# Gas Prices



## Bladestunner316

Im at $2.53 unleaded. And my state voted in a gas tax increased by nine and a half cents over four years.

How high is yours?

Blade

Title Edited by Mod

[Edited on 8-8-2005 by joshua]


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

$2.09 where I live.


----------



## Bladestunner316

nice


----------



## blhowes

> _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> $2.09 where I live.


----------



## Formerly At Enmity

2.16 in memphis, tn......


----------



## Philip A

$2.69 for the low grade.


----------



## fredtgreco

$2.09


----------



## RamistThomist

$2.14


----------



## Bladestunner316

yeah PhilipA us west coasties got stick together with our high prices!!!


----------



## Average Joey

> _Originally posted by Formerly At Enmity_
> 2.16 in memphis, tn......



Head to Horn Lake,MS.It is down to maybe 2.05 a gallon.

Here in Olive Branch it is around 2.12 a gallon.

[Edited on 4-24-2005 by Average Joey]


----------



## ReformedWretch

2.09


----------



## DocCas

> _Originally posted by Philip A_
> $2.69 for the low grade.


That is about what I pay in San Diego. I noticed you live in Ridgecrest. Do you work at China Lake?


----------



## Puddleglum

Here (just south of Blade), the cheapest is Safeway at $2.41, but you can get a 3-cent discount if you're a club card member. (Actually, I think Arco is cheaper than Safeway's regular price, but more than their member price). 

Blade,
Did they really vote in that increase? I'd heard a lot about it leading up to the vote, but nothing since. If we get a re-vote, and Dino wins, can he un-do Gregoire's budget? (Please . . . )


----------



## Scott Bushey

> _Originally posted by Bladestunner316_
> Im at $2.53 unleaded. And my state voted in a gas tax increased by nine and a half cents over four years.
> 
> How high is yours?
> 
> Blade



We're about the same here in south Florida......


----------



## matthew11v25

2.73 in santa rosa, California (low grade). Gas prices are from 2.60-2.75~


----------



## clevipearce

2.12 unleaded here in good ole' Mississippi.


----------



## jfschultz

Looking in terms of the benefit obtained - I am getting $0.047 per mile.


----------



## Bladestunner316

Actually I heard the bill stalled it passed in the senate but stalled in the house. I didnt vote for either gregrore or dino didnt care for either.

Blade


----------



## Philip A

> _Originally posted by DocCas_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by Philip A_
> $2.69 for the low grade.
> 
> 
> 
> That is about what I pay in San Diego. I noticed you live in Ridgecrest. Do you work at China Lake?
Click to expand...


Yes indeed, I am an engineer at the Lake. I guess it's not such a "secret city" anymore, is it? How do you know about us, do you have Navy ties as well?


----------



## twogunfighter

Diesel and low grade are $2.15.


----------



## LawrenceU

We are back down to 2.15 for low grade. 2.25 for what I have to run. 89 octane or better.

On the grammatic side. I didn't know Gas Price could own anything

Sorry, it's just the English major still rears its head.


----------



## matthew11v25

man...some of you guys got it cheap. I have to commute an hour to work...feel it after a while.


----------



## LawrenceU

We may have it less, but I work as a contractor and a pastor. Right now I'm spending around 45.00 per day on fuel, and that is just for my truck. That does not include other vehicles, implements, tools, generators, etc. If this holds up, fuel prices, just wait until it hits the shelves at stores. Most transportation companies are eating the price difference right now due to presigned contracts for delivery. (I'm already charged a 'fuel surcharge' on most lumber now. My crew rates are having to go up next week. BTW, my farming kin are really getting nailed. Right in the busiest part of the year diesel kabooms up the chart. )It will be like the truckers' strike of the past before this is over.


----------



## turmeric

Please, please remove the apostrophe from the title, I can't stand it!!
Okay, I have issues...

Thanks, I feel much better!

[Edited on 9-23-2005 by turmeric]


----------



## fredtgreco

Courtesy of Kevin Carroll:


----------



## Jonathan

That is great. 

In NH there are some gas stations (usually right off the highway) that are 2.23, but if you drive up the road for a minute there are many around 2.05.


----------



## Average Joey

> _Originally posted by matthew11v25_
> man...some of you guys got it cheap. I have to commute an hour to work...feel it after a while.



Yes,I pity you in California.You guys get nothing but high prices for everything.I was shocked when I bought a 2 cheeseburger meal at McDonalds in LA and had to pay almost 9 bucks!Well to be fair,I asked for supersized.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

What's everybody paying at the pump these days? It's $2.25 here.


----------



## RamistThomist

2.25 for the cheap stuff.


----------



## Joseph Ringling

$2.39 for the lowest grade gasoline.


----------



## Bladestunner316

2.49 cheap stuff


----------



## street preacher

In good ole St. Louis, MO it's $2.30 a gallon. Go Cards!


----------



## matt01

$2.29 - Northern Minnesota


----------



## Average Joey

Right now our cheapest is 2.19.I think that may be the cheapest anywhere right now.


----------



## Puddleglum

Joe, that's pretty good! Cheapest here is 2.339 (but it's Safeways, so if you're a member, you get a 3-cent discount, which is nice!).


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia

$2.39 - ish


----------



## Dan....

Last month the local Speedway had a sale on gift cards. You could buy a $25.00 gift card for $24.00. I took advantage of the deal (bought $200 worth).

Gas prices are now averaging around $2.40 at the Speedway. Less the gift card discount, the price is $2.304. I'm saving almost 10 cents per gallon and still frowning.



[Edited on 7-10-2005 by Dan....]


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

It was around $2.00 last week. Friday it went up to $2.39. It is robbery I tell you.


----------



## Average Joey

About a month ago it was as low as 1.89 in some places around here.


----------



## Bladestunner316

$2.59 cheap $2.82 expensive


----------



## toddpedlar

> _Originally posted by Average Joey_
> Right now our cheapest is 2.19.I think that may be the cheapest anywhere right now.



Ours just went up to 2.19 this past week (happily that was only a 4 cent increase, not one of these dime hops we've been having)

t


----------



## toddpedlar

> _Originally posted by Bladestunner316_
> $2.59 cheap $2.82 expensive



 

You mean 

$2.59 expensive $2.82 outrageous 

I've never understood gas prices in Washington state. I grew
up 15 minutes from one of the larger refineries on the west coast, 
and gas got much cheaper the farther from the refinery you got...

Todd

[Edited on 8-6-2005 by toddpedlar]


----------



## Bladestunner316

:bigsmile:


----------



## toddpedlar

> _Originally posted by turmeric_
> Please, please remove the apostrophe from the title, I can't stand it!!
> Okay, I have issues...



not issues, standards  I was trying to be gracious and let it go, though.

Todd


----------



## Richard King

In Texas we have a website that is constantly updated that will tell you who is selling gas the cheapest in whateve city you live in. Maybe you could google and see if your state has the same. Seems like Sam's Club and Rudy's BarBQue always have the lowest prices in my town. 
It is really pretty handy:

http://www.texasgasprices.com/


----------



## Richard King

In Texas we have a website that is constantly updated that will tell you who is selling gas the cheapest in whateve city you live in. Maybe you could google and see if your state has the same. Seems like Sam's Club and Rudy's BarBQue always have the lowest prices in my town. 
It is really pretty handy:

http://www.texasgasprices.com/


----------



## Bladestunner316

washington has one too.


----------



## Puritanhead

I think it's $2.19-$2.29 now in Virginia... 

The whole gas and oil industry industry is a crooked racket-- I hope clean energy alternatives and technology will break their backs one day... the incentives to stifle innovation are obvious for the old vanguard of big oil... It's the only industry that gets away with price-rigging in the United States, because of the OPEC cartel and political connections. It is essentially illegal for any other business enterprise to get away with what the oil industry does. They rig and limit production -- and stifle free competition. For any other industry that does what the oil industry does, it would be met with DoJ trust-busting, restraint of trade and price-fixing prosecutors. They're well-connected and have friends in high places. Also, the war gives them the creative pretext to keep prices high. Granted, forty to sixty cents on every gallon is usually federal and state taxes.


----------



## RamistThomist

I say we store up gas, wait for the market to crash, then take over.


----------



## Puritanhead

> _Originally posted by Draught Horse_
> I say we store up gas, wait for the market to crash, then take over.



I do remember a time in NC when gas was $0.85 cents... what was it -- mid-to-late 90s.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

> _Originally posted by Puritanhead_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by Draught Horse_
> I say we store up gas, wait for the market to crash, then take over.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do remember a time in NC when gas was $0.85 cents... what was it -- mid-to-late 90s.
Click to expand...


Yes, I remember paying 69 cents per gallon at a station in SC around 1997. <sigh>


----------



## LawrenceU

I remember when people went ballistic because it went over $0.459 . I can remember riding to the filling station down the road and filling the milk jug for the lawnmower's gas for less than half of the average price of a 12 oz. Coke these days.

Man, do I feel old . . . and broke.


----------



## Puritanhead

> _Originally posted by LawrenceU_
> I remember when people went ballistic because it went over $0.459 . I can remember riding to the filling station down the road and filling the milk jug for the lawnmower's gas for less than half of the average price of a 12 oz. Coke these days.
> 
> Man, do I feel old . . . and broke.



You lived in the Flinestones days Mr. Underwood.


----------



## RamistThomist

government conspiracy. they are trying to hurt the little man.


----------



## Bladestunner316

isnt that the whole point of big government keep the little man under their control.


----------



## Puritanhead

Gee us Americans grumble a lot ... but I remember how expensive gas was in 2002 when I got to Great Britain... It was like 6 or 7 pounds per liter-- mostly taxes. The exchange rate was about 1.60 dollars per 1.00 pound sterling. That's like $4.50 per liter. One gallon equals 3.79 liters.

Motor vehicles are expensive luxuries for Europeans... most teenagers or young adults do not drive over there, whereas teens take cars for granted over here...



[Edited on 8-8-2005 by Puritanhead]


----------



## Bladestunner316

$2.67


----------



## Anton Bruckner

> _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> 
> 
> Yes, I remember paying 69 cents per gallon at a station in SC around 1997. <sigh>


Unbelievable.


----------



## Bladestunner316




----------



## Average Joey

We are now averaging around 2.30 a gal here.The cheapest I have seen is 2.25.

This is so unbelieveable!We need to threaten to drill in Alaska!Just making that threat,the saudis would cut oil prices in half!

Stupid liberals and that weak hearted Bush and his "bi-partisan"Republicans.

[Edited on 8-12-2005 by Average Joey]

[Edited on 8-12-2005 by Average Joey]


----------



## govols

The problem is not so much with getting the oil over here, it is refining the oil to distribute. If the silly Californians would pick 1 - 5 brands of petrol and not 10 + then the refineries would be able to produce more.

I did like when the president said he wanted to make some of the old army / air force bases into refineries.

[Edited on 8-12-2005 by govols]


----------



## Bladestunner316

Alaska is not the answer. Neither is oil. But until then I would rather see one brand then 10.


----------



## LadyFlynt

$2.60 here in the midwest. Cost me $35.00 today...and that was only "almost" full.


----------



## Joseph Ringling

$2.54


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

$2.59


----------



## ChristianTrader

> _Originally posted by Bladestunner316_
> Alaska is not the answer. Neither is oil. But until then I would rather see one brand then 10.



What is the answer, then?


----------



## Average Joey

> _Originally posted by joshua_
> I think Alaska's the answer. Why not? You're talking a little over .1% (I think) of the land that we could drill on and be covered for a long, long time.



Exactly!My main point was just us threatening to drill in Alaska would cause the Saudis to cut prices in half at the least.They donnot want to lose our buiseness.


----------



## ChristianTrader

> _Originally posted by Average Joey_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by joshua_
> I think Alaska's the answer. Why not? You're talking a little over .1% (I think) of the land that we could drill on and be covered for a long, long time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly!My main point was just us threatening to drill in Alaska would cause the Saudis to cut prices in half at the least.They donnot want to lose our buiseness.
Click to expand...


Oil pricing is not that simple. It is basically a supply and demand issue. For your thesis to be coherent, you would have to believe that the Saudi's have some hidden oil that no on knows about that they will bring on the market if the US threatens to drill in Alaska.

There is also the issue over exactly how much oil is in Alaska. I am not sure if there is a great consensus on that point.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

At my gas station, the price has risen 22 cents in the last 36 hours.


----------



## Average Joey

> _Originally posted by ChristianTrader_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by Average Joey_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by joshua_
> I think Alaska's the answer. Why not? You're talking a little over .1% (I think) of the land that we could drill on and be covered for a long, long time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly!My main point was just us threatening to drill in Alaska would cause the Saudis to cut prices in half at the least.They donnot want to lose our buiseness.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oil pricing is not that simple. It is basically a supply and demand issue. For your thesis to be coherent, you would have to believe that the Saudi's have some hidden oil that no on knows about that they will bring on the market if the US threatens to drill in Alaska.
> 
> There is also the issue over exactly how much oil is in Alaska. I am not sure if there is a great consensus on that point.
Click to expand...


I did not mean for it to be simple.My belief is it all has to do with Greed.The Saudis are raising oil prices because they know we will pay it.The whole Alaskan deal would change everything.in my opinion.


----------



## Bladestunner316

Well first off were associating the rising costs as a loss of oil production. So that we need to go get more from another muslim nation as a solution.

OPEC controls the prices. The ME decides the price of oil. We have Iran which is not an ally at this point. We will go to war with them over rising oil costs. Just like when we overthrew them with a coup in 52'-53' because they wanted to use russian companies instead of British. 

In order to survive the world must develop better sources of fuel besides oil. Example - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_fuel . We could use Hydrogen extract it from water. It would be a better solution for car fuel. 

We become weak when we are so overly dependent upon oil or etc.. that we cant function without it. 

But the real problem is are government and others are run by men who have their hands on piles of money coming from Big Oil companies. They wont switch over until they can make profit. So the government is not a solution to the oil crisis. 

So while we pay the price with rising gas prices oil companies are reaping the benefits of a gulable nation. Ohh its IRan, Its hurricanes, its its...its......??? 

Your going to tell me that a HUGE oil companie thats billions upon billions in the go not prepared for hurricanes??? or armed conflict?? Armed conflict is what mercanaries are for there all over Iraq working for companies. Hired guns. Its also helps to have a business partner controlling a large military force. 

But if were fighting for oil then why are we paying so much? Well we are fighting and dieing for oil and the GOV is reaping the benefits none of which we will never see. We are used. Thats what big governments do. 

So the solution is stop drilling start investing in alternative sources. Dont let the government get so big that it monopolizes an industry to benefit the few and not the many. 

Blade


----------



## Bladestunner316

Also if oil is naturally supposed to lube the earth and we take that away and away so much it cant replenish itself then would there not be adverse affects geologically speaking? 

Like say oceanic warming off my coast of 2-5 degrees. Causing the salmon to die off, and birds to die off, and plankton to die off. Not to mention sealife dieing off of florida.

Just thinking outloud. 

Blade


----------



## Average Joey

> _Originally posted by Bladestunner316_
> Well first off were associating the rising costs as a loss of oil production. So that we need to go get more from another muslim nation as a solution.
> 
> OPEC controls the prices. The ME decides the price of oil. We have Iran which is not an ally at this point. We will go to war with them over rising oil costs. Just like when we overthrew them with a coup in 52'-53' because they wanted to use russian companies instead of British.
> 
> In order to survive the world must develop better sources of fuel besides oil. Example - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_fuel . We could use Hydrogen extract it from water. It would be a better solution for car fuel.
> 
> We become weak when we are so overly dependent upon oil or etc.. that we cant function without it.
> 
> But the real problem is are government and others are run by men who have their hands on piles of money coming from Big Oil companies. They wont switch over until they can make profit. So the government is not a solution to the oil crisis.
> 
> So while we pay the price with rising gas prices oil companies are reaping the benefits of a gulable nation. Ohh its IRan, Its hurricanes, its its...its......???
> 
> Your going to tell me that a HUGE oil companie thats billions upon billions in the go not prepared for hurricanes??? or armed conflict?? Armed conflict is what mercanaries are for there all over Iraq working for companies. Hired guns. Its also helps to have a business partner controlling a large military force.
> 
> But if were fighting for oil then why are we paying so much? Well we are fighting and dieing for oil and the GOV is reaping the benefits none of which we will never see. We are used. Thats what big governments do.
> 
> So the solution is stop drilling start investing in alternative sources. Dont let the government get so big that it monopolizes an industry to benefit the few and not the many.
> 
> Blade



They`ll just take advantage of the alternative too.


----------



## Bladestunner316

I would rather be using hydrogen from water than using oil. Its 2005 and were still using oil where are the flying vehicles???


----------



## Average Joey

> _Originally posted by Bladestunner316_
> I would rather be using hydrogen from water than using oil. Its 2005 and were still using oil where are the flying vehicles???



Yeah,according to Back to the Future part 2,we should be flying cars in 10 years.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

> _Originally posted by Average Joey_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by Bladestunner316_
> I would rather be using hydrogen from water than using oil. Its 2005 and were still using oil where are the flying vehicles???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah,according to Back to the Future part 2,we should be flying cars in 10 years.
Click to expand...


Mr. Fusion! :bigsmile:


----------



## toddpedlar

> _Originally posted by Bladestunner316_
> I would rather be using hydrogen from water than using oil.



Hydrogen's nice and all, but you still have to generate the power to split water. Eventually, we'll have to use hydrogen cells, indeed, particularly for cars/trains in the future - but right now it's exceedingly cost ineffective to produce hydrogen cells. Until other alternative are made less expensive (I'm a strong proponent of developing wind) in order to fuel hydrogen generation plants, it really can't fly. (unless you want to burn coal to produce hydrogen from water... now that makes sense.)

Anyway, the statement that some in government are making (that hydrogen is the answer) are simplistic, not taking into account the difficulties involved in ramping up to produce sufficient hydrogen for the usage envisioned.

Todd


----------



## Bladestunner316

wind sounds like a good proposal. What about solar energy? use it to charge cars?

blade


----------



## toddpedlar

> _Originally posted by Bladestunner316_
> wind sounds like a good proposal. What about solar energy? use it to charge cars?
> 
> blade



Wind, Solar or any power source, really, can be used to create hydrogen cells. Solar is pretty inefficient as a technology - wind is the best, but there are many who are quite anti-wind, although for the life of me I cannot understand their objections. The primary reason that people argue against wind turbines (at least those I've come into contact with, in person or in print) is aesthetics. They don't like the way wind turbines look. 

In SE Washington state, where my wife grew up, there is a large array of wind turbines (a couple hundred?) on some ridges along the Columbia river - and in my opinion, they're at least neutral, if not pleasing to the eye. One can argue about destroying natural beauty by putting up wind turbines... but i have to say it's better than the alternative.

Studies have shown that much of the US energy needs can be supplied by wind, if enough wind turbine installations are created - I think, if I'm not mistaken, that the dakotas + texas, if wind tech is really exploited, can almost do it themselves. 

As for charging cars - battery technology is pretty poor. If you're talking about 'charging hydrogen fuel cells' (which produce electrical current by recombination of hydrogen and oxygen into water' then yes, I'd say use solar / wind to produce the necessary hydrogen - that's the way to go.


----------



## toddpedlar

btw, since Wednesday, our gas rose from 2.15 to 2.35...


----------



## Bladestunner316

Hmm wind turbines or power stations and transformers??

Thats a tough choice

blade


----------



## Bladestunner316

I like your thinking about the wind. Plant a bunch on florida hurrican blows by have enough energy for a long time.

blade


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

250 MPG!


----------



## Bladestunner316




----------



## jfschultz

> _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> 250 MPG!



The potential problem is with the life of the battery. Toyota expects the battery to last the life of the car because the ECU is programmed to keep the battery within the middle 50% of its capacity. The plug-in hybrid will cycle the battery through most of its capacity, which will reduce the life of the battery. One company that is working on a third-party upgrade for the Prius expects it will cost $12,000 and that the battery will last 6-8 years. The Toyota warranty for the hybrid system, including the battery is 8 years. (How many of you expect to need to replace your engine when the typical 3 year warranty expires?)

Stewardship Gen 1:28 Not Plunder

[Edited on 8-16-2005 by jfschultz]


----------



## heartoflesh

*$2.69* in the Twin Cities.


----------



## Abd_Yesua_alMasih

Wind turbines? Wait till you have them near your house and it sounds like trains rumbling by 24 hours a day and seven days a week. We are trying it in New Zealand but there are so many complaints. Whole villages can get hit by the noise so it is not just people living within a stone-throw of them.

[Edited on 16-8-2005 by Abd_Yesua_alMasih]


----------



## BobVigneault

So for all the folks who believe we kicked Hussein out of Iraq so we could maintain the flow of cheap oil.... 2.69 here in WI/IL. Ugh!

My partner at work and I live 2 miles apart in Wisconsin. We each travel 45 miles to Rockford to work 20 feet from each other. Because my boss wants us covering from 6am to 4:30pm block we leave our homes 2 hours apart and can't carpool. That's insane. I asked my boss what the price of gas will need to get to before we can merge our trips. No answer so far.


----------



## toddpedlar

> _Originally posted by Rick Larson_
> *$2.69* in the Twin Cities.



I'll stop complaining, now. It's only $2.45 down here
in NE Iowa... (of course that's up $0.30 since a week ago)

Todd


----------



## Bladestunner316

We went to Iraq for the Oil but the only ones that see the benefit are the big oil companies that get breaks and bonuses from the government go figure.

blade


----------



## Dan....

Chicagoland:

I bought gas yesterday for 2.69, which was the cheapest one I could find on my drive home from work. Most stations were between 2.71 and 2.76. There was one station on the way that had it at 2.85 ....ouch!!!




[Edited on 8-16-2005 by Dan....]


----------



## toddpedlar

Well at this rate, I'm back on my bike for good. (okay, during a blizzard in January, I won't be biking to work) Lately I've been driving when I haven't the time to walk, or the inclination. Can't afford to do that too often any more - those in town miles suck the gas something awful. At any rate, I'm glad for the prod to be walking/riding more - I can finally succeed in retaining my convictions that I should be doing so anyway.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

It took me $33.00 to fill up today. I remember when I use to get gas at around $0.45 a gallon. Winter heating prices have gone up trememdously the last 5 or six years. Can spell inflation!


----------



## Augusta

> _Originally posted by toddpedlar_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by Bladestunner316_
> wind sounds like a good proposal. What about solar energy? use it to charge cars?
> 
> blade
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wind, Solar or any power source, really, can be used to create hydrogen cells. Solar is pretty inefficient as a technology - wind is the best, but there are many who are quite anti-wind, although for the life of me I cannot understand their objections. The primary reason that people argue against wind turbines (at least those I've come into contact with, in person or in print) is aesthetics. They don't like the way wind turbines look.
> 
> In SE Washington state, where my wife grew up, there is a large array of wind turbines (a couple hundred?) on some ridges along the Columbia river - and in my opinion, they're at least neutral, if not pleasing to the eye. One can argue about destroying natural beauty by putting up wind turbines... but i have to say it's better than the alternative.
> 
> Studies have shown that much of the US energy needs can be supplied by wind, if enough wind turbine installations are created - I think, if I'm not mistaken, that the dakotas + texas, if wind tech is really exploited, can almost do it themselves.
> 
> As for charging cars - battery technology is pretty poor. If you're talking about 'charging hydrogen fuel cells' (which produce electrical current by recombination of hydrogen and oxygen into water' then yes, I'd say use solar / wind to produce the necessary hydrogen - that's the way to go.
Click to expand...


The other reason wind turbines are falling out of favor with enviros is that birds were flying into them and getting killed.


----------



## Bladestunner316

well then we better develop beeter methods to prevent birds from flying into windmills.


----------



## Bladestunner316

$2.71


----------



## Bladestunner316

$2.75


----------



## Apologist4Him

> _Originally posted by Bladestunner316_
> Im at $2.53 unleaded. And my state voted in a gas tax increased by nine and a half cents over four years.
> 
> How high is yours?
> 
> Blade
> 
> Title Edited by Mod



$2.59 a gallon at the lowest octane level. I remember when gasoline was around .75 cents a gallon. Gasoline has tripled in price in the past 15 years. I think it's robbery. 

[Edited on 8-19-2005 by Apologist4Him]


----------



## toddpedlar

> _Originally posted by Apologist4Him_
> 
> 
> $2.59 a gallon at the lowest octane level. I remember when gasoline was around .75 cents a gallon. Gasoline has tripled in price in the past 15 years. I think it's robbery.
> 
> [Edited on 8-19-2005 by Apologist4Him]



It seems to me it's about doubled in the last TWO YEARS. ($1.30-ish in July of 2003 to $2.49 today here)


----------



## Bladestunner316




----------



## Apologist4Him

This calls for a group rant. 

 

*picture the horse as symbolic for gasoline prices*


----------



## heartoflesh

For we Americans on the board, I guess we should be glad we don't live in England where we would be paying upwards of $6.00 per gallon. Which begs the question, do we as Americans feel a certain entitlement to low gas prices?


----------



## toddpedlar

> _Originally posted by Rick Larson_
> For we Americans on the board, I guess we should be glad we don't live in England where we would be paying upwards of $6.00 per gallon. Which begs the question, do we as Americans feel a certain entitlement to low gas prices?



Well, in a sense, Rick, I think yes, we do have an entitlement to lower gas prices.

Why? Not because I think there is some inherent 'right to drive'. 

My statement (which is only *mostly* serious) has to do with the reason why European gas prices are so high. Perhaps you don't know this, but the only real reason that European gas prices are as high as they are is because of the socialistic nature of those governments. 

On average, the amount of tax paid on a gallon of gas in Europe is around 75%. Just like everything else, a large proportion of the price of anything in Europe is money used to fund the government entitlement programs. So, that $6.00 gallon of petrol in jolly old England is only costing about $1.50 for the fuel itself, and $4.50 goes to pay for extensive welfare, universal health care, public servants, etc. 

In the US, the average of state + local taxes is something like 40 or 50 cents per gallon... so our "fuel cost" is more like about $2.00. 

So the difference is essentially ALL in the amount of tax being paid to the state-messiah. 

I don't think, therefore, to say that we deserve lower gas prices is all that far off base. Socialist governments are inherently evil - and insofaras the cost difference between European and US gasoline price is driven by the tax burden placed on Europeans by the socialistic regimes they're under.... well, yes - they deserve better.

Todd


----------



## crhoades

Couple of relevant sites:

http://www.gasbuddy.com
This site allows you to compare gas prices and allows you to check where the lowest price is in your area. Pretty nifty.

Site to track raw materials - coal, petroleum etc.


----------



## Abd_Yesua_alMasih

I am having a nightmare trying to convert the NZ dollar to US dollars and litres to gallons. Once it is all worked out I am not sure how accurate it would be... I have lost the stats I need right now.

Needless to say we have to pay more per 'gallon' that you Americans have to.


----------



## heartoflesh

> _Originally posted by toddpedlar_
> 
> Well, in a sense, Rick, I think yes, we do have an entitlement to lower gas prices.
> 
> Why? Not because I think there is some inherent 'right to drive'.
> 
> My statement (which is only *mostly* serious) has to do with the reason why European gas prices are so high. Perhaps you don't know this, but the only real reason that European gas prices are as high as they are is because of the socialistic nature of those governments.
> 
> On average, the amount of tax paid on a gallon of gas in Europe is around 75%. Just like everything else, a large proportion of the price of anything in Europe is money used to fund the government entitlement programs. So, that $6.00 gallon of petrol in jolly old England is only costing about $1.50 for the fuel itself, and $4.50 goes to pay for extensive welfare, universal health care, public servants, etc.
> 
> In the US, the average of state + local taxes is something like 40 or 50 cents per gallon... so our "fuel cost" is more like about $2.00.
> 
> So the difference is essentially ALL in the amount of tax being paid to the state-messiah.
> 
> I don't think, therefore, to say that we deserve lower gas prices is all that far off base. Socialist governments are inherently evil - and insofaras the cost difference between European and US gasoline price is driven by the tax burden placed on Europeans by the socialistic regimes they're under.... well, yes - they deserve better.
> 
> Todd




I think you're right there, Todd.


----------



## Apologist4Him

> _Originally posted by Rick Larson_
> For we Americans on the board, I guess we should be glad we don't live in England where we would be paying upwards of $6.00 per gallon. Which begs the question, do we as Americans feel a certain entitlement to low gas prices?



The point is, do we have a choice? It's not like the U.S. gas "market" is free. People have to put gasonline in their automobiles to get to work, like water and food, it's not an option. Can somebody please explain how a capitalist free market economic system operates?

Aside from that, the ethic of the logic of what you're suggesting is, if people are tortured by their government for entertainment purposes 5 times a week in England, what right do we have to complain for being tortured by the government for science experimentation 2 times a week? Because people in Europe are being raped on gasoline prices, it's ok if we're raped on gasoline prices too? 

Yes, I'm glad we're not being for to pay $6 per gallon, but such is that would be a perfect way to ruin a good and thriving economy. Do gasoline companies owe anything to the American public? No, of course not. But using the same logic, if you bring a puppy home, and do not give him food or water because he's not entitled to it, don't expect him to live either. 


[Edited on 8-20-2005 by Apologist4Him]


----------



## blhowes

Funny video


----------



## Anton Bruckner

Very funny, but it would have been more credulous if Pamela Anderson was the distraction instead of Jay.

[Edited on 8-22-2005 by Slippery]

[Edited on 8-22-2005 by Slippery]


----------



## blhowes

> _Originally posted by Slippery_
> Very funny, but it would have been more credulous if Pamela Anderson was the distraction instead of Jay.
> 
> [Edited on 8-22-2005 by Slippery]
> 
> [Edited on 8-22-2005 by Slippery]


Perhaps when the sequel comes out...


----------



## Anton Bruckner

xperts Say Rising Gas Prices Spur Thefts

By SAMIRA JAFARI, Associated Press Writer Tue Aug 23, 5:22 AM ET

MONTGOMERY, Ala. - The case of an Alabama gas station owner run down and killed by a driver who police believe was escaping with $52 worth of fuel comes as no shock to industry experts.
ADVERTISEMENT

"As the price of gas climbs, people's values decline," said Jeff Lenard, spokesman for the National Association of Convenience Stores.

Lenard said the death of Husain "Tony" Caddi, 54, has captured national media attention for two reasons: It shows that soaring gas prices make people angry enough to steal, and gas retailers are tired of putting up with it.

Caddi, owner of the Fort Payne Texaco, died Friday after he grabbed onto the vehicle and the driver dragged him across the parking lot and onto a highway, police said. Caddi fell from the vehicle and was run over by the vehicle's rear wheel. A search for the driver and a gold or tan Jeep-style SUV continued Monday.

The Petroleum & Convenience Marketers of Alabama tells gas retailers to "never try to take action themselves" during robberies and drive-offs, said Arleen Alexander, the group's executive director.

"But I can understand why someone would want to fight for their property," Alexander said. "Fifty-two dollars doesn't sound like that much, but with the little they're making these days that's a lot."

Gasoline theft cost retailers nationwide $237 million in 2004 "” more than twice the $112 million loss in 2003, according to NACS.

On average, one in every 1,100 fill-ups was a gas theft last year, the group said. With about a penny per gallon as profit, a retailer would have to sell an extra 3,000 gallons to offset each $30 stolen, Lenard said.

Theft combined with gas prices that have jumped this summer by as much as 18 cents to an average of $2.55 a gallon nationally, and both retailers and consumers are beginning to lash out, experts warned.

"It's a very difficult situation and you're never sure how people are going to react," said Sam Turner, president of Calfee Co. of Dalton, Ga., which operates 114 Favorite Markets convenience stores in the South.

"It's something on everybody's mind right now because it's a commodity that virtually everybody uses. You're talking about a heck of an impact to their billfold," he said.

Lenard and Turner said safety and theft concerns have pushed most gas stations in the region to shift to a prepay policy, but even that is not a perfect solution. A prepay policy cuts down on browsing and buying in gas station stores "” a big chunk of owners' profits.

"We're in uncharted territory. We're seeing more people going to prepay than ever before," Lenard said. "I think we'll look back on 2005 and say 'Remember when we used to be trusted to pay for our gas?'"


----------



## love2read

I'm at 1.36 ..... that is euro, and not per gallon but per liter. So that will be........

about $6.50 per gallon

Welcome to the Netherlands


----------



## Poimen

> _Originally posted by love2read_
> I'm at 1.36 ..... that is euro, and not per gallon but per liter. So that will be........
> 
> about $6.50 per gallon
> 
> Welcome to the Netherlands



Every time I think the price is outrageous in the US I remember Canada. Every time I think the price is outrageous in Canada I remember Europe.



[Edited on 8-27-2005 by poimen]


----------



## Bladestunner316

It looks like because of the storm hitting an oil port crude went up by about 5 dollars a barrel from 66 to 70 dollars a barrel. Prompting fears gas may hike up to at least 13 to 20 cents a gallon come labour day. 

Gas up now while its cheap. 

Blade


----------



## rgrove

I've found it very interesting to hear many liberals complaining about the cost of gas and condemning Bush for it when only a few years ago they wanted it deliberately taxed higher and higher to keep people off the roads. When I was in the Army stationed in Eurpope I ran into that attitude on the BBC for the first time. Some English guy wanted taxes so high even the BBC news fellow seemed a little set back. Shouldn't they be applauding this situation? We paid $2.49 on our last fill here in Beaverton, Oregon. I'm filling up first thing tomorrow with the problems in New Orleans...


----------



## Anton Bruckner

we need to invest in alternative sources of energy. I'm sure with the right incentives, companies can turn alcohol into gas, as well as efficiently use solar energy.


----------



## Texas Aggie

Gas in the United States is relatively cheap these days in comparison to everything else we relish (remember we have inflation).

Alternative measures would be nice. Remember when Clinton axed the supercolider in Texas? The dems have no ambition for alternative measures either. Otherwise we would be knee-deep in fusion research and technology.

Right now, oil works for everyone and there is plenty of it in the United States. Get out there and drive your Lincoln Navigators, have fun and enjoy our wonderful exploitation policies. Like the idea of having reserves for war-time need. Better to buy off other nations' oil and hog our own.

Oil for blood is appropriate (providing you like to use this argument). Oil is in fact a national security issue of the highest degree. Free flow of foreign oil is the idea for multiple reasons. It keeps our reserves full (stored for those special times). It promotes U.S. corporations overseas and provides a means to conduct gov surveilence in a variety of lovely countries. It places U.S. interests in parts of the world where China, Russia and North Korea have the same vested ambitions. It places a check & balances system amongst the "haves" and the "have nots," who would like very much to control the bulk of foreign oil.

Oil is the blood of this wonderful, capitalist, industrial nation. Without it, we could be crippled. We need to continue to buy out the world's oil, keep other countries at bay and store up all our national oil as much as possible.

Take your family on a trip, fly the friendly skies and help burn 30,000 pounds of jet fuel per flight. Go out and buy that urban assault vehicle you always wanted for your family... after all, they are safe for the kids and it's most patriotic.


----------



## Anton Bruckner

> _Originally posted by Texas Aggie_
> 
> 
> Oil for blood is appropriate (providing you like to use this argument). Oil is in fact a national security issue of the highest degree. Free flow of foreign oil is the idea for multiple reasons.


Fully agree, that Oil is a National security issue. But the fact is that moral conditioning is not conducive to such an argument, hence the administration had to lie albeit tell the untruth that Saddam Hussein had WMDS, as a means for justification for invasion.

If Bush had come out plainly and say, we need the oil, he would have justly been rebuffed and spurned as a greedy meglomaniac, since it is understood, that you don't steal or covet what belongs to others.

But interestingly enough when one compiles the statistics of China's economic growth, booming middle class, coupled with India, it does make sense for the U.S to secure some oil reserves of her own, but to invade another country that has the Oil reserves under a lying justification is just plain old wrong.

I heard that the newly constructed Iraqi constitution virtually guaranteed oil drilling to the U.S. Life is a farce. And Russia and France are looking on the outside and can't speak, because they were getting the oil goodies before the US invasion. Wickedness in high places.

But the politics of this world is not the politics of the spiritual realm.

Foreign Policy is Amoral.

[Edited on 8-29-2005 by Slippery]


----------



## Average Joey

> _Originally posted by Slippery_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by Texas Aggie_
> 
> 
> Oil for blood is appropriate (providing you like to use this argument). Oil is in fact a national security issue of the highest degree. Free flow of foreign oil is the idea for multiple reasons.
> 
> 
> 
> Fully agree, that Oil is a National security issue. But the fact is that moral conditioning is not conducive to such an argument, hence the administration had to lie albeit tell the untruth that Saddam Hussein had WMDS, as a means for justification for invasion.
> 
> If Bush had come out plainly and say, we need the oil, he would have justly been rebuffed and spurned as a greedy meglomaniac, since it is understood, that you don't steal or covet what belongs to others.
> 
> But interestingly enough when one compiles the statistics of China's economic growth, booming middle class, coupled with India, it does make sense for the U.S to secure some oil reserves of her own, but to invade another country that has the Oil reserves under a lying justification is just plain old wrong.
> 
> I heard that the newly constructed Iraqi constitution virtually guaranteed oil drilling to the U.S. Life is a farce. And Russia and France are looking on the outside and can't speak, because they were getting the oil goodies before the US invasion. Wickedness in high places.
> 
> But the politics of this world is not the politics of the spiritual realm.
> 
> Foreign Policy is Amoral.
> 
> [Edited on 8-29-2005 by Slippery]
Click to expand...


While this could be true,I don`t buy it.I still stick to my theory of the USA (Bush Administration) going for the weak target,most hated(Saddam was hated by surrounding countries),and a country right in the middle of the middle east,Iraq to be the building of an ally to the United States from the ground up.A perfect place to wage war to the surrounding countries.Much like we have USA bases in Japan and South Korea.We would have them in Iraq.Of course the oil would be a benefit also.


----------



## Texas Aggie

Personally I do not believe the White House had any clue as to whether or not Iraq had WMDs (Saddam played a pretty good tale and led U.S. intelligence down a nice tactical path. Kudos to Saddam). I would have taken the more conservative approach anyway in a post 9/11 world and proceed with the invasion.

I was happy to see some movement on our policy in Iraq. During the last administration, Clinton had to flex his muscle several times by sending B-52s to Diego Garcia to threaten Saddam (and get the inspectors back into Iraq).

In addition, I was getting sick and tired of Saddam shooting at our pilots (who were enforcing the no-fly zones) with no repercussion. We also now know that his nuclear research teams who were working in Libya were given over by Kadaffi himself (as well as shut down his own program and send his son on a massive U.S. PR tour). I think there were widespread benefits of having a right-wing nut job in office who was tired of "swatting flies."

To me, the security of my family, my state and my country is the highest priority in this day and age. Saddam needed to be taken out (he was a known product with an unknown agenda). I only wish Iraq would have been completely dissolved as a country. It should have been broken up and given to their respective neighbors (Kuwait, Iran & Turkey). 


[Edited on 8-29-2005 by Texas Aggie]


----------



## Anton Bruckner

Saddam didn't need to be taken out. 1800 American soldiers have died, and hundreds if not 1000's of Iraqi citizens. If America didn't invade, and Saddam was still in power those people would not have died. And in actuality, if we consider those road side car bombings in Iraq as terrorism, we can justly say we have suffered more terrorism as a result of this, in addition, since it is our soldiers who are constantly dying, we can justly say also that we are not safe,since they are dying.

A Preemptive defensive war is ridiculous and if there ever was a good one, the Iraq invasion is a pitiful example. Saddam was doing illegal billion dollar business with Russia and France, and could have cared less about invading America. And it isn't by chance that Iraq has the second largest oil reserves either.

The WMD report actually shows it was Saddam who was telling the truth and not G.W Bush.

Oil as an National Security Issue is quite cogent at this point in history, especially when alternative forms of energy aren't being massive exploited. This makes the old adage true, that necessity is the mother of invention. Only when the oil drips its last, then alternative forms will come to the fore. But on a purely ethical philosophical basis, Oil as an NSI is bankrupt, because a monopoly in its truest form cannot exist. A person willingly chooses to purchase the product of a monopoly, not because he cannot do without it, but because he has conditioned himself and his lifestyle around it. This is quite true, since we have history to show that there was a time without cancer medications, pennicilin, oil, cars and internet.

hehehe can you imagine going to God, and saying, "I had to steal the pennicilin" 

Now I think the most pertinent thing to consider from a Christian perspective, is whether Government is held to the same standard as an Individual.
I know the government is exempt for using the sword to bring justice, to taxation etc. But none of those exemptions include covetousness, which is basically what attacking another nation for its resources is.


----------



## Bladestunner316

We gave sadam chemical weapons we are no better than anyone else who supported him. 

Who is making the record profits from Oil? It definetelly aint us but the big oil compainies.

blade


----------



## Texas Aggie

The mere fact that the invasion of Iraq occurred is a decree of God. There is a divine reason for such an action which will eventually lead to His desired will. We can argue all day concerning politics and history but the fact remains that God is on the throne.

Either this nation engages this war as parents do with children (unified front) or the division will further increase the propaganda and death toll for U.S. troops. Right or wrong, this is still your country and your tax dollars are funding the troops overseas who engage in such death and destruction.

Either you are on board or you are not. The troops are doing what the people of this country have asked them to do. Political correctness is binding their hands and far more carnage would be accomplished via air power (the Iraqi people are aware of this and are subsequently thankful). The 1800 sacrificed for oil sounds pretty good.... but there is much more to the story.

Don't think for a second that U.S. war planners were not aware of the jihadist infiltration into Iraq. The more the better in that environment (they are being killed by the hundreds, some barely get into action). Better Iraq as a major battlefield than the U.S. or worse, Afghanistan. Unfortunately the jihadist and mercenaries from North Africa are heading out of Iraq and into Afghanistan (take a look at the incidents). The tactical advantage may shift to their side because of the environment. Iraq was a blessing.

Saddam needed to be taken out. His open defiance against the U.S. emboldened the Arab world and more and more incidents were sure to follow. It was a guessing game on the WMD´s.... at least now we know plus get their oil (what a great deal). Our support for Iraq during the Iran/Iraq war has no relevance (you are comparing apples and oranges). Sounds to me like the both of you are drinking the magic Kool-Aid college girls get from their professors.

[Edited on 8-29-2005 by Texas Aggie]


----------



## Anton Bruckner

> _Originally posted by Texas Aggie_
> The mere fact that the invasion of Iraq occurred is a decree of God. There is a divine reason for such an action which will eventually lead to His desired will. We can argue all day concerning politics and history but the fact remains that God is on the throne.


I'm not doubting that the invasion was decreed by God. Everything that comes to pass is decreed by God. But the fact is that even after Babylon was decreed to obliterate Israel, Babylon was likewised judged because she sinned when she obliterated Israel. The decree of God had nothing to do with justifying the actions of a sinner, eventhough the sin was decreed as a means of judgment upon the wicked.

Here is how the Pslamists phrased it in response to Babylon, Psalms 137:9, " Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones."

Even the Pharisees did what was ordained by God in eternity in the killing of Jesus, but yet they suffered a just reward in damnation for what they did with their wicked hands.

I have no doubt that God used America to bring justice to Saddam and his two sons. Uday raped teenage girls with impunity in Bagdad, murdered with impunity, Qusay tortured as if it was eating fast food; dipping in hot oil etc, and Saddam did not curb the behaviors of his sons a la Eli in relation to Hophni and Phineas. I am quite sure, that the imprecatory prayers of the victims, and victims relatives were answered when Saddam's two boys met their grissly, and gory end, and when Saddam was lifted out from that pit, signifying totally degradation and humiliation.

But that being said, America invaded Iraq under false pretense for oil. It Thus keeping in tune with God's unremitting arm of Justice, God will judge the unrepentent for their acts. Because just as how imprecatory prayers went up for the wickedness of Saddam, so too are imprecatory prayers going up for America based on those who were wronged without cause.

And the above in no way should diminish one's love for country. One should always love and honor their country, but keep in mind a Biblical perspective, that only the children of the heavenly Jerusalem have their sins purged away by the blood of the Lamb. No one else.

[Edited on 8-29-2005 by Slippery]


----------



## Texas Aggie

Keon,

What inside information do you have concerning America invaded Iraq under false pretense for oil?


----------



## Bladestunner316

texis,
Lets see apples and oranges. So supporting bin laden and sadaam and Iran has no bearing on the conflict we are in now. Wrong. It has all the bearing. 

The reason we invaded Iraq was so that he would not be able to sell Iraq's oil in Euros instead of dollars. 

To think that were there because we want to spread freedom and stop terorrism is benign. 

Let me ask you this if you think that this war is a God given right. 

How does killing innocent people for oil and money advancing the kingdom?

How is having a long history of inhmane intervention advancing the kingdom? 

How is having a Islamic run Iraq advancing the kingdom? 

How is having a christian president(s) alliancing themselves with islamic leaders advancing the kingdom?

how is wasting time,money, lives, over killing for a natural resource advanicng the kingdom? Especially in light of having alternative methods in our grasp but not doing anything about it because the current administration and previous have their hands so deep in big oil they only see what benefits them.

Blade


----------



## Bladestunner316

Ok Im going to end this right here we can argue elsewhere the finer points of foreign policy. This should just be about 'your' gas prices. So without furthur adu. 

Has anyone noticed a dramatic increase in their local gas stations?

I noticed some on the way back home from a friends who went up 20 cents. From 271-273ish to 281.

Blade


----------



## Texas Aggie

Blade,

Ok I will also end this right here and we can argue elswhere on the finer points of foreign policy. This is all about gas prices.

The national average price of gasoline (per gallon) in 1985 was $1.30. From 1985 to 2005 we have had a national inflation rate of 80.75%. If you have not budgeted for gas in this day and age then go buy a bicycle. Funny how it is OK for everything else to inflate, but placing the blame on Bush for high gas prices is typical alligator talk.

The support for the Mujahideen in Afghanistan was essential to "œcontainment." As opposed to sending U.S. forces into Afghanistan in the 1980´s, the administration supplied the Mujahideen with advisors, weapons and financing to expel the Soviets. This is an example of the Truman Doctrine at use (political response to communist aggression). The direct application of the Truman Doctrine in Afghanistan contributed to the bankruptcy of the Soviet Union and the demise of the Cold War. The Truman Doctrine allowed U.S. intervention (covert or overt operations) to enforce a containment policy via CIA, financing, military and special operations abroad. Support for Bid Laden in the 1980s has no relevance to the case. Hence "œapples & oranges." Two different times, two different scenarios, two distinctly different combatants.

The U.S. became more involved in the Iran/Iraq war (1980-1988) after the Iranian revolution. Both Iran and Iraq began to attack neutral tankers in the gulf and we started protecting our own flag carriers. The Iranians continued to mine the gulf and one of our frigates was damaged by a mine. In response we bombed multiple Iranian oil platforms as well as destroyed two Iranian warships.

At the time, Saddam was the "œlesser of two evils" and we provided Iraq with both biological and chemical technology (as well as precursors to nuke technology). U.S. and western support for Iraq continued all the way until Saddam invaded Kuwait. Now we had to deal with a separate issue (hence "œapples and oranges).

The U.S. was well aware of what Saddam had been supplied with by western nations. We knew his capabilities as well as his duel-use technology (civil and military use). The Ba´ath party and Saddam wanted much more. They couldn´t have what they wanted from Iran, so they invaded Kuwait.

U.S. and western interests were now affected and Saddam turned on his original helpers. New animal, new time, new combatant (hence apples and oranges). The only bearing this has on the Iraq war is our knowledge of his capabilities and technology. We are fighting against some of our own outdated manufactured weaponry and we know what WMD technology he had. Believe it or not, not all of his manufactured chemical weapons were used against Iran, nor disposed of, after kicked out of Kuwait).

Your assertion that we invaded Iraq was so that Saddam could not sell his resource in Euros as opposed to the U.S. is a great point and I believe is in fact very true. Two of the many credible reasons for invading Iraq involved oil. These are:

1. Control over the resource itself
2. Preservation of the U.S. dollar as the world's reserve currency.

Lets just focus on oil for the moment (since this is the sticky point of this whole Iraq thing). 

Our buddy Saddam controlled a country with an estimated 1/4th of the world´s oil production. Iraq alone is estimated to contain at least 60% of the world´s reserves (upon continued exploration). Iraq is #2 in capacity to Saudi. We are the largest net importer of the resource (imports of oil were projected to be 70% of the domestic demand by 2025).

Our invasion of Iraq gives us direct control over their oil fields. The idea now is to pump out their oil as much as possible in order to compete with the OPEC oil-pricing gougers. Direct control over Iraq´s oil fields will improve/guarantee future supplies to the U.S. and U.K. All the previous exploration contracts with China, France, Russia, Indonesia and India are voided. What a fantastic strategic benefit from the invasion (a reward to the U.S. & U.K., so to speak for our valiant bloodshed). Control over the oil is a form of international power projection (another great benefit of invading Iraq).

The U.S. and U.K. military presence in Iraq has many, many roles. Just one of these roles is to provide oil field, drilling & piping protection from the foreign insurgency (mainly mercenaries and jihadist from North Africa, Iran, Syria and Saudi).

The euro thing is an excellent point as well. In the late 1990´s Iran made the change. Subsequently in early 2000 Saddam followed the idea. Naturally Bush was going to categorize this as bad (and it is bad... bad for us). This was just one (not the only reason) why the Bush administration developed the Axis of Evil. Notice how the rest of all the OPEC countries did not make the change.

Without a doubt, the oil and the U.S. dollar were two of the many reasons to invade Iraq (we reap tremendous benefits from the spilt blood). With that said, they are not the only two reasons, there are many more in this justified war. The oil and dollar preservation are really just added benefits (or entitlements of the cost for the regime change).

The fact that Saddam needed to be taken out is without question. Containment of Saddam was attempted (but he was openly defiant). The mere fact that Saddam, and Saddam alone, initiated two wars in the region during the past twenty years as evidence that he is "œnot aggressive" is like saying Germany was not aggressive prior to 1945. Look at how many lampshades and soap bars the Nazis were able to make out of those they hated. Bill Clinton, on three separate occasions came very close to taking out Saddam. Instead he attempted to please the Islamic world via U.S. military intervention in the former Yugoslavia.

Clinton´s administration did absolutely nothing to combat the ever growing Anti-Americanism fervor in the middle-east region. The boldness escalated and attacks from Iraq on U.S. pilots continued daily. Islamic extremist were building a rapidly growing army of unlawful-combatants in Sudan and Afghanistan to commit the murder of U.S. citizens. The Bush Whitehouse was tired of "œswatting flies." A major overhaul was needed post 9/11, hence the doctrine of preemptive strike. You are either for us or against us. If you are against us, then it sucks to be you. Don´t even let us think you are up to no good.... because you might be wiped out of existence. Talk about advancing the Kingdom. Protection of this nation is a major advancement of the Kingdom. Who else is going to do it?.... Europe? Asia?

Your right Blade, the spread of democracy is in fact benign (but it will be a great benefit if it holds). Who really cares anyway? I don´t. Initially the regime change will be a democracy because that is our will and that is our mode of government. Would you like for us to set them up as little socialists or communists?... I know, let´s make them Nazis since most of them are all Jew haters anyway.

With a democracy, the people may very well choose to be reigned over by an Islamic republic... that´s not our problem as long as the established republic behaves. This is not really what the people over there want anyway. Even the young people in Iran are sick of the Mullahs (we may see internal change from Tehran within the next twenty years). Go read up on it and stop listening to your professors.

For the short term, we are not necessarily there to stop terrorists but to kill as many as possible. Iraq as a strategic battlefield was ideal for encouraging young like-minded jihadist and mercenaries to come to the killing fields. Killing the jihadist is the idea, not stopping them (the more that come over to Iraq, the better.). It´s like a spider waiting for its prey to come to the web. It´s a strategic plan thought out brilliantly by our war-planers. Bring the young jihadist to Iraq with hopes they wont logistically and operationally mobilize in the rugged battlefield of Afghanistan. You can even see how hard it is to get Bin laden and some of his lieutenants out of Afghanistan (although they are all probably in Iran).

As far as "œGod given right...." The Iraqi people are very happy air power has not decimated all their towns and villages while destroying insurgents. Like I said before, this is a war being fought under the rules of political correctness. We unfortunately sacrifice our troops in order to protect (and limit) the number of civilian casualties. It could be much, much worse. If you look at the numbers Blade, you will see that the insurgency is killing far more civilians than UK & US forces. At any rate, civilian casualties are a repercussion of proximity to the battle. Feel fortunate this is not occurring in Kirkland, Washington. Since when is the life of an Iraqi civilian or combatant worth equal to or more than a U.S. soldier? Although our western philosophy towards the sanctity of life is valued, a U.S. combatant´s life is a higher priority than those scurrying about the battlefield.

God will advance His Kingdom as fit. I´m sorry you view our actions as inhumane. I didn´t know we had the "œhate America crowd" on this forum. Western values are generally regulated by a code. Inhumane is getting your head sawed off with a large bread knife and having the video sent to your spouse. Give me a break about being inhumane.

Alternative fuel methods.... ha! Who´s going to fund that now Blade?... you? Texas (the big oil state) tried with the super-conducting super-collider south of Dallas Fort Worth. This was a huge facility promoting the research of atomic dissection as well as nuclear fusion as an alternative source. Government funding got axed with the Clinton White House. The fact of the matter is oil is relatively inexpensive and there is plenty of it for now as well as projected into the future. Alternative fuel research is not a demand of the American taxpayer (research and development is not what the majority are willing to pay for).

If you are going to blame anybody, blame the far left-wing nut-jobs for the gas prices. After all, they are the ones who forced the mandatory environmental controls on the energy corporations. All their wacko, environmental disaster scares and save the whale campaigns have made a fantastic influence. Their actions are now coming to fruition via government regulation. I don´t think California has had a new refinery since 1977. Who wants such an abomination in their backyard?.... nobody (but they want all the benefits).

You also have 4.5 billion Chinese coming a little out from under the clutches of poverty-stricken communism. You think oil and gas prices are high now? Just wait until the Chinese markets make more of a demand for the resource. Look at their massive industrialization over the past ten years alone. They are actually building cars now. Look out.

The Iraq war is completely justified. Oil is just a benefit and entitlement for the sacrifice made. Bush and Blair will go down in history for their brilliant forethought.

Gas prices are just fine. If you can't budget for it, scale back on your standard of living with everything else.

[Edited on 9-5-2005 by Texas Aggie]


----------



## Bladestunner316

My gas just went up to 2.79 this morning.


----------



## Bladestunner316

I cant stress enough if you can stock up on gas do so now before it gets higher especially if you need it for generators.

blade


----------



## toddpedlar

> _Originally posted by Bladestunner316_
> My gas just went up to 2.79 this morning.



Yeah, ours bounced up 15 cents today to $2.64. 
Call it the Hurricane Hop I guess. I have always found 
it "interesting" that gas prices go bounding upward 
at the slightest change in the oil supply (of course 
they never go down very quickly after such changes
are rectified)

Todd


----------



## Bladestunner316

I have a feeling that this bump was going to happen anyway but did so sooner than thought because of the storm I would expect a more dramtic increase within the week. The only way prices will go down is if the oil flow recovers or Bush lets into the reserves which I highly doubt. 

Blade


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

News updates fron CNN (8/31/05):



> Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said the White House will tap the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve to help ease concerns about the disaster's effect on the nation's fuel supplies. Katrina on U.S. oil production and refinery capabilities may be worse than initial reports estimated and could lead to a national gas crisis in the short-term, analysts warned Tuesday.



and



> Consumers can expect retail gas prices to rise to $4 a gallon in the near future, Ben Brockwell, director of pricing at the Oil Price Information Service, said Wednesday. "There's no question gas will hit $4 a gallon," he said. "The question is how high will it go and how long will it last?"


----------



## Bladestunner316




----------



## LarryCook

2 Kings 6:24-29


> 24Afterward Ben-hadad king of Syria mustered his entire army and went up and besieged Samaria. 25And there was a great famine in Samaria, as they besieged it, until a donkey's head was sold for eighty shekels of silver, and the fourth part of a kab[a] of dove's dung for five shekels of silver. 26Now as the king of Israel was passing by on the wall, a woman cried out to him, saying, "Help, my lord, O king!" 27And he said, "If the LORD will not help you, how shall I help you? From the threshing floor, or from the winepress?" 28And the king asked her, "What is your trouble?" She answered, "This woman said to me, 'Give your son, that we may eat him today, and we will eat my son tomorrow.' 29So we boiled my son and ate him.


Let's pray that we trust in the Lord to provide in the forthcoming days of scarcity. Rember, there is a chapter 7.

Larry


----------



## Bladestunner316

2.82


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

$3.09 this morning and we are usually lower than the national average.


----------



## Bladestunner316




----------



## ChristianTrader

> _Originally posted by Texas Aggie_
> Blade,
> 
> Ok I will also end this right here and we can argue elswhere on the finer points of foreign policy. This is all about gas prices.
> 
> The national average price of gasoline (per gallon) in 1985 was $1.30. From 1985 to 2005 we have had a national inflation rate of 80.75%. If you have not budgeted for gas in this day and age then go buy a bicycle. Funny how it is OK for everything else to inflate, but placing the blame on Bush for high gas prices is typical alligator talk.
> 
> The support for the Mujahideen in Afghanistan was essential to "œcontainment." As opposed to sending U.S. forces into Afghanistan in the 1980´s, the administration supplied the Mujahideen with advisors, weapons and financing to expel the Soviets. This is an example of the Truman Doctrine at use (political response to communist aggression). The direct application of the Truman Doctrine in Afghanistan contributed to the bankruptcy of the Soviet Union and the demise of the Cold War. The Truman Doctrine allowed U.S. intervention (covert or overt operations) to enforce a containment policy via CIA, financing, military and special operations abroad. Support for Bid Laden in the 1980s has no relevance to the case. Hence "œapples & oranges." Two different times, two different scenarios, two distinctly different combatants.
> 
> The U.S. became more involved in the Iran/Iraq war (1980-1988) after the Iranian revolution. Both Iran and Iraq began to attack neutral tankers in the gulf and we started protecting our own flag carriers. The Iranians continued to mine the gulf and one of our frigates was damaged by a mine. In response we bombed multiple Iranian oil platforms as well as destroyed two Iranian warships.
> 
> At the time, Saddam was the "œlesser of two evils" and we provided Iraq with both biological and chemical technology (as well as precursors to nuke technology). U.S. and western support for Iraq continued all the way until Saddam invaded Kuwait. Now we had to deal with a separate issue (hence "œapples and oranges).
> 
> The U.S. was well aware of what Saddam had been supplied with by western nations. We knew his capabilities as well as his duel-use technology (civil and military use). The Ba´ath party and Saddam wanted much more. They couldn´t have what they wanted from Iran, so they invaded Kuwait.
> 
> U.S. and western interests were now affected and Saddam turned on his original helpers. New animal, new time, new combatant (hence apples and oranges). The only bearing this has on the Iraq war is our knowledge of his capabilities and technology. We are fighting against some of our own outdated manufactured weaponry and we know what WMD technology he had. Believe it or not, not all of his manufactured chemical weapons were used against Iran, nor disposed of, after kicked out of Kuwait).
> 
> Your assertion that we invaded Iraq was so that Saddam could not sell his resource in Euros as opposed to the U.S. is a great point and I believe is in fact very true. Two of the many credible reasons for invading Iraq involved oil. These are:
> 
> 1. Control over the resource itself
> 2. Preservation of the U.S. dollar as the world's reserve currency.
> 
> Lets just focus on oil for the moment (since this is the sticky point of this whole Iraq thing).
> 
> Our buddy Saddam controlled a country with an estimated 1/4th of the world´s oil production. Iraq alone is estimated to contain at least 60% of the world´s reserves (upon continued exploration). Iraq is #2 in capacity to Saudi. We are the largest net importer of the resource (imports of oil were projected to be 70% of the domestic demand by 2025).
> 
> Our invasion of Iraq gives us direct control over their oil fields. The idea now is to pump out their oil as much as possible in order to compete with the OPEC oil-pricing gougers. Direct control over Iraq´s oil fields will improve/guarantee future supplies to the U.S. and U.K. All the previous exploration contracts with China, France, Russia, Indonesia and India are voided. What a fantastic strategic benefit from the invasion (a reward to the U.S. & U.K., so to speak for our valiant bloodshed). Control over the oil is a form of international power projection (another great benefit of invading Iraq).
> 
> The U.S. and U.K. military presence in Iraq has many, many roles. Just one of these roles is to provide oil field, drilling & piping protection from the foreign insurgency (mainly mercenaries and jihadist from North Africa, Iran, Syria and Saudi).
> 
> The euro thing is an excellent point as well. In the late 1990´s Iran made the change. Subsequently in early 2000 Saddam followed the idea. Naturally Bush was going to categorize this as bad (and it is bad... bad for us). This was just one (not the only reason) why the Bush administration developed the Axis of Evil. Notice how the rest of all the OPEC countries did not make the change.
> 
> Without a doubt, the oil and the U.S. dollar were two of the many reasons to invade Iraq (we reap tremendous benefits from the spilt blood). With that said, they are not the only two reasons, there are many more in this justified war. The oil and dollar preservation are really just added benefits (or entitlements of the cost for the regime change).
> 
> The fact that Saddam needed to be taken out is without question. Containment of Saddam was attempted (but he was openly defiant). The mere fact that Saddam, and Saddam alone, initiated two wars in the region during the past twenty years as evidence that he is "œnot aggressive" is like saying Germany was not aggressive prior to 1945. Look at how many lampshades and soap bars the Nazis were able to make out of those they hated. Bill Clinton, on three separate occasions came very close to taking out Saddam. Instead he attempted to please the Islamic world via U.S. military intervention in the former Yugoslavia.
> 
> Clinton´s administration did absolutely nothing to combat the ever growing Anti-Americanism fervor in the middle-east region. The boldness escalated and attacks from Iraq on U.S. pilots continued daily. Islamic extremist were building a rapidly growing army of non-combatants in Sudan and Afghanistan to commit the murder of U.S. citizens. The Bush Whitehouse was tired of "œswatting flies." A major overhaul was needed post 9/11, hence the doctrine of preemptive strike. You are either for us or against us. If you are against us, then it sucks to be you. Don´t even let us think you are up to no good.... because you might be wiped out of existence. Talk about advancing the Kingdom. Protection of this nation is a major advancement of the Kingdom. Who else is going to do it?.... Europe? Asia?
> 
> Your right Blade, the spread of democracy is in fact benign (but it will be a great benefit if it holds). Who really cares anyway? I don´t. Initially the regime change will be a democracy because that is our will and that is our mode of government. Would you like for us to set them up as little socialists or communists?... I know, let´s make them Nazis since most of them are all Jew haters anyway.
> 
> With a democracy, the people may very well choose to be reigned over by an Islamic republic... that´s not our problem as long as the established republic behaves. This is not really what the people over there want anyway. Even the young people in Iran are sick of the Mullahs (we may see internal change from Tehran within the next twenty years). Go read up on it and stop listening to your professors.
> 
> For the short term, we are not necessarily there to stop terrorists but to kill as many as possible. Iraq as a strategic battlefield was ideal for encouraging young like-minded jihadist and mercenaries to come to the killing fields. Killing the jihadist is the idea, not stopping them (the more that come over to Iraq, the better.). It´s like a spider waiting for its prey to come to the web. It´s a strategic plan thought out brilliantly by our war-planers. Bring the young jihadist to Iraq with hopes they wont logistically and operationally mobilize in the rugged battlefield of Afghanistan. You can even see how hard it is to get Bin laden and some of his lieutenants out of Afghanistan (although they are all probably in Iran).
> 
> As far as "œGod given right...." The Iraqi people are very happy air power has not decimated all their towns and villages while destroying insurgents. Like I said before, this is a war being fought under the rules of political correctness. We unfortunately sacrifice our troops in order to protect (and limit) the number of civilian casualties. It could be much, much worse. If you look at the numbers Blade, you will see that the insurgency is killing far more civilians than UK & US forces. At any rate, civilian casualties are a repercussion of proximity to the battle. Feel fortunate this is not occurring in Kirkland, Washington. Since when is the life of an Iraqi civilian or combatant worth equal to or more than a U.S. soldier? Although our western philosophy towards the sanctity of life is valued, a U.S. combatant´s life is a higher priority than those scurrying about the battlefield.
> 
> God will advance His Kingdom as fit. I´m sorry you view our actions as inhumane. I didn´t know we had the "œhate America crowd" on this forum. Western values are generally regulated by a code. Inhumane is getting your head sawed off with a large bread knife and having the video sent to your spouse. Give me a break about being inhumane.
> 
> Alternative fuel methods.... ha! Who´s going to fund that now Blade?... you? Texas (the big oil state) tried with the super-conducting super-collider south of Dallas Fort Worth. This was a huge facility promoting the research of atomic dissection as well as nuclear fusion as an alternative source. Government funding got axed with the Clinton White House. The fact of the matter is oil is relatively inexpensive and there is plenty of it for now as well as projected into the future. Alternative fuel research is not a demand of the American taxpayer (research and development is not what the majority are willing to pay for).
> 
> If you are going to blame anybody, blame the far left-wing nut-jobs for the gas prices. After all, they are the ones who forced the mandatory environmental controls on the energy corporations. All their wacko, environmental disaster scares and save the whale campaigns have made a fantastic influence. Their actions are now coming to fruition via government regulation. I don´t think California has had a new refinery since 1977. Who wants such an abomination in their backyard?.... nobody (but they want all the benefits).
> 
> You also have 4.5 billion Chinese coming a little out from under the clutches of poverty-stricken communism. You think oil and gas prices are high now? Just wait until the Chinese markets make more of a demand for the resource. Look at their massive industrialization over the past ten years alone. They are actually building cars now. Look out.
> 
> The Iraq war is completely justified. Oil is just a benefit and entitlement for the sacrifice made. Bush and Blair will go down in history for their brilliant forethought.
> 
> Gas prices are just fine. If you can't budget for it, scale back on your standard of living with everything else.



http://www.puritanboard.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=13037


----------



## Craig

$3.14 around my area...I did see it for $3.49 about 30 miles east of Kalamazoo.


----------



## Bladestunner316

5.57 in atlanta. stock up or fill up its gona be a long haul.

blade


----------



## ChristianTrader

> _Originally posted by Craig_
> $3.14 around my area...I did see it for $3.49 about 30 miles east of Kalamazoo.



$3.00 for regular around my area (Raleigh, NC). That is an increase of about 25 cents overnight.


----------



## Puddleglum

The Safeways near where I live increased their prices by 12 cents between when I went to work this morning, and came back this afternoon. Regular is getting close to $3 - premium & diesel are over $3 by now.


----------



## toddpedlar

Ours went from $2.49 on Monday, to $2.64 on Tuesday, to $2.79 today...


----------



## matt01

3.29 for Regular. The owner of the corner gas station said that she believed it would hit $5 by the weekend. At that point I will be wondering on whether it is even worth the 2o minute drive to work...


----------



## Craig

> _Originally posted by matthew_
> 3.29 for Regular. The owner of the corner gas station said that she believed it would hit $5 by the weekend. At that point I will be wondering on whether it is even worth the 2o minute drive to work...


I hear you. I commute an hour one way...I was spending around $250-$265 in gas per month...if gas goes up to $3.50, I'll be paying between $315-$330 per month as I work mon-fri, and 2-3 sat per month. I can't buy a different car, and getting 5 miles more per gallon isn't that big of a help anyway.

So, if this continues, does this mean our economy is going to crash? I mean, pretty much everything relies on oil and with the added cost, I assume other costs will go up to compensate. We have a lot of outsourced jobs and fewer jobs available that offer high pay. The economy has been difficult enough as it is, how will we be able to afford this? The Europeans have public transportation that makes sense, and far less commutes as everything is jammed together...we're paying over $3 in gas and have fewer alternatives for transportation.


----------



## Herald

$3.09 for 87 octane


----------



## matt01

> _Originally posted by Craig_
> The Europeans have public transportation that makes sense, and far less commutes as everything is jammed together...we're paying over $3 in gas and have fewer alternatives for transportation.



Exactly, I try not to listen to the arguments about the poor Europeans paying so much for their gas. The difference that needs to be remembered is the mass transit systems that exist throughout Europe. If I had the means to take a subway or even a bus to work I would, unfortunately, the nearest bus line is at least 12 miles away from my place of employment


----------



## LarryCook

Katrina Gulf Oil-Rig Wreckage Sparks Fear of $100-Barrel Crude




> Sept. 1 (Bloomberg) -- As Hurricane Katrina slammed through the Gulf of Mexico, energy companies evacuated offshore workers and shut about 91 percent of the region's oil production, or 1.37 million barrels daily.
> 
> ``There isn't the global spare capacity out there to replace this loss if it continues for a prolonged period,'' says Bart Melek, a senior economist at BMO Nesbitt Burns in Toronto. ``Already the market is tight as a drum, and if anything else happens, say instability in the Middle East, I wouldn't preclude $100 oil at all.''



Good thing the middle east is a fairly stable place...


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

> _Originally posted by LarryCook_
> Katrina Gulf Oil-Rig Wreckage Sparks Fear of $100-Barrel Crude
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sept. 1 (Bloomberg) -- As Hurricane Katrina slammed through the Gulf of Mexico, energy companies evacuated offshore workers and shut about 91 percent of the region's oil production, or 1.37 million barrels daily.
> 
> ``There isn't the global spare capacity out there to replace this loss if it continues for a prolonged period,'' says Bart Melek, a senior economist at BMO Nesbitt Burns in Toronto. ``Already the market is tight as a drum, and if anything else happens, say instability in the Middle East, I wouldn't preclude $100 oil at all.''
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good thing the middle east is a fairly stable place...
Click to expand...


From the Washington Times, 9/1/05, regarding international reaction to Hurricane Katrina:



> Islamic extremists found a cause for celebration, giving the storm the military rank "private" and suggesting in Internet chatter that Katrina had joined their jihad, or holy war. They also prayed that oil prices hit $100 a barrel this year.


----------



## Arch2k




----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

> _Originally posted by Bladestunner316_
> 5.57 in atlanta. stock up or fill up its gona be a long haul.
> 
> blade



Washington Post, 9/1/05, reports one gas station in Atlanta is at $5.87.


----------



## Puritanhead

I have to ask? Why do they continue this 9/10 cent charade on the end of the posted prices...


----------



## crhoades

> _Originally posted by Puritanhead_
> I have to ask? Why do they continue this 9/10 cent charade on the end of the posted prices...


To torment you!  http://www.users.qwest.net/~taaaz/AZgas.htmlhttp://www.users.qwest.net/~taaaz/AZgas.html

Scroll down into the intro - they discuss it here. Yes...I answer rhetorical questions with website links...


----------



## crhoades

http://www.cato.org/research/articles/vandoren-030401.html

Let ´Em Gouge: A Defense of Price Gouging

by Jerry Taylor & Peter VanDoren

April 1, 2003

Jerry Taylor is director of natural resource studies at the Cato Institute, and Peter VanDoren is editor of Regulation, the Cato Review of Business and Government.

Gasoline prices have gone up from a national average of $1.22 a year ago to a startling $1.71 today. The industry says it's supply and demand. Consumer activists say it's gouging. Who's right? Well, both are.

The supply and demand explanation is straightforward. On top of the Venezuelan labor strike and war jitters in the Middle East, the winter in the northeast "” a region that relies heavily on heating oil "” has been unusually cold. Refineries have accordingly been making heating oil rather than gasoline, so gasoline supplies are relatively scarce. Scarce gasoline = rising prices.

But what constitutes price gouging? To many, "gouging" is selling something at the highest level that the market will bear regardless of production costs. By that definition, we are indeed being gouged at the pump. Gasoline prices have risen faster than the price of crude oil.

But pricing goods and services at the highest level that the market will bear is what everyone in a capitalist economy does every day. Moreover, it happens regardless of whether prices are rising or falling. Oil companies were trying just as hard to charge what the market would bear in December 2001 when gasoline was $1.13 a gallon as they are now. Given present scarcities, however, the market can bear a higher price today than yesterday.

Why the constant government investigations only when prices are rising? Because to many, pricing significantly above cost is immoral and politicians and the press are in the business of finding immoral dragons to slay.

What has really set the moralizers off this time is the revelation that the gouging is often both tightly targeted and coldly calculated. The industry calls it "zone pricing." Essentially, oil companies examine small geographic areas, consider how much retail competition exists, estimate the willingness of motorists to look elsewhere for gasoline, and price accordingly. Consumer activists are aghast that oil companies would go so far to extract every penny they can out of a gallon of gas.

Price discounting, however, clearly benefits the consumers who receive the discounts. But how about those consumers who pay prices higher than the discount? Economists of all stripes who've studied the effect of differential pricing based on the willingness of consumers to search for lower prices have concluded that consumers overall are likely to benefit if sales are higher with price discrimination than without it. That's because those consumers less sensitive to prices pay more of the fixed costs of doing business.

Regardless, most people view the practice of zone pricing in gasoline markets as unfairly taking advantage of consumers. Yet many of those same people "” who will curse a blue streak if you put them in front of a camera and ask them about "Big Oil" "” are as we speak putting their houses on the market and enthusiastically gouging the living daylights out of anyone looking for a new home. And what's more, they're zone pricing! Surprisingly, however, no one ever rages against real estate price gouging. In fact, the opposite is the case. Business reporters gush about returns and politicians pledge to do whatever it takes to keep the real estate bubble afloat.

So is price gouging okay if you're the gouger but not the gougee? It would appear so. But in reality, price gouging "” like spinach "” may be unappealing at first bite but it's good for everyone in the long run. Gougers are sending an important signal to market actors that something is scarce and that profits are available to those who produce or sell that something. Gouging thus sets off an economic chain reaction that ultimately remedies the shortages that led to the gouging in the first place. Without such signals, we'd never know how to efficiently invest our resources. Moreover, we'd have no idea what to conserve. It's no exaggeration to state that, without such price signals, our economy would look like Cuba's.

There's a catch, however. If the government artificially restricts supply, those price signals will fall on deaf ears. Local zoning ordinances, for instance, often prevent real estate developers from answering the call from desperate home-buyers. They also frequently prevent new service stations from popping up to challenge the local micro-monopoly.

Blame not the price gouger. Blame the government that won't let the price gouger do his job.

This article originally appeared on NRO on April 1, 2003.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

Puritan Business Ethics:



> Nor would the Puritans agree with modern methods of competition or profiteering. When citizens in Boston complained that Robert Keayne charged excessive prices, the magistrates fined him two hundred pounds, and he very nearly found himself excommunicated from the church. John Cotton used the trial to lay down some business principles in a public lecture on economics. Cotton denounced as false the following premises:
> 
> That a man might sell as dear [expensively] as he can, and buy as cheap as he can"¦. That he may sell as he bought, though he paid too dear, etc., and though the commodity be fallen, etc. That as a man may take advantage of his own skill or ability, so he may of another´s ignorance or necessity.
> 
> In England John Knewstub showed what a gulf lies between the Puritans and modern commercial practices when he wrote disparagingly of businessmen who:
> 
> come to buying and selling as it were to the razing and spoiling of some enemy´s city "¦, where every man catcheth, snatcheth and carrieth away whatsoever he can come by. And he is thought the best who carrieth away the most"¦. But the Holy Ghost will bring us to another trial of our love.


----------



## Bladestunner316

$2.93


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

My gas station on 8/26/05 -- $2.49

My gas station on 9/2/05 -- $3.09


----------



## Bladestunner316




----------



## Poimen

> _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> 
> From the Washington Times, 9/1/05, regarding international reaction to Hurricane Katrina:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Islamic extremists found a cause for celebration, giving the storm the military rank "private" and suggesting in Internet chatter that Katrina had joined their jihad, or holy war. They also prayed that oil prices hit $100 a barrel this year.
Click to expand...


A woman in an Islamic army? 

[Edited on 9-3-2005 by poimen]


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

> _Originally posted by poimen_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> 
> From the Washington Times, 9/1/05, regarding international reaction to Hurricane Katrina:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Islamic extremists found a cause for celebration, giving the storm the military rank "private" and suggesting in Internet chatter that Katrina had joined their jihad, or holy war. They also prayed that oil prices hit $100 a barrel this year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A woman in an Islamic army?
> 
> [Edited on 9-3-2005 by poimen]
Click to expand...


They don't mind using female suicide bombers...


----------



## Bladestunner316




----------



## Bladestunner316

apparantly according to another forum I vist there is a shortage of gas begingin in the portland,or area. guess this was hear on kgw. I cant confirm this though it is speculated that gas from the pnw is being diverted to the SE. Not sure how much is being diverted. 

Anyone from oregon please help me fill in the gaps. 

Also their was rumour that gas would be shut down at 4pm in baltimore that is false but it created a gas panic which can cause shortages. 

Never the less If you can stock up on gas do so. It can only help you.

Blade


----------



## ChristianTrader

> _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> Puritan Business Ethics:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nor would the Puritans agree with modern methods of competition or profiteering. When citizens in Boston complained that Robert Keayne charged excessive prices, the magistrates fined him two hundred pounds, and he very nearly found himself excommunicated from the church. John Cotton used the trial to lay down some business principles in a public lecture on economics. Cotton denounced as false the following premises:
> 
> That a man might sell as dear [expensively] as he can, and buy as cheap as he can"¦. That he may sell as he bought, though he paid too dear, etc., and though the commodity be fallen, etc. That as a man may take advantage of his own skill or ability, so he may of another´s ignorance or necessity.
> 
> In England John Knewstub showed what a gulf lies between the Puritans and modern commercial practices when he wrote disparagingly of businessmen who:
> 
> come to buying and selling as it were to the razing and spoiling of some enemy´s city "¦, where every man catcheth, snatcheth and carrieth away whatsoever he can come by. And he is thought the best who carrieth away the most"¦. But the Holy Ghost will bring us to another trial of our love.
Click to expand...


I would love to see a Scriptural Firefight over this issue.

Its a two part question.

1)The morality of price "gouging" however one wants to define it. (And defining it is part of the problem of complaining over it.)

2)The morality of outlawing it. (For not all sins are crimes)

[Edited on 9-3-2005 by ChristianTrader]


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

> _Originally posted by ChristianTrader_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> Puritan Business Ethics:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nor would the Puritans agree with modern methods of competition or profiteering. When citizens in Boston complained that Robert Keayne charged excessive prices, the magistrates fined him two hundred pounds, and he very nearly found himself excommunicated from the church. John Cotton used the trial to lay down some business principles in a public lecture on economics. Cotton denounced as false the following premises:
> 
> That a man might sell as dear [expensively] as he can, and buy as cheap as he can"¦. That he may sell as he bought, though he paid too dear, etc., and though the commodity be fallen, etc. That as a man may take advantage of his own skill or ability, so he may of another´s ignorance or necessity.
> 
> In England John Knewstub showed what a gulf lies between the Puritans and modern commercial practices when he wrote disparagingly of businessmen who:
> 
> come to buying and selling as it were to the razing and spoiling of some enemy´s city "¦, where every man catcheth, snatcheth and carrieth away whatsoever he can come by. And he is thought the best who carrieth away the most"¦. But the Holy Ghost will bring us to another trial of our love.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I would love to see a Scriptural Firefight over this issue.
> 
> Its a two part question.
> 
> 1)The morality of price "gouging" however one wants to define it. (And defining it is part of the problem of complaining over it.)
> 
> 2)The morality of outlawing it. (For not all sins are crimes)
> 
> [Edited on 9-3-2005 by ChristianTrader]
Click to expand...


To put forth a definition, see here (for starters, at least). 

I see it as an Eighth Commandment issue vis-a-vis Lev. 25.14-17; Prov. 20.14 and 22.16. 

As to whether the civil magistrate should enforce price-gouging laws, as much as I am inclined towards a completely free market (I am sympathetic towards libertarian economic principles but I am not a libertarian), given that the magistrate is to enforce the Decalogue, and the Puritan precedent that I have cited, and given that price-gouging is what occurs in calamitous situations where people tend to take advantage of others' extremities, I tend see price-gouging laws as Biblical, much as I would see laws against oppressive usury as Biblical.

See Thomas Ridgeley on the Eighth Commandment and Richard Steele's _The Religious Tradesman_, Chapter V, _Of Justice_. I wonder what Richard Baxter has to say on this subject?

I know that the example of Jacob and Esau is cited as an example of price gouging on Jacob's part. I know that the example of Joseph is cited in favor of the concept of price gouging. 

There is much to consider here, I'm sure.


[Edited on 9-3-2005 by VirginiaHuguenot]


----------



## blhowes

Today, I'm forced to do something against my better judgment. Last night, we ran some errands, and driving home I let the gas needle go just about as low as it can go. We're running on fumes and I'll have to go today to fill up the tank. I can't believe I'll be paying around $3.50 per gallon for gas!!!

$3.50 for one gallon of regular gas? As bad as that is, I'm sure the price hasn't stabilized yet and it won't be long before it'll be $4.50 or higher. I may just have to see if I can find those threads that talk about why we shouldn't drill up in Alaska. If its because Mr. Walrus and Mrs. Penguin are concerned about us clearing out a little bit of their land or about some nearly-extinct animal that most have never heard about anyway, well it may be time for them to buy their own cars, fill them up with gas, and move on to greener (or whiter) pastors, I mean pastures.

$3.50 per gallon! 

[Edited on 9-3-2005 by blhowes]


----------



## Poimen

> _Originally posted by blhowes_
> Today, I'm forced to do something against my better judgment. Last night, we ran some errands, and driving home I let the gas needle go just about as low as it can go. We're running on fumes and I'll have to go today to fill up the tank. I can't believe I'll be paying around $3.50 per gallon for gas!!!
> 
> $3.50 for one gallon of regular gas? As bad as that is, I'm sure the price hasn't stabilized yet and it won't be long before it'll be $4.50 or higher. I may just have to see if I can find those threads that talk about why we shouldn't drill up in Alaska. If its because Mr. Walrus and Mrs. Penguin are concerned about us clearing out a little bit of their land or about some nearly-extinct animal that most have never heard about anyway, well it may be time for them to buy their own cars, fill them up with gas, and move on to greener (or whiter) pastors, I mean pastures.
> 
> $3.50 per gallon!
> 
> [Edited on 9-3-2005 by blhowes]



No kidding. 

Drill, drill, drill!


----------



## Texas Aggie

It is not necessarily a mater of drilling to obtain the oil.... it a matter of refining the resource. Blame the environmental nut-jobs for the strict governmental controls placed on the energy corporations and the fact that nobody now wants a refinery near them (although they want all the benefits). Don´t forget, environmental controls cost $$$$$.

After all who wants a dog turd in their backyard? California has had such staunch opposition to refineries that they haven't had a new one since 1977.


----------



## Poimen

> _Originally posted by Texas Aggie_
> It is not necessarily a mater of drilling to obtain the oil.... it a matter of refining the resource. Blame the environmental nut-jobs for the strict governmental controls placed on the energy corporations and the fact that nobody now wants a refinery near them (although they want all the benefits). Don´t forget, environmental controls cost $$$$$.
> 
> After all who wants a dog turd in their backyard? California has had such staunch opposition to refineries that they haven't had a new one since 1977.



Either way, they should do it soon. If we want to change to a cleaner source of energy for our vehicles we will need a large supply of oil to start. For if we can stop sucking off the ME teat we might have more time, money and resources to, say, pursue hydrogen fuel cells or the like.


----------



## Bladestunner316

So you would rather put more species at risk. The environmeent at risk. Just to have cheaper gas. If your so bummed about environmental regulations why dont you be the first to sign up for an oil drill in your back yard. Oh yeah you wouldnt because you wouldnt want your children to play around that. You wouldnt want to breath it in. Dont blame a small crowd of non-christians who actually take a stand for the environment for your high gas cost. At least they care about the environment unlike most christians today. albeit they can be a bit excentric. But at least they care. Now if you would actually get on the governments case about producing alternatives instead of ooil we may have some progress. But since republicans need the christian vote and like democrats have their hands in big oil they tell you want they want you to hear and christians just soak it in because they want a christian candidate in office. See the ones who are at blame are the ones we pay taxes too. 

Blade


----------



## Texas Aggie

Research and development of cleaner more efficient energy sources is not a desire of the American public. Like I mentioned before, Texas was kneed deep in fusion technology when the Clinton administration axed the program and wasted literally millions of dollars on research and construction of the atom smasher south of the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex.

We have huge supplies of oil (even already refined oil) here in the United States. These are reserved for those "special times" of need (war, natural disasters and national security concerns). The idea is to keep buying the ME oil and retain as much of the resource for our own reserve.

The oil is out there.... and there is plenty of it for use. True, there are OPEC price gougers, but hey... it is their oil and they can sell it for what ever they want as long as there is a market for their price. Wait until 4.5 billion Chinese want more of the resource (and you think we are paying high prices now).

Again, the idea is to store up our oil and use the rest of the worlds´. The ME teat is very full and ready to be drained. Research and development of alternative fuels is not the priority of the average tax payer and majority of voters in the United States.


----------



## Bladestunner316

Yeah but look at how succesfull we are at stealing Iraqs oil???


Oh there is that silly commandment STEAL. Gosh why didnt God think about that when we need oil. 

Blade


----------



## Texas Aggie

There is no stealing of oil Blade. Give it up. We occupy the country.... it belongs to the people of the United States until Iraq is fully returned to the Iraqi people (then they can decide what to do with it).

Your concept of occupation is seriously construed to the far left. If we wanted to, Iraq could technically become part of the United States forever. I suppose you think we have stolen land from the Japanese and Germans since we still have U.S. bases from our WWII occupation. Your Christian ideology mixed with Marxist comments is comical.


----------



## fredtgreco

> _Originally posted by Bladestunner316_
> Yeah but look at how succesfull we are at stealing Iraqs oil???
> 
> 
> Oh there is that silly commandment STEAL. Gosh why didnt God think about that when we need oil.
> 
> Blade



If we treated Iraq the way every other nation that has ever existed treated a vanquished foe, you would have an Iraqi gardner and $0.75 per gallon gas. Faluljah would cease to exist - everyone would be dead.


----------



## Bladestunner316

Yeah we didnt steal it the goverment of Iraq asked us to bomb them and gave us their oil. RIGHT. 

Ha ha im a marxist now too huh thats laughable. 

So we steal oil by invading a soveregn nation and its ok because now we occupy the nation. That makes a whole lot of sense. 

How about I invade your house and take your stuff but Ill stay there to occupy your place and just tell the cops its not stealing because I occupy the place. But if I left then it would be stealing. 

Blade


----------



## Bladestunner316

Fred,
If we did that we would be dead to. But since you want to make the US look good in their wrong actions I wont stop you. 

Oh I should be thankful to this government for not be more evil to Iraq than they allready have been.

Blade


----------



## Texas Aggie

If you hate the Iraq war so much Blade, at the very least, you should stop paying your federal taxes for all the bloodshed over oil.

The Ba'ath party definitely did not ask us to invade.... where would you get such an idea? Occupation entitles the oil. It is just that simple. 

Occupation entitles the people of the United States to everything that country has to offer. Brute force is the determinate. Boots on the ground speak for the people of the United States. The oil belongs to us until we see fit to return home and relinquish full control of the country to the people of Iraq once we are finished killing all the jihadist. I'm sorry you see this as oppressive.

Your anti-war arguments are fashioned after Marxist tactics (also called alligator speak). Go read up on it.

Your comparison on invading my house is ridiculous. Apples and oranges yet again my friend.


----------



## Bladestunner316

So your telling me to disobey Jesus when he said to give ceaser what is ceasers????

So its ok to to steal oil, and its ok to disobey Jesus now if I disagree with the war.


----------



## Bladestunner316

and yet again anything you cant argue agaisnt is 'apples and oranges' or 'kool aid'.


----------



## Texas Aggie

You love to say "steal oil." This is an example of a Marxist tactic. You have no grounds for your argument, yet it is a divisive tool for propaganda. There is no theft, because we occupy the country. This is the entitlement to the people of the U.S.

You are concerned with the constitutional legality of the Iraq war; therefore, you should also be concerned about the legality of the federal income tax. Especially since you are directly funding this "blood for oil" war.

Your convictions are strong; however misguided and destructive to US forces abroad. Again it is better to cast a vote than continue to support and encourage the Islamic war on the West via the lies spewing from your mouth.


----------



## Bladestunner316

I think Ive made my views clear. Thank you.

blade


----------



## Texas Aggie

Me to. See ya.


----------



## Swampguy

Romans solves this arguement
15:1 We who are strong have an obligation to bear with the failings of the weak, and not to please ourselves. 2 Let each of us please his neighbor for his good, to build him up. 3 For Christ did not please himself, but as it is written, "œThe reproaches of those who reproached you fell on me." 4 For whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, that through endurance and through the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope. 5 May the God of endurance and encouragement grant you to live in such harmony with one another, in accord with Christ Jesus, 6 that together you may with one voice glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. 7 Therefore welcome one another as Christ has welcomed you, for the glory of God.

Now for gas price in Baton Rouge it is $2.61


----------



## Bladestunner316

Im done arguing over the oil issue but I will remain to post my gas prices per the threads title.

blade

[Edited on 9-3-2005 by Bladestunner316]


----------



## Bladestunner316

$2.93


----------



## Puritanhead

yeah a fight over oil on the puritanboard!!!


----------



## Puritanhead

gas prices are not too bad in southside Virginia-- it's northern Virginia and tidewater where they pinch you...

http://www.virginiagasprices.com/


----------



## Bladestunner316

no more fighting in this thread. This is just to post gas prices.


----------



## blhowes

> _Originally posted by Bladestunner316_
> no more fighting in this thread. This is just to post gas prices.


I got a bargain. Instead of $3.50 per gallon, I went to a different place and paid only $3.30 per gallon...$57 to fill the tank.


----------



## Bladestunner316




----------



## Puritanhead




----------



## Puritanhead

> _Originally posted by blhowes_
> I got a bargain. Instead of $3.50 per gallon, I went to a different place and paid only $3.30 per gallon...$57 to fill the tank.



Gee Bob, you should be faithful to your Massachusetts yankee roots and you should have the _Boston Oil Party_. You could dress up as an indian and throw your oil into the Boston Harbor. I am not sure how it affects the environment, but it is a powerful political statement.
:bigsmile:


----------



## blhowes

> _Originally posted by Puritanhead_
> Gee Bob, you should be faithful to your Massachusetts yankee roots and you should have the _Boston Oil Party_. You could dress up as an indian and throw your oil into the Boston Harbor. I am not sure how it affects the environment, but it is a powerful political statement.
> :bigsmile:



Great idea. Actually, the guy in the front, third from the left, looks amazingly like, and may actually be, me. As you can see, I'm throwing a case of oil overboard. Just to the left of me is a coiled up gas pump hose (the pump is on the lower deck), ready to be used (as soon as I can raise enough money to pay for the gas)


----------



## pastorway

$2.85 here in the Heart of Texas


----------



## LawrenceU

My last tank of gas was $70.25 Let's see that was about 18 gallons of gas. . . half a tank.

Where o where has my horsey gone? 
Oh, where o where can he be?


----------



## fredtgreco

> _Originally posted by LawrenceU_
> 
> 
> My last tank of gas was $70.25 Let's see that was about 18 gallons of gas. . . half a tank.
> 
> Where o where has my horsey gone?
> Oh, where o where can he be?



I hear you. I am seriously considering buying a cheap used tin can of a car for gas mileage alone. 150+ mile round trips each week to preach could make the savings pay for the car!


----------



## Bladestunner316

Just have your kids cary you to church


----------



## jfschultz

> _Originally posted by fredtgreco_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by LawrenceU_
> 
> 
> My last tank of gas was $70.25 Let's see that was about 18 gallons of gas. . . half a tank.
> 
> Where o where has my horsey gone?
> Oh, where o where can he be?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I hear you. I am seriously considering buying a cheap used tin can of a car for gas mileage alone. 150+ mile round trips each week to preach could make the savings pay for the car!
Click to expand...


Last year my wife though I was crazy in buying a new car. This year her tune changed and now I was smart.

This evening I drove to Rhodes College to pick up Chris Blum and take him to evening service and then took him back to Rhodes and then returned home. While driving on the campus to his dorm he asked about how far it was and about the gas. Pointing to the screen I told him that he was in a hybrid and at that point we were running electric. When I got back home the "consumption" display, indicated a total of 61 miles at 60.9 MPG!

"Stewardship Gen 1:28 Not Plunder"


----------



## Puritanhead

I need a car that is powered by hydrogen or maybe the Holy Spirit even...


----------



## Puritanhead

it's $3.15 - $3.40 per gallon now where I live...


----------



## blhowes

> _Originally posted by jfschultz_
> Last year my wife though I was crazy in buying a new car. This year her tune changed and now I was smart.
> 
> This evening I drove to Rhodes College to pick up Chris Blum and take him to evening service and then took him back to Rhodes and then returned home. While driving on the campus to his dorm he asked about how far it was and about the gas. Pointing to the screen I told him that he was in a hybrid and at that point we were running electric. When I got back home the "consumption" display, indicated a total of 61 miles at 60.9 MPG!
> 
> "Stewardship Gen 1:28 Not Plunder"


Neat. What make and model car is it? I'd like to find out more information about alternatives.

[nosy]
Price-wise, how does it compare with other cars its size?
[/nosy]


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

Gas Prices Drive Man to Commute by Horse


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

The average price of regular gas in Washington, DC is now $3.38, which is higher than all 50 states' averages and ranks fourth highest among metropolitan area averages in the country. 

Source: _Washington Post_, 9/08/05


----------



## jfschultz

> _Originally posted by blhowes_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by jfschultz_
> Last year my wife though I was crazy in buying a new car. This year her tune changed and now I was smart.
> 
> This evening I drove to Rhodes College to pick up Chris Blum and take him to evening service and then took him back to Rhodes and then returned home. While driving on the campus to his dorm he asked about how far it was and about the gas. Pointing to the screen I told him that he was in a hybrid and at that point we were running electric. When I got back home the "consumption" display, indicated a total of 61 miles at 60.9 MPG!
> 
> "Stewardship Gen 1:28 Not Plunder"
> 
> 
> 
> Neat. What make and model car is it? I'd like to find out more information about alternatives.
> 
> [nosy]
> Price-wise, how does it compare with other cars its size?
> [/nosy]
Click to expand...


It is a Toyota Prius. It likes the 35-40 MPH city streets with the engine at operating temperature. My normal comute of 4 miles hurts. So my overall average is in the upper 40's.

Most auto reviewers call it a compact, it is a bit shorter than a Corolla. The EPA calls it a mid-size based of the interior space which is close to a Camry's.

The MSRP is in about the middle of the various Camry trim levels, but popularity leaves little leverage to negotiate the price down. (Some dealers are still selling at a premium over MSRP!) My Prius cost more than my 2000 Camry only because of the options. (It is easier to get lower option packages now.)


----------



## Poimen

$2.85 last night.


----------



## Anton Bruckner

she's dropping. That's good.


----------



## Greg

It's been staying steady at $2.99/gal here.


----------



## king of fools

Yeah, it's leveling back out in Texas. It was 2.89 my last fillup. Seems to be dropping a little bit each day.


----------



## Bladestunner316

thats good. prices ahvent changed here since I got back from vacation. which is good but not great. Just means they havent increased. as far as I know it seems like hings are calming down a smidge.

blade


----------



## LadyFlynt

Wish I had a horse...but then with five little ones we'd need half a dozen horses, then the price of property, hay, etc...eh! We could always sell the manure I suppose...


----------



## Bladestunner316

Turn the manure into a fertilizer for a garden.

blade


----------



## Bladestunner316

Ok here we go again top off your gas now refineries are allready shutting down on top of the downsize in production over Katrina. 

This is without Rita hitting and doing damage yet.

Blade


----------



## heartoflesh

Better fill er' up now, could be $4.00 a gallon by Saturday.


----------



## Bladestunner316




----------



## Puddleglum

No . . . I'm moving this week-end (= lots of driving), and gas prices have finally come back down . . . can't they stay down for a little longer?


----------



## Bladestunner316

Probably wont go up till 24 hours after the storm.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

Filled Up at 2.57 this evening. All the way to the brim.


----------



## Bladestunner316

Smart Man


----------



## BJClark

*Reporting Gas Price Gouging*

FYI, I haven't read all of the posts so if this information has been past along already forgive me.

To report Price Gouging, if you look at ANY Gas Pump there should be a sticker on it, the sticker has a 1-800 # for the U.S. Department of Agriculture within each State, you call that number to report it. It's all automated so you won't get to yell at them.

Now, they only consider it price Gouging IF it is $1.00 to $1.25 more than the gas stations within about a 2 block area.

Anyway, just thought I'd pass this information along in case anyone didn't know.

[Edited on 9-23-2005 by BJClark]


----------



## Bladestunner316

So then all you would need is all the gas stations to price goug for them to not be considerd price gouging. 

Thank you for the info 

blade


----------



## Poimen

> _Originally posted by BJClark_
> FYI, I haven't read all of the posts so if this information has been past along already forgive me.
> 
> To report Price Gouging, if you look at ANY Gas Pump there should be a sticker on it, the sticker has a 1-800 # for the U.S. Department of Agriculture within each State, you call that number to report it. It's all automated so you won't get to yell at them.
> 
> Now, they only consider it price Gouging IF it is $1.00 to $1.25 more than the gas stations within about a 2 block area.
> 
> Anyway, just thought I'd pass this information along in case anyone didn't know.
> 
> [Edited on 9-23-2005 by BJClark]



Why would you waste tax payers money by using that government service when you could simply use your foot to drive over to another station that was cheaper? If people are too lazy to find cheaper gas then they only have themselves to blame when they purchase more expensive fuel.


----------



## Average Joey

Watched Bill O`Reilly the other night.He and some people did some studies and found that for as high as gas prices sell the oil barrels should be at around 95 dollars.Currently it is around 67 dollars a barrel.Doesn`t that show that oil companies are price gouging?

Filled up today at cheapest place I saw 2.49.

Can`t Bush put a cap on the prices if he wanted to?

[Edited on 9-23-2005 by Average Joey]

[Edited on 9-23-2005 by Average Joey]


----------



## BJClark

> _Originally posted by poimen_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by BJClark_
> FYI, I haven't read all of the posts so if this information has been past along already forgive me.
> 
> To report Price Gouging, if you look at ANY Gas Pump there should be a sticker on it, the sticker has a 1-800 # for the U.S. Department of Agriculture within each State, you call that number to report it. It's all automated so you won't get to yell at them.
> 
> Now, they only consider it price Gouging IF it is $1.00 to $1.25 more than the gas stations within about a 2 block area.
> 
> Anyway, just thought I'd pass this information along in case anyone didn't know.
> 
> [Edited on 9-23-2005 by BJClark]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why would you waste tax payers money by using that government service when you could simply use your foot to drive over to another station that was cheaper? If people are too lazy to find cheaper gas then they only have themselves to blame when they purchase more expensive fuel.
Click to expand...



They could drive to another station, I know I have, but they could also report those who are price gouging, I don't consider that lazy, I call that being responsible.

Companies get fined for EVERY sale, that's some $20,000 for each register receipt where they were price gouging. If they were reported you can guarantee those businesses would suffer. And you can bet they would feel THAT in their pocketbooks.


----------



## Bladestunner316

Daniel,
What if your in atlanta and all the stations are out of gas, or are charging between 4 to 6.5 dollars a gallon? 

Blade


----------



## Poimen

> _Originally posted by Bladestunner316_
> Daniel,
> What if your in atlanta and all the stations are out of gas, or are charging between 4 to 6.5 dollars a gallon?
> 
> Blade



As Bobbi mentioned:



> Now, they only consider it price Gouging IF it is $1.00 to $1.25 more than the gas stations within about a 2 block area.



Just because they are charging an large amount for the gas does not mean they are price gouging. Gas stations have to stay in business too. 

Do we have evidence that they are gouging? Are they inflating prices because of demand or because of supply?


----------



## Bladestunner316

If a gas company is recording record profits then why cant they keep prices down for the consumer?

blade


----------



## Puritanhead

*Crude Politics and Crude Science*



> _Originally posted by Bladestunner316_
> If a gas company is recording record profits then why cant they keep prices down for the consumer?
> 
> blade



*Crude Politics and Economics*

_The simple answer is that oil profits are too lucrative to pass up._ 

No, one is a bigger fan of free-markets than I am, but gas companies don't embrace laissez-faire (i.e. hands-off approach,) and they conspire to rig prices and production under the auspices of OPEC and in the U.S. they use their political influence for patronage. Needless, to say I am not a big fan of crude politics, and I hope to see market innovations displace our dependency on oil in the coming years in favor of alternative energy sources. 

Gas companies don't operate on a strict competitive basis in the least... It's frankly a racket and OPEC is little more than a _cartel_. A cartel is nothing more than a group of producers whose goal it is to fix prices, to limit supply and to limit competition. Cartels typically collaborate in secret and set an occasional accord on prices. In the case of OPEC, their collaborative efforts come in the form of limiting production or setting production quotas. They've been maintaining such an arrangement pretty steadily since World War II. At times, new entrants into the market didn't play ball, but generally at our present juncture, most oil companies are perfectly content to limit production. Because of the large quantity of imported oil the U.S. receives, American oil prices are heavily influenced by OPEC. Sometimes, OPEC has their prices undercut by rogue cartel members that break rank to increase production quotas which was the case briefly in 1990s. However, in the last five years, the cartel solidarity has been unprecedented. It would be conceivable that our anti-trust law could be applied to outside producers operating, but oil companies enjoy some powerful political influence and they stave off the risk of anti-trust suit by the federal government. Though, they pay a price in that some politicians have threatened to fix or limit prices at various times in history... Some are doing it now... Though this would only cause shortages in long-run.

Ironically, if OPEC were based in the U.S. than what they do would be considered illegal and the Feds could feasibly invoke restraint of trade, price-fixing and antitrust laws. Though, oil companies used their palm-greasing influence among international institutions like the UN, to solidify the idea that by virtue of the doctrine of state immunity under public international law, Anti-Trust laws cannot be applied to foreign oil companies distributing oil within any country. It is crude production that is limited by production quotas set by the producer cartels,. However, the gas refining business is slightly more competitive than crude production but utilizes the crude as a raw material from OPEC-limited supply of crude nonetheless. America has increased it's refining capacity steadily in recent years. Though, it remains to be seen how 2005 hurricanes will impact production by impairing or damaging our capacity.

One of the bittersweet ironies is that even if we were to reduce our dependence on foreign crude imports, our environmental and labor regulatory red tape is so costly that we cannot possibly hope to cut consumer prices even modestly because of operating costs. Some oil companies are subsidized with perks from Washington (that they lobbied for) to make up for the red tape and supposedly to make them competitive with foreign oil.

Despite price-fixing, gas prices in the U.S. still have a somewhat broad price range, however, the biggest factor in state-to-state price differentials is often gasoline excise taxes. On average, in most federal and state jurisdictions, gasoline excise takes up to forty percent of the sticker price of a gallon gas. 

*Geological Myth and Reality*
_Another prevalent myth that serves the oil cartel's purposes is the their myth of the biological origin of oil -- the biogenic theory holds that oil is essentially organic matter (i.e. dead plants, animals, etc.) that were entombed in the folds of the earth and buried by layers of rock as the Earth's surface shifted and folded over millions of years._ I find that theory that fossilized ancient organic matter suffices to account for all the abundant oil resources to be untenable. Even if biological or fossilized matter has been found in surface oil deposits, it does not vindicate the bionic theory, and there may be simpler explanations for the biological matter mixed with oil deposits. I personally do not buy the fossil fuel argument and believe it is myth perpetrated by geologists on the payroll of oil companies; it also is a corollary to the dogma of evolutionary theorists. _Obviously, the idea that oil is not a renewable resource serves the purpose of conveying extreme scarcity and in perpetuating the myth that oil may be exhausted, it better enables them in conspiring to limit production becomes less of a crime._ Oil of course produces pollution which may be an argument for limiting production or at least consumption, but with technology investment, refining techniques have improved the clean-burning quality of fuels over time and automotive engine technology has greatly improved in time while reducing overall pollution. Air pollution has greatly decreased in the U.S. over the repugnant levels that were sustained in the 1970s. Again, I'm all for alternative energy sources, so air pollution concerns are beside the point.

Of course, oil wells can be exhausted but they most replenish themselves when left alone overtime. I believe that oil emanates from within the earth and believe in the so called abionic origin of petroleum which states that petroleum is produced by non-biological processes deep in the Earth. Oil composed of hydrocarbons seeps out of deep pockets within the crust, and the process of its formation perhaps involves earthen magma, or at the very least owes to the extreme heat of subterranean earth.



> "The capital fact to note is that petroleum was born in the depths of the Earth, and it is only there that we must seek its origin." --D. Mendeleev, geologist, 1877



Having said all that, I do acknowledge there are organic fuels (i.e. peat in bogs rich in nitrates) but they account for scant portion of our energy resources. I just think the bionic theory is spurious and absurd... the idea the primordial ooze from dead biological matter (whether ancient plants or dinosaurs) has led to the production of billions upon a billions barrels of oil harvested from the earth is just plain asinine.

I loathe _crude_ politics and _crude_ science, but I love earth science and geology! It's fascinating!


[Edited on 9-27-2005 by Puritanhead]


----------



## Puritanhead

Oil Prices Gain, Products Edge Lower


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

Mistake Leads to 29-Cent Gas Price Mon Oct 10, 7:37 AM ET

LINCOLN, Neb. (AP) - One gas station manager's mistake paid off for Lincoln drivers who were in the right place at the right time Friday. 

For 30 to 45 minutes, three of the Kabredlo's Convenience Store's four pumps sold premium unleaded gas for 29 cents a gallon.

Gas hasn't been that cheap since 1955, according to AAA Nebraska.

As news of the cheap fuel spread, lines formed at the store at 2305 R St., said Max Wolfe, who was doing landscaping for Kabredlo's.

Wolfe and his co-workers took time out to fill up. "I was on E, and I filled my tank up for $4," Wolfe said. "It made my day."

Nathan Olson said he usually pays $72 to fill his gas-guzzling 1998 Ford F-150. Friday, he filled the tank three-quarters full for $3.50.

The store manager who said she made the mistake didn't give her name.

On average, Lincoln gas stations are charging $2.93 a gallon for gas, according to AAA.


----------



## matt01

> _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> Mistake Leads to 29-Cent Gas Price Mon Oct 10, 7:37 AM ET



Mistake Leads to 29-Cent Gas Price and causes Manager to get _canned_!


----------



## Bladestunner316

$2.89 another station posted at $2.77 its been steadily going down.

Blade


----------



## Average Joey

Hey guys(and gals),check out the first page of this thread and be jealous of ourselves several months ago.


----------



## Bladestunner316

:bigsmile:


----------



## Puddleglum

Joe . . . did you have to do that? You've just encouraged me to break the 10th Commandment!  Oh well, at least they are coming down a little.


----------



## matt01

2.16 Grateful while it lasts...


----------



## Joseph Ringling

2.04 Get it while the getting is good.


----------



## Anton Bruckner

$2:45. that's NYC for you.


----------



## Average Joey

$1.94


----------



## Anton Bruckner

> _Originally posted by Average Joey_
> $1.94


 aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh, I'm jealous. with gas prices like that, you can drive a ford expedition, lincoln navigator or one of those gas guzzling bohemoths.


----------



## Average Joey

> _Originally posted by Slippery_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by Average Joey_
> $1.94
> 
> 
> 
> aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh, I'm jealous. with gas prices like that, you can drive a ford expedition, lincoln navigator or one of those gas guzzling bohemoths.
Click to expand...


I drive an Explorer and with the current price it costs me currently a little over 40 to fill up every two weeks.A couple of months ago it costed me between 50 and 60.


----------



## Bladestunner316

$2.38 safeway


----------



## Average Joey

I just checked out MS on that gas price website and somebody in Gulfport is selling gas for $1.49 a gallon!Maybe if I lived around Jackson it would be worth the drive.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

Gas at my station went down to $1.87 but now it's back up to $2.10.

Gas Prices on Upswing That Could Top $3 By Spring


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

$2.85 here now.


----------



## Pilgrim

> _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> $2.85 here now.



That's in the ballpark for around here too. If this trend keeps up, prices will top $3.00 in the coming weeks, if not sooner.


----------



## Archlute

2.95 for regular, and our family van only gets 9mpg!!! That'll be about 55.00 per round trip for the summer internship when our family goes up to worship every Lord's day. I may be in debt when it's all finished.


----------



## Pilgrim

> _Originally posted by Archlute_
> 2.95 for regular, and our family van only gets 9mpg!!! That'll be about 55.00 per round trip for the summer internship when our family goes up to worship every Lord's day. I may be in debt when it's all finished.


----------



## Ivan

$3 will happen. If the slightest disturbance happens in the world it will go higher. A major event and it will soar to heights we can only imagine. 

Frankly, I expect very dark days ahead.


----------



## ANT

These gas prices are killing me ... (I drive an Expedition) ... Aaaarrrgggh


----------



## Pilgrim

> _Originally posted by Ivan_
> $3 will happen. If the slightest disturbance happens in the world it will go higher. A major event and it will soar to heights we can only imagine.
> 
> Frankly, I expect very dark days ahead.



I've heard that Brazil is making ethanol from sugar and will soon be free of dependence on oil.


----------



## Bladestunner316

brazil is smarter then US for doing that. Gas is 2.79 here 2.93 by the freeway.


----------



## ReformedWretch

3.09 for Premium here! My Crossfire will only take Premium...I am not driving much.


----------



## Bladestunner316




----------



## Anton Bruckner

$2.93. sinful, sinful, sinful. And Lee Raymond of Exxon got $356 million retirement package


----------



## ReadBavinck

I am very grateful for my '97 Saturn right now. I highly recommend the car to those looking to lower thier gas bill. It's a pretty cheap car and I always get over 30mpg, often around 33mpg.


----------



## rmwilliamsjr

> _Originally posted by Pilgrim_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by Ivan_
> $3 will happen. If the slightest disturbance happens in the world it will go higher. A major event and it will soar to heights we can only imagine.
> 
> Frankly, I expect very dark days ahead.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've heard that Brazil is making ethanol from sugar and will soon be free of dependence on oil.
Click to expand...


from sugar cane.
it is a good read see:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/03/29/eveningnews/main1454613.shtml
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1007/p05s01-woam.html
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6817

note especially that the cost in Brazil is roughly $1US/gal.


----------



## Bladestunner316

356 mill is not enough to raise afamily on these days


----------



## LadyFlynt

2.82 last I saw for unleaded


----------



## Puddleglum

The best price I've seen today is $2.95.


----------



## Bladestunner316




----------



## LarryCook

The only way that I have found to completely eliminate any concern for the price of gas is to increase my giving.


----------



## Ivan

$2.78 the best price here. I think I'm going to buy a bike...and I ain't talkin' Harley!


----------



## Anton Bruckner

> _Originally posted by Bladestunner316_
> 356 mill is not enough to raise afamily on these days


 but it is enough to raise several families over several lifetimes


----------



## Anton Bruckner

> _Originally posted by rmwilliamsjr_
> 
> 
> note especially that the cost in Brazil is roughly $1US/gal.


wow. now that's what the price of gas should be. But unfortunately, the Oil Oligopolies have plenty say in Energy Policy. And as a result the masses are at their mercies.

Heck, if illegal Mexican immigrants got more clout than U.S Citizens, how much more clout with an Oil company.


----------



## Nomos

from http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/03/29/eveningnews/main1454613.shtml :

"That's primarily because while the rest of the world was mapping the human genome, scientists in Brazil were mapping the DNA of sugar in an effort to create a cleaner, cheaper alternative to gasoline: sugarcane ethanol."

Great, now the price of sugar will sky rocket! 


Ryan Jankowski
Rincon Mountain Presbyterian Church, PCA
Tucson, AZ


----------



## Puddleglum

Paid $3.05 today - that's pretty much par for where I live. 

Did find an Arco later on which for some reason is still only charging $2.81 (not for long!).


----------



## shelly

$2.75 for the cheap stuff. It was $2.47 2 weeks ago. 

[Edited on 5-6-2006 by shelly]


----------



## Bladestunner316

3.09 last I checked.


----------



## blhowes

$1.99

Shelly, I can relate to your signature comment about your sloth avatar.


----------



## Bladestunner316

1.99!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! how the - did you get that?


----------



## Anton Bruckner

> _Originally posted by Bladestunner316_
> 1.99!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! how the - did you get that?


he's probably an exxon worker


----------



## blhowes

> _Originally posted by Bladestunner316_
> 1.99!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! how the - did you get that?


Some guy on the corner, dressed in a long trench coat, opened up the trunk of his car and said, "Psst, Buddy, Come 'ere. "

...or, it was a typo and should have been 2.99


----------



## Ivan

$2.89 in Burlington, Wisconsin


----------



## Bladestunner316

I was wondering about that Bob


----------



## shelly

2.63 yesterday


----------



## Ivan

$2.86 in sunny southeastern Wisconsin today.


----------



## Puddleglum

$3.22 at the station near where I live. One of the bus drivers on Wednesday said that he'd seen $3.47 earlier that day.


----------



## Bladestunner316

3.15


----------



## ~~Susita~~

3.39


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

Man alive! 

Fuel Bank


----------



## Cheshire Cat

2.94 here.


----------



## Herald

3.09 in Gambrills, MD. 87 octane.


----------



## Philip A

> _Originally posted by ~~Susita~~_
> 3.39



3.39 over the mountains here in Ridgecrest too.

All the rest of y'all are a buncha' whiners!!


----------



## Ivan

> _Originally posted by Philip A_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by ~~Susita~~_
> 3.39
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3.39 over the mountains here in Ridgecrest too.
> 
> All the rest of y'all are a buncha' whiners!!
Click to expand...


No, just poor.


----------



## Bladestunner316

fuel bank sounds cool!


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

Man Switches to Horse to Protest Gas Prices

May 8, 2006 

ARLINGTON, TX (AP) -- Egon Settle of Arlington, Texas, says he's riding a horse to do his errands, as a protest against the price of gas.

Settle said he has saved $565 over the past four weeks by pulling his horse trailer to work with his truck and then using his horse to run errands.

Settle has certainly gotten a lot of attention. He said people stop and shake his hand, and tell him, "I appreciate what you're doing."

Settle said he's "bitter and angry" that he can't drive his truck around much because of the high price of gas.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

Malfunction Cuts Gas Price to 29 Cents 
Mon May 22, 2006

HAMMOND, Ind. (AP) - When a pump at a gas station malfunctioned, opportunistic motorists were able to buy gas for 29 cents per gallon. 

A Marathon station sold a gallon of fuel for less than the price of a first-class stamp for about 90 minutes Friday before the mistake was detected and and the price corrected to $2.79.

While still answering questions from customers about why the price had suddenly gone up, clerk Nida Tayyab said more than 50 people had crowded the store, likely thinking the mishap was a price promotion, and received the bargain. Normally, the station serves about 10 people per hour.

"I was really confused," she said. "It was so messed up. I can't explain here how it was."

When Tayyab figured out what was going on, she called her father, who works at another store, for help fixing the situation.

"It's fine now. It's all working," Tayyab added.


----------



## Bladestunner316




----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

Gas prices move past $3 to all-time high

July 24, 2006

CAMARILLO, Calif. (AP) - Nationwide gas prices hit an all-time high in the last two weeks, rising nearly 2 cents to just over $3 per gallon, according to a survey released Sunday. 

The national average for self-serve regular stood at $3.0150 a gallon Friday, up 1.98 cents in the last two weeks, according to the Lundberg Survey of 7,000 gas stations across the country.

The price exceed the previous high of $3.0117 set in September last year, analyst Trilby Lundberg said.

A gallon of mid-grade gasoline averaged around $3.12, and premium at nearly $3.22.

Nationwide, the lowest price for regular was $2.77 a gallon in Charleston, S.C., while the highest "” $3.28 a gallon "” was in San Diego.


----------



## jaybird0827

Topped off my tank this morning. $2.899 regular at the pump and the guy was in the process of changing the sign to $2.939. This, in Indian Trail, NC at the station having the lowest price on US 74 in that area.


----------



## Puritanhead

Gas prices are starting to drop.

Yippie! Three cheers for capitalist expansion of refining capacity!!!


[Edited on 8-30-2006 by Puritanhead]


----------



## Puritanhead

about $2.50 regular.


----------



## jaybird0827

$2.689 is lowest I've seen so far this week, down here.


----------



## Puritanhead

Roanoke VA I hear is $2.43


----------



## Bladestunner316

2.95 here


----------



## Ivan

$2.82...weird how we get excited about this as a LOW price!


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

$2.09 in Gainesville, Va.


----------



## Theoretical

It's hovering in the $2.40-2.50 range here in the Plano-Richardson area of DFW.


----------



## Ivan

$2.55 in very rainy Burlington, Wisconsin.


----------



## Bladestunner316

2.74 with safeway club card!!


----------



## yeutter

$2.38 in Lansing, MI


----------



## jaybird0827

$2.53 in Stallings, NC


----------



## nicnap

$2.26 here in SC.


----------



## govols

$2.30 north of Atlanta.


----------



## BJClark

Here in North Florida the prices are still up at 2.69 in most places, however if you know where to go there are some where the prices are 2.54.


----------



## Puddleglum

Just a few days ago I saw the first $2.99 near where I live in Seattle! 
In other areas, it's down more - even high $2.70s if you can pay cash.


----------



## yeutter

$2.29 in Lansing, MI today


----------



## jaybird0827

$2.439 in Matthews, NC this morning.


----------



## Kevin

C$.97 per litre here in NB.

( that is aprox US$4.05 per US gal.)


----------



## Ivan

2.45 and dropping in southeastern Wisconsin.


----------



## ~~Susita~~

2.90-something here in Bako.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

$1.95 in Gainesville, VA.


----------



## Scott Bushey

$2.89 here in Florida

Whats wrong w/ this picture?


----------



## Bladestunner316

2.71


----------



## rjlynam

$2.25 in Youngsville, America.


Keeping the tank only half filled when price is expecting to drop will save ya some additional shekels.

Keep it full when price is expected to rise. 

I put a 1000+ miles on my vehicle a week, so it does add up for me.


----------



## Ivan

Today in rainy southeastern Wisconsin, the price of gas is $2.29 and dropping.

Should go below $2.00 in a couple weeks or so.


----------



## SolaScriptura

$2.12 in Clarksville, IN


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

$1.83 in Richmond, VA


----------



## jaybird0827

It was still $2.339 in Matthews, NC last night, and that's the lowest I've seen here.


----------



## Ivan

> _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> $1.83 in Richmond, VA



I think I need to find a little reformed church in VA!


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

> _Originally posted by Ivan_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> $1.83 in Richmond, VA
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think I need to find a little reformed church in VA!
Click to expand...


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

$1.78 in Staunton, VA


----------



## Bladestunner316

WOW

Its down to 2.41 here!


----------



## jaybird0827

Lowest in our area is $2.139 - Stallings, NC. I think we're seeing the new floor.


----------



## ReederKidsMom

My mom is from south center PA, and said somewhere between her and me (NC) there was a gas station at $1.97

My Friends in NJ say they are down to $2.03 and get your gas pumped for you there.

Our gas seems to be at a set $2.25, here in NC. Everywhere I go here in NC that's the best price I see.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

$1.98 in Winston Salem, NC


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

$1.85 in Pembroke, VA


----------



## Blue Tick

VirginiaHuguenot said:


> $1.85 in Pembroke, VA



Moving to Pembroke!


----------



## MrMerlin777

Blue Tick said:


> Moving to Pembroke!



Wish I could. 

2.61 here in WA some places.


----------



## Davidius

I bought my first gas below $2 a few days ago for $1.99 at some place on the interstate.


----------



## Kevin

.85 per litre here.

that translates to aproxx US$3.67 per (US) gal!


~edit~

My bad I converted the $ the wrong way the actual price is aprox us$2.89.


----------



## MrMerlin777

Kevin said:


> .85 per litre here.
> 
> that translates to aproxx US$3.67 per (US) gal!



OUCH! That hurts just hearing it.


----------



## Ivan

MrMerlin777 said:


> OUCH! That hurts just hearing it.



Hang on. We'll get there yet.


----------



## Blue Tick

Folks there's talk that the prices will be in the $4.00 dollar zone by the summer.


----------



## Herald

This morning 87 octane was $3.06 per gallon. Outrageous!


----------



## Bladestunner316

3.56 in downtown kirkland by 520.


----------



## Ivan

I think the cheapest is $3.23 and going up. Get ready for a very bumpy ride.


----------



## staythecourse

*From 3.19 to 3.09*

at my local station. It dropped that much in a day which surprised me since it was Derby weekend.


----------



## ~~Susita~~

Kevin said:


> .85 per litre here.
> 
> that translates to aproxx US$3.67 per (US) gal!
> 
> 
> ~edit~
> 
> My bad I converted the $ the wrong way the actual price is aprox us$2.89.



Sounds familiar.


----------



## bookslover

In part, you can thank the wacky enviros for high gas prices. They have campaigned vigorously so that no new refineries have been built in the US in the last 30 or 40 years, that I know of.

This is why we hear so much about refinery maintenance and breakdowns as a partial reason gas prices are so high. When the _newest_ refineries are now 30 to 40 years old, this is what you get.


----------



## jawyman

It is...ready or not Brothers and Sister where I live at $3.25 for low-grade. Please pray for the great State of Michigan as we weather through our economic woes.


----------



## Ivan

I saw a couple of stations at $3.09 on my way to church this morning. Funny, they were in little, out-of-the-way towns. I think they would have higher prices.


----------



## SolaGratia

Los Angeles Area, Gas is about $3.55 low grade.


----------



## jbergsing

$2.87 the last time I fueled up the van. But that was about 5 days ago.


----------



## jbergsing

bookslover said:


> In part, you can thank the wacky enviros for high gas prices. They have campaigned vigorously so that no new refineries have been built in the US in the last 30 or 40 years, that I know of.
> 
> This is why we hear so much about refinery maintenance and breakdowns as a partial reason gas prices are so high. When the _newest_ refineries are now 30 to 40 years old, this is what you get.


You are correct. But there's a little more to it. Although we haven't built any new refineries in decades, we have expanded the capabilities of those we have in service. Unfortunately, they can only meet 95% of our demands. That doesn't sound that bad but it actually is. I can't explain it well enough so let me see if I can find something on the web to point to for further info. (I'll post again when I find something.)

There are no plans to build more refineries, only to find an alternative. That's great for the long term plan, but not-so-good for the short term. Until we can get the tree-huggers and their lobbyists out of DC, this is the game we're gonna play.


----------



## bookslover

Today, here in the greater Los Angeles area, I just paid $3.36 per gallon for regular unleaded.

I now go to work, go to church, go to the grocery store, go to pick up my son from work - and, that's about it.


----------



## Archlute

3.56 regular - 3.71 supreme. And I just dumped our Corolla at my in-laws over spring break. All we have until our move is our 15 passenger Ford van at a whopping 9mpg!


----------



## ~~Susita~~

Cheapest here is like 3 and a half-ish. Break out the bikes, folks! I think we could all use the exercise, anyway.


----------

