of what it should be accounting for inflation, and we still bitch about it.

    Get a grip guys.
  • Bob
    I am so glad other people are aware of this issue. I just wish the media would start crackin skulls on this one. As RKB stated, paying more at the pump for legitamate reasons is fine, but paying more at the pump under false pretenses is total bull shit. It is sooo painfully obvious that at some point in the oil system, from pumping oil, to refining oil, to pumping gasoline, someone is lying about increased costs: exactly how does a suicide bomb or a gun battle in a mid-east shit hole make oil more expensive? Unless the flow of oil is physically halted, it doesn't. Oil tycoons would respond, 'it's the risks' - but yet, in spite of these simply "overwhelming" risks, they've managed to snatch up a combined profit of HUNDREDS of BILLIONS (trillions?) of dollars. Son of a bitch! I have to fill up my tank today! The shame of it all.:cry:
  • Alan H.
    Walmart for the fiscal year ended 1/31/05 had $10.3 billion of net income on $288.2 billion of revenue (3.57% margin).

    ExxonMobil for the year ended 12/31/04 had net income of $25.5 billion on revenue of $298.0 billion (8.56% margin).
  • RKB
    (and a correction in the WalMart number, above: profit was 9 BILLION, not million)
  • RKB
    (and apropos of nothing, curse you and your blazing fast WordPress comments!)
  • RKB
    About a year ago, the Fortune 500 was published. I expect it'll be updated again soon. Top ten revenue wasn't all that surprising, even with half either being oil or automotive companies.

    The interesting number -- and I've been waiting almost a year for it -- is the PROFIT numbers.

    Revenue giant (and leading revenue company) WalMart had 9 million in profit in 2003. Exxon Mobile, on the other hand, had around $21.5 billion in pure, clean, liquid profit.

    I honestly don't mind paying more at the pump if there are legitimate reasons to do so -- hell, throw on a 100% tax to cover state and federal road work for all I care. But when an oil company MORE THAN DOUBLES the profit of that well-known profit monster WalMart, then, yes, I've got a problem with it.

    I'm not suggesting by any stretch that ExxonMobile doesn't have a right to turn a healthy profit. But, frankly, what they did in 2003 is simply obscene.

    Stay tuned to see if last year was a repeat.
  • Patrick
    It wouldn't shock me to here about Shell illegally manipulating the market.

    Every once in a while I hear (usually from NPR) that Shell recently under-estimated expected supply.
    This would obviously have the effect of driving up prices. It could be a simple mistake but I'm a little more cynical. Hell, remember Enron?
  • Bob
    Ahhh... Remember when, in the late 90's, oil prices skyrocketed to over $2 a gallon (they had been running as low as $1.09)? Well, we were all told that rising crude oil prices were to blame, and that this in turn was due to 'problems' and 'tension flair-ups' in the Middle East. Highly probable, given the carnage and mayhem of our beloved cradle of civilization. Of course, the next year, after the story died and prices dropped a bit, I read on the fourth page of my daily newspaper that Shell had claimed earning record profits the prior year; we're talking PROFITS in the BILLIONS!

    Gee, I wonder if Shell & friends just 'pretended' that they had to raise prices on oil so that they could double profits from the previous year... yep, that's it.

    So when I see the price of gas at my local Shell or Mobile jump 30 cents every time a bomb goes off in Riyadh, I cry on the outside, but smile on the inside knowing that a rich oil tycoon just got richer, and I just got poorer. God, I love the oil industry!

    And on the flip-side, I imagine that the oil tycoon just LOVES when the media puts a suicide bombing or Saudi gun battle on the front page - Cha-Ching!!! Profits incoming!!!
  • Patrick
    The problem is that despite what liberals want us to think, there is little the government can do about it. We are too dependent on OPEC!

    What?

    We are too dependant on OPEC and therefore our government has little influence on gas prices?

    Better read President Bush's proposed energy plan. It specifically outlines a plan to significantly reduce our dependence on foreign ernergy. Among an array of justifications is the Bush administrations reasoning that this will grant the U.S. more influence over oil prices and supplies.

    So it seems conservatives aren't so different from liberals in this respect. They both seem to beleive that government can at least manipulate market prices.

    It's really a simple economics concept.
  • Last week it was $1.68 a gallon here and this week it went up to $1.89. It was about $1.85 most of last month.
  • Good thing gas prices didn't increase at the rate other things increased.

    Seriously, the gas "problem" is highly overrated.
  • $2.15?? $2.15?? Um, try I paid $2.45 last night!!!

    Thank goodness I get 5% back, but that still keeps it over $2 a gallon! NO BUENO!!!
  • pete from astoria
    The rising cost of gasoline (crude oil) is definitely a negative thing for the average American. The problem is that despite what liberals want us to think, there is little the government can do about it. We are too dependent on OPEC!
    In contrast, a gallon of milk (a domestic product) costs more than a gallon of gasoline. This is entirely due to the control that “special interests” have on our elected officials. There is a group of dairy states that are part of the “milk cartel” which stifle competition and keep prices artificially high. There are other agricultural products that are protected by our federal laws that keep prices artificially high. The farm/agriculture lobby is the most powerful interest group out there. I’m getting pretty tired of the self-righteous politicians who pander to this group at the expense of the American family.
  • We can call it whatever you want, my friend.
  • Can we call it Jeff's Law of Bleeding?
blog comments powered by Disqus