Posted on 05/31/2007 3:41:52 AM PDT by IrishMike
What to do about choose the adjective "spiraling," "skyrocketing," "out-of-control" gas prices? .................... A national morning show interviewer practically high-fived the governor of Florida for urging an investigation into "gouging." Meanwhile, over at one of the cable news networks, the "newsman" beat his desk, his chest and anything he could find to express his concern, outrage and downright indignation.
The California speaker of the State Assembly said that while he lacked evidence that oil companies engage in cheating, he still felt they did. Why? His gut told him so. In fact, over the last 20 years, 30 federal investigations seeking evidence of price manipulation or collusion came up with, uh, well, a dry hole.
But the conspiracy theorists press on. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., asked the Government Accountability Office to conduct an investigation. A year ago, he asked the Federal Trade Commission to investigate. By then, the FTC had already conducted two investigations, uncovering no evidence of unfair business practices. But, who knows? Maybe the oil company CEOs pulled a Sandy Berger, and stuffed damning evidence in their pants. So, by all means, let's look harder.
The mainscream media reports on the "outrageous," "unacceptable," "unjustifiable" "record profits." Never mind that following price peaks in 1981, low crude and gas prices during the '80s and '90s bankrupted some oil companies. But that was then. Today, Exxon Mobil, Chevron and ConocoPhillips earn tens of billions of dollars annually in profits that "defy common sense."
Why bother reporting that, with Big Oil profits at eight to 10 cents on the dollar, other companies and industry sectors earn more including, for example, Internet giant Google and the banking industry. In California, the state "earns" about 40 cents per gallon, with the feds' cut coming in at almost 19 cents.
(Excerpt) Read more at creators.com ...
I found his picture.
I wish I knew how to steal and post that!
I got an A in Differential Equations. How’s that?
You mean because it is a "necessity"? Gasoline is used for a lot of different things, some of the necessary and some of them not. A lot of gasoline use is not necessary. Products are hauled that are not really needed and trips are taken that aren't necessary. If gasoline gets too expensive people will drive less and oil companies will make less profit. So for some purposes we are "free" to refuse to buy.
< img src="picture here closed quote, closed bracket
Find a picture you like, right click, view properties. Copy those properties, insert between the quotes.
I do not side with Chavez. I believe he is destroying what should be a prosperous country and I am amazed how rapidly he is doing it.
But ExxonMobil, nor the others is treating those facilities as a write off. They still have a 40% share and they are not walking away from them.
Ugh. Tomorrow. it’s time for a beer.
There is no such thing as ‘dependence’ in a free market.
What you are describing is ‘choice’, and as long as a choice exists, there is no dependence. If you are actually ‘addicted’ to something, then you have no ‘choice’.
So which is it ? Are we ‘addicted’ or are we ‘choosing’ to drive the vehicles we drive and the distances we drive ?
People that say they ‘have no choice’ except to drive a gasoline vehicle 50 miles a day don’t really mean that. What they mean is that they’ve evaluated the costs of all their choices — living closer to work, buying a diesel, buying an electric or hybrid, carpooling, driving an econobox, mass transportation, etc. — and that gas vehicle and driving 50 miles gives them the most value at the lowest cost.
People just like to complain.
It isn’t the government job to force people’s choices when those choices hurt nobody but themselves. That’s kind of a Conservative mantra, or should be.
Go here to practice:
HTML Sandbox
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/938739/posts
Go here to learn more:
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3aa5843c228c.htm
HTML Bootcamp (Cyber patriot training)
It’s great to see that a conservative on free republic agrees with what I say.
If I reached one person with this message then it has been all worth it.
Thanks so much for your post. Your post made my day!
Thanks. That’s what I have firmly believed for a while. I don’t find too many people who agree with me where I live.So many people trust the government and politicians. So it’s refreshing to see that there are some people out there like you who do have common sense.
I browsed some of your posts. They are interesting,entertaining and you have a good writing style. I wish I could write like you do.
Thank you for the compliment, but I'd be genuinely surprised if anyone had ever taken one of my posts, as I did with yours, and saved it in order to memorize it for arguing with a liberal in-law ;-)
A write off is still real money and a loss. You are real blase about their money but probably not about your own.
..................REPUBLICISM NOT SOCIALISM
..................REPUBLICISM NOT SOCIALISM
But it was not a $30B loss as you seemed to imply. They went from about 55% ownership to 40% ownership. And they are being paid for that ownership share.
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.