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

Skip to comments.

Economics of prices {price-gouging oil companies}
JewishWorldReview.com ^ | May 31, 2006 | Walter Williams

Posted on 06/05/2006 8:43:21 AM PDT by thackney

Here's what one reader wrote: "Williams, I can understand how the destruction of Hurricane Katrina and Middle East political uncertainty can jack up gasoline prices. But it's price-gouging for the oil companies to raise the price of all the gasoline already bought and stored before the crisis." Several other readers made similar allegations. Such allegations reflect a misunderstanding of how prices are determined.

Let's start off with an example. Say you owned a small 10-pound inventory of coffee that you purchased for $3 a pound. Each week you'd sell me a pound for $3.25. Suppose a freeze in Brazil destroyed half of its coffee crop, causing the world price of coffee to immediately rise to $5 a pound. You still have coffee that you purchased before the jump in prices. When I stop by to buy another pound of coffee from you, how much will you charge me? I'm betting that you're going to charge me at least $5 a pound. Why? Because that's today's cost to replace your inventory.

Historical costs do not determine prices; what economists call opportunity costs do. Of course, you'd have every right not to be a "price-gouger" and continue to charge me $3.25 a pound. I'd buy your entire inventory and sell it at today's price of $5 a pound and make a killing.

If you were really enthusiastic about not being a "price-gouger," I'd have another proposition. You might own a house that you purchased for $55,000 in 1960 that you put on the market for a half-million dollars. I'd simply accuse you of price-gouging and demand that you sell me the house for what you paid for it, maybe adding on a bit for inflation since 1960.

(Excerpt) Read more at jewishworldreview.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: Alaska
KEYWORDS: anwr; economics; energy; evilcapitalism; eviloilcompanies; fud; gouging; oil
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-171 next last
To: Diggler

The other half of the equation is they still want to make a profit on the stuff they already bought. So if a business bought supply for $3 a unit and the price of units drops to $2 they're still going to keep the price above $3. It's not good enough to just replace stock, you need to recoup other costs (manpower, facilities), and turn a profit on every sale (unless the product is a loss leader).


41 posted on 06/05/2006 1:08:45 PM PDT by discostu (get on your feet and do the funky Alphonzo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras
OOPS, FreeRepublic is loaded with people who don't get it.

I disagree. Most folks here are very well informed. And we learn more from each other a lot of the time. Though sometimes I get lost when the military guys sometimes sorta 'chat' amongst themselves and use acronyms that we (I) dopey civilians do not understand. LOL

42 posted on 06/05/2006 1:10:25 PM PDT by Cobra64 (All we get are lame ideas from Republicans and lame criticism from dems about those lame ideas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Sinner6
Doesn't Walter Williams sit in for Rush sometimes?

Yes he does. I believe Walter E. Williams has a Phd in Economics.

43 posted on 06/05/2006 1:12:04 PM PDT by Cobra64 (All we get are lame ideas from Republicans and lame criticism from dems about those lame ideas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Cobra64
You can disagree if you want, but I have gone over the exact sames points that Williams covered in this article and gotten nowhere with many people on this forum. Some on this thread.

They are hooked on the concept of gouging, which in actuality does not exist, and the bizarre conspiracy theories about "big oil".

44 posted on 06/05/2006 1:15:11 PM PDT by Protagoras ("A real decision is measured by the fact that you have taken a new action"... Tony Robbins)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: mysterio

Do you not understand the fundamentals of capitalism, and a free market economy? Or does Communism make more economic sense to you? Is 1-800-KARLMARX on your speed dial? Alfred Marshall and Adam Smith economic principles work better among free people.


45 posted on 06/05/2006 1:18:13 PM PDT by Cobra64 (All we get are lame ideas from Republicans and lame criticism from dems about those lame ideas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: thackney
Actually, the cost for a gallon of gasoline at the pump is cheaper today than it was 30 years ago.
46 posted on 06/05/2006 1:21:34 PM PDT by Cobra64 (All we get are lame ideas from Republicans and lame criticism from dems about those lame ideas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: thackney
Supply and demand works.

Yes it does in a free market.

47 posted on 06/05/2006 1:24:41 PM PDT by Cobra64 (All we get are lame ideas from Republicans and lame criticism from dems about those lame ideas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: AaronInCarolina
the profit made by oil companies pales in comparison to the amount of taxation on that gallon.

The oil companies paid DOUBLE in taxes in relationship to their net profits. These same TAXES are relected in the cost of the supplier to the price of a gallon of gas to the consumer.

I do not understand that so many folks (not you) do not understand simple logic and common sense.

48 posted on 06/05/2006 1:27:08 PM PDT by Cobra64 (All we get are lame ideas from Republicans and lame criticism from dems about those lame ideas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Cobra64

And the cost per mile for fuel is even less when you look how mpg has changed. The average new passenger car is rated at 30 mpg in 2005; it was 15.9 in 1975.


49 posted on 06/05/2006 1:29:02 PM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
But if we are fighting a war on terror for real, then we should be funding alternative energy research and not letting the oil companies any where near any of that grant money.

You certainly do not believe in free enterprise and the private sector. Do you have a government job?

50 posted on 06/05/2006 1:30:38 PM PDT by Cobra64 (All we get are lame ideas from Republicans and lame criticism from dems about those lame ideas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
Therefore, the coffee argument is a strawman. How wrong I'm not.

It was not a coffee "argument." It was an EXAMPLE. (shaking head and rolling eyes)

51 posted on 06/05/2006 1:33:59 PM PDT by Cobra64 (All we get are lame ideas from Republicans and lame criticism from dems about those lame ideas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
domestic fuels that we don't have to buy from terrorists

Dial 1-800-ENVIROMENTALIST and communicate your concerns.

52 posted on 06/05/2006 1:35:52 PM PDT by Cobra64 (All we get are lame ideas from Republicans and lame criticism from dems about those lame ideas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Rte66
If people spent a few bucks to buy some stock in an oil company, they wouldn't moan about the company's "record profits" when they're a shareholder.

True. But two points. The oil companies have not had record profits. Their ROI is less than most other industries. The ignorant unwashed shudder when they hear a corporate earnings number greater than their personal income. Further, those that may have investments in mutual funds are probably invested in the petroleum sector.

53 posted on 06/05/2006 1:39:18 PM PDT by Cobra64 (All we get are lame ideas from Republicans and lame criticism from dems about those lame ideas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: mysterio

What was the rate of return on your investments last year? If you can figure that out, compare that to the rate of return from Exxon/Mobil or Chevron/Texaco.


54 posted on 06/05/2006 1:41:00 PM PDT by Cobra64 (All we get are lame ideas from Republicans and lame criticism from dems about those lame ideas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras; mysterio

Hey Prota. I've just been reading from the beginning of this thread. I retract my previous note to you. There ARE a lot of intelligence-deprived people here.


55 posted on 06/05/2006 1:43:20 PM PDT by Cobra64 (All we get are lame ideas from Republicans and lame criticism from dems about those lame ideas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras
Some are on this thread.

Yes, and to be redundant, yes.

56 posted on 06/05/2006 1:44:23 PM PDT by Cobra64 (All we get are lame ideas from Republicans and lame criticism from dems about those lame ideas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Cobra64

Oh, I agree, totally - but it was a modification of my normal advice to the moaners ... "If you don't own an oil well, get one."

I took it down a notch and advocated for a stock purchase, instead. Same people would *not* be saying a word about "record profits," but, of course, they'd be whining about how little profit their oil companies made.


57 posted on 06/05/2006 1:51:17 PM PDT by Rte66
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Cobra64
Boy, you're the most enthusiastic of the stockbrokers I've met on here yet. lol.

What we have right now is not a free or competitive market. We have government protecting an oil-based monopoly on our transportation energy requirements.

What I want to see is real, useful research that results in innovation to get us out of the pockets of tinpot dictators in third world hell holes. If you think that doesn't fall under defense, then you are crazy. Unless you are arguing to privatize the military, in which case you would be logically consistant. It is insane to say we are fighting a war on terror when we depend on the terrorists to sell us energy. If replacing this energy source hurts your portfolio, I'm sorry.

And I have explained how the coffee example or argument is a strawman. Would you like me to explain again?
58 posted on 06/05/2006 1:51:45 PM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: AaronInCarolina

true the government makes more on gas taxes than the oil companies make in profits....

http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/1139.html



Table 1. State and Federal Gasoline Taxes Compared to Major U.S. Oil Companies’ Domestic Profits, 1977-2004

(figures in billions of 2004 dollars)


Total
Oil Profits $643.0
Federal Taxes $533.0
State Taxes $810.1
Total Taxes $1,343.1


59 posted on 06/05/2006 1:52:11 PM PDT by edzo4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Cobra64
Is 1-800-KARLMARX on your speed dial?

Weak.
60 posted on 06/05/2006 1:53:00 PM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-171 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