Memorial Day Weekend- Bend Over

[PIA]

this makes me want to vomit...

[Tequila Revenge]

The price of gasoline has long ago surpassed the STUPID level.

ONCE AGAIN I say
BUILD MORE G.D. REFINERIES, DRILL FOR OIL HERE AND THE ENVIRONMENTALIST NUT JOBS BE DAMNED!!!

Build more nuclear plants
Expand coal mining.
If the supply goes UP, the price will go DOWN! (DUH)!

DRILL IN THE A.N.W.R.
We're talking about an area the size of South Carolina, and doing the actual drilling in an area the size of my friggin' back yard!
The Caribou will just have to cope.

It's obvious we're not getting any sympathy from the rag heads in the middle east, so we need to take matters into our own hands.
I'm tired of the talk of alternative energy sources.
My car runs on GASOLINE, not switch grass or wood chips.
We need SHORT TERM solutions, not lawn mowers with doors shoved down our throats by 2025. (When I'll be so damned old I'll have my driver's license taken away from me anyway).

We go through this every year at Memorial Day. The "summer driving season" b.s. is always the excuse for raising fuel prices even higher.
People need to start taking their vacations in the winter time, not in June, July, & August when they KNOW fuel prices will skyrocket even more.
For those with kids in school who can only take vacations in the summer time, I say this (and it won't win me a lot of friends, but I don't give a rat's rear end):
If you can afford to take your kids on vacation, you can afford to fill up your gas tank.

I feel sorriest for the people who live in the rural areas where there is no public transportation available and they HAVE to drive their cars into town for groceries, work, etc.

Hopefully the oil companies will use some of their profits for more exploration, drilling, refining, etc.

AND WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH SUSPENDING THE OBSCENE GASOLINE TAX, or at least reducing it, for Christ's sake?

I just thank God that I'm still able to work, and work some occasional overtime to help pay for some of this crap. Others aren't quite so lucky.
Retirees on fixed incomes and people who live in the rural areas are hit hardest. Nobody seems to give a damn about them. Not our elected officials, anyway.

Here ya go Gary

By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Monday, May 12, 2008 4:20 PM PT

For the last 28 years, Democrats in Congress and a few Republicans have again and again opposed our drilling for oil in Alaska's ANWR area when we knew it contained at least 10 billion barrels of oil we could be using now.

* For the past 31 years, Congress repeatedly prevented us from building any new oil refineries that we now badly need.

* More recently, congressional Democrats defeated and discouraged any bill that would let us drill in the deep sea 100 miles out. However, it's somehow OK for China to drill there.

* As a further indictment of our Congress, since the 1980s it has continually stopped all building of nuclear power plants while France, Germany and, yes, Japan, plus 12 other major nations, did build plants and now get 20% to 80% of their energy from their wise and safe nuclear plant investments.

* From 1990 to 2000, U.S. crude oil demand rapidly accelerated by 7.41 quadrillion BTUs, according to Department of Energy data. And our rate of foreign oil dependency dramatically increased while our domestic oil production steadily declined.

Under the eight Clinton years alone, U.S. oil production declined 1,349,000 barrels per day, or 19%, while our foreign imports increased 3,574,000 barrels per day, or 45%.

During this time, President Clinton vetoed ANWR drilling bills that would have clearly made Alaska our No. 1 state in the production of our own vitally needed oil supply, not only for all Americans but also for national defense emergencies.

So were Democrats and members of Congress together merely short-sighted, with only a few having any real business experience?

Or were they just ignorant about economics - the fact that the law of supply and demand determines the price of all commodities such as oil, steel, copper and lumber?

Or were they simply and utterly irresponsible and incompetent in their actions that led us to become dangerously dependent on increasing oil imports from foreign countries?

We think it was "all of the above."

The unintended consequence of the Congress members' poor judgment and meddling micromanagement of U.S. energy policy is that they actually hurt most the very people they always profess to be able to help - the average American consumer, lower-income workers and those in the inner city who can't afford an extra $100 a month to drive to and from their jobs.

Democrats kowtowed to the wishes of their environmental supporters over the basic needs of 300 million American citizens.

It is a national disgrace that all they now know how to do is relentlessly criticize, complain and condemn. They always attempt to blame, investigate and scapegoat someone else, in this case U.S. oil companies, when Congress is the true villain of ineptness for constantly blocking and obstructing every effort for us to become more productive and less dependent on foreign oil.

Do those now in Congress really think Middle America's voters are so gullible that they will believe that its latest best and brightest answer to increasing our supply of oil and gas is to slap a 25% windfall penalty tax on oil companies and remove all other incentives for oil companies to drill and explore for oil?

The right time to release oil from, or stop adding to, our Strategic Petroleum Reserve is not now. That will do nothing to increase our ongoing oil supply needs and will have limited affect on oil prices while increasing our national security risks.
Maybe we should investigate the blame-throwing investigators in Congress.
Only after we first announce to the world a bold new change in our policy by proclaiming that we intend to begin drilling in ANWR and selected outer sea areas, plus adopt new conservation programs, will the release of oil from our reserves have a major impact on breaking the price of oil.

If our congressional leadership can't muster the courage to begin reversing past mistakes now and allow our companies to drill in ANWR and off-limits offshore areas, and build essential refineries and safe nuclear power plants, what will an even-more-discredited Congress do in 2009, 2010 and 2011, when millions of new city dwellers in China and India will be driving the cars their countries are now producing, thereby materially increasing their already huge demand for oil and gas?



It's wake-up time for America.

[Tequila Revenge]

To follow up the IBD comments I've always been puzzled as to WHY conservation of resources are NEVER considerd a viable option. It's real simple; YOU CAN'T SELL OR TAX WHAT YOU DON'T CONSUME. We'll pour in millions of $$$$ into "renewable energy," like solar and wind, and offer huge tax incentives and rebates. Why? Because once that energy gets into the "grid" utility companies can sell it at huge profits.

It's proven you can save more energy in your home by utilizing proper building techniques and better insulation materials. In fact, in most areas you'll NEVER get the ROI off of solar as you would by investing $8-10K in building a better house. The conservation approach will save most home owners well over $100K in savings over a 20 year time period and the pay back on the $8-10K is around 7 years. Why is there NOT a program for something this simple? How much oil goes to heating a home? THERE IS NO REVENUE STREAM IN CONSERVATION FOR GOVT, UTILITIES OR BUSINESS.

[flyboy55]

Investor's Business Daily?

They've been defending Big Oil profits and denying the reality of climate change for almost two decades (someone should tell them that their boy in the Oval Office has finally acknowledged the reality of climate change due to human inputs).

It doesn't surprise me that they have now hallucinated a Democrat controlled plot behind tight oil supplies and soaring fuel costs.

I think the only people surprised by what's happening with the price of crude and the cost of a gallon of gasoline are the people who faithfully read IBD to find out what's going on in the world.

PS Upon reviewing what I wrote I realized someone could take it personally, which was not my intent. Sorry TR and anyone else who may have taken it that way.

[ConchRepublican]

Investor's Business Daily?

They've been defending Big Oil profits and denying the reality of climate change for almost two decades (someone should tell them that their boy in the Oval Office has finally acknowledged the reality of climate change due to human inputs).

It doesn't surprise me that they have now hallucinated a Democrat controlled plot behind tight oil supplies and soaring fuel costs.

I think the only people surprised by what's happening with the price of crude and the cost of a gallon of gasoline are the people who faithfully read IBD to find out what's going on in the world.

PS Upon reviewing what I wrote I realized someone could take it personally, which was not my intent. Sorry TR and anyone else who may have taken it that way.

Sooo . . . the above isn't true? Drilling in ANWR, off shore and building refineries would not have us in a better position than we're in now?

[Tequila Revenge]

Investor's Business Daily?

They've been defending Big Oil profits and denying the reality of climate change for almost two decades (someone should tell them that their boy in the Oval Office has finally acknowledged the reality of climate change due to human inputs).

It doesn't surprise me that they have now hallucinated a Democrat controlled plot behind tight oil supplies and soaring fuel costs.

I think the only people surprised by what's happening with the price of crude and the cost of a gallon of gasoline are the people who faithfully read IBD to find out what's going on in the world.

PS Upon reviewing what I wrote I realized someone could take it personally, which was not my intent. Sorry TR and anyone else who may have taken it that way.

No worries Fly Boy. I just hope the conversation continues. I only added the IBD info to add some food for thought.

[Tequila Revenge]

Investor's Business Daily?

They've been defending Big Oil profits and denying the reality of climate change for almost two decades (someone should tell them that their boy in the Oval Office has finally acknowledged the reality of climate change due to human inputs).

It doesn't surprise me that they have now hallucinated a Democrat controlled plot behind tight oil supplies and soaring fuel costs.

I think the only people surprised by what's happening with the price of crude and the cost of a gallon of gasoline are the people who faithfully read IBD to find out what's going on in the world.

PS Upon reviewing what I wrote I realized someone could take it personally, which was not my intent. Sorry TR and anyone else who may have taken it that way.

Sooo . . . the above isn't true? Drilling in ANWR, off shore and building refineries would not have us in a better position than we're in now?

Do you believe that big oil would lower their prices? It's game played by oil and govt. We're only their income stream.

Now I'm gonna poke a little fun at you. Shouldn't a "good republican" consider the subsidizing of oil compnaies simply wrong?

[ph4ever]

I paid $4.13 last night - needless to say I was pi$$ed.

What is it in Saudia Arabia - like .43

Oh well gotta get to work....

[ConchRepublican]

Investor's Business Daily?

They've been defending Big Oil profits and denying the reality of climate change for almost two decades (someone should tell them that their boy in the Oval Office has finally acknowledged the reality of climate change due to human inputs).

It doesn't surprise me that they have now hallucinated a Democrat controlled plot behind tight oil supplies and soaring fuel costs.

I think the only people surprised by what's happening with the price of crude and the cost of a gallon of gasoline are the people who faithfully read IBD to find out what's going on in the world.

PS Upon reviewing what I wrote I realized someone could take it personally, which was not my intent. Sorry TR and anyone else who may have taken it that way.

Sooo . . . the above isn't true? Drilling in ANWR, off shore and building refineries would not have us in a better position than we're in now?

Do you believe that big oil would lower their prices? It's game played by oil and govt. We're only their income stream.

Now I'm gonna poke a little fun at you. Shouldn't a "good republican" consider the subsidizing of oil compnaies simply wrong?

I think the prices wouldn't have gotten where they are. As long as they make their profits' they'll be happy. If they can make them and charge less, they would. Isn't oil revenue/profit capped/controlled by the gov't anyway?

As for the subsidies, on the surface I am against it, but I am not one who understands the intricacies of the economy. Ideally, I say screw 'em, make yourself successful or fail. But, there's the overall effect these large companies have on the market as a whole which poeple concern themselves about.

Plus, there's the strategic resource angle that they should be protected due to their being vital to the national security. I like free markets, but once privately/publically owned companies become entwined with the protection or provide a vital service to the nation, there is a responsibility to look out for their existance. I guess. It would be better to have an open competition and have more options available, but, then there is the security factor to be concerned about. Plus, how many people actually get competing estimates (aside from all MY customers, but that's another story)? The chance of govenrment doing that is even less.

I do think these things are complicated, not Gordian Knot complicated, but close. Maybe we do need a sword to cut through everything and set a new standard but that will take a LOT more public outcry for someone to tick off that many people. And, frankly, I think people make enough to keep them comfortable and have enough to be distracted that they don't pay as much attention as they should.

Sorry for the ramble . . . but as I started, things just flowed point to point, a little free association, and since I'm on lunch, I don't have the time the edit it cleanly.

[ConchRepublican]

I paid $4.13 last night - needless to say I was pi$$ed.

What is it in Saudia Arabia - like .43

Oh well gotta get to work....

It should be cheaper there. It's their resource they sell to us. That's why, if we tapped OUR resources . . . .

[Tequila Revenge]

Investor's Business Daily?

They've been defending Big Oil profits and denying the reality of climate change for almost two decades (someone should tell them that their boy in the Oval Office has finally acknowledged the reality of climate change due to human inputs).

It doesn't surprise me that they have now hallucinated a Democrat controlled plot behind tight oil supplies and soaring fuel costs.

I think the only people surprised by what's happening with the price of crude and the cost of a gallon of gasoline are the people who faithfully read IBD to find out what's going on in the world.

PS Upon reviewing what I wrote I realized someone could take it personally, which was not my intent. Sorry TR and anyone else who may have taken it that way.

Sooo . . . the above isn't true? Drilling in ANWR, off shore and building refineries would not have us in a better position than we're in now?

Do you believe that big oil would lower their prices? It's game played by oil and govt. We're only their income stream.

Now I'm gonna poke a little fun at you. Shouldn't a "good republican" consider the subsidizing of oil compnaies simply wrong?

I think the prices wouldn't have gotten where they are. As long as they make their profits' they'll be happy. If they can make them and charge less, they would. Isn't oil revenue/profit capped/controlled by the gov't anyway?

As for the subsidies, on the surface I am against it, but I am not one who understands the intricacies of the economy. Ideally, I say screw 'em, make yourself successful or fail. But, there's the overall effect these large companies have on the market as a whole which poeple concern themselves about.

Plus, there's the strategic resource angle that they should be protected due to their being vital to the national security. I like free markets, but once privately/publically owned companies become entwined with the protection or provide a vital service to the nation, there is a responsibility to look out for their existance. I guess. It would be better to have an open competition and have more options available, but, then there is the security factor to be concerned about. Plus, how many people actually get competing estimates (aside from all MY customers, but that's another story)? The chance of govenrment doing that is even less.

I do think these things are complicated, not Gordian Knot complicated, but close. Maybe we do need a sword to cut through everything and set a new standard but that will take a LOT more public outcry for someone to tick off that many people. And, frankly, I think people make enough to keep them comfortable and have enough to be distracted that they don't pay as much attention as they should.

Sorry for the ramble . . . but as I started, things just flowed point to point, a little free association, and since I'm on lunch, I don't have the time the edit it cleanly.

We agree!! And well stated too

[green1]

Price of Oil dropped today. When can we expect to see a corresponding drop in gas prices? I won't hold my breath, but it would be refreshing.

[ConchRepublican]

Investor's Business Daily?

They've been defending Big Oil profits and denying the reality of climate change for almost two decades (someone should tell them that their boy in the Oval Office has finally acknowledged the reality of climate change due to human inputs).

It doesn't surprise me that they have now hallucinated a Democrat controlled plot behind tight oil supplies and soaring fuel costs.

I think the only people surprised by what's happening with the price of crude and the cost of a gallon of gasoline are the people who faithfully read IBD to find out what's going on in the world.

PS Upon reviewing what I wrote I realized someone could take it personally, which was not my intent. Sorry TR and anyone else who may have taken it that way.

Sooo . . . the above isn't true? Drilling in ANWR, off shore and building refineries would not have us in a better position than we're in now?

Do you believe that big oil would lower their prices? It's game played by oil and govt. We're only their income stream.

Now I'm gonna poke a little fun at you. Shouldn't a "good republican" consider the subsidizing of oil compnaies simply wrong?

I think the prices wouldn't have gotten where they are. As long as they make their profits' they'll be happy. If they can make them and charge less, they would. Isn't oil revenue/profit capped/controlled by the gov't anyway?

As for the subsidies, on the surface I am against it, but I am not one who understands the intricacies of the economy. Ideally, I say screw 'em, make yourself successful or fail. But, there's the overall effect these large companies have on the market as a whole which poeple concern themselves about.

Plus, there's the strategic resource angle that they should be protected due to their being vital to the national security. I like free markets, but once privately/publically owned companies become entwined with the protection or provide a vital service to the nation, there is a responsibility to look out for their existance. I guess. It would be better to have an open competition and have more options available, but, then there is the security factor to be concerned about. Plus, how many people actually get competing estimates (aside from all MY customers, but that's another story)? The chance of govenrment doing that is even less.

I do think these things are complicated, not Gordian Knot complicated, but close. Maybe we do need a sword to cut through everything and set a new standard but that will take a LOT more public outcry for someone to tick off that many people. And, frankly, I think people make enough to keep them comfortable and have enough to be distracted that they don't pay as much attention as they should.

Sorry for the ramble . . . but as I started, things just flowed point to point, a little free association, and since I'm on lunch, I don't have the time the edit it cleanly.

We agree!! And well stated too

Someone agrees with me??? Can you let my wife know??????

[Tequila Revenge]

Investor's Business Daily?

They've been defending Big Oil profits and denying the reality of climate change for almost two decades (someone should tell them that their boy in the Oval Office has finally acknowledged the reality of climate change due to human inputs).

It doesn't surprise me that they have now hallucinated a Democrat controlled plot behind tight oil supplies and soaring fuel costs.

I think the only people surprised by what's happening with the price of crude and the cost of a gallon of gasoline are the people who faithfully read IBD to find out what's going on in the world.

PS Upon reviewing what I wrote I realized someone could take it personally, which was not my intent. Sorry TR and anyone else who may have taken it that way.

Sooo . . . the above isn't true? Drilling in ANWR, off shore and building refineries would not have us in a better position than we're in now?

Do you believe that big oil would lower their prices? It's game played by oil and govt. We're only their income stream.

Now I'm gonna poke a little fun at you. Shouldn't a "good republican" consider the subsidizing of oil compnaies simply wrong?

I think the prices wouldn't have gotten where they are. As long as they make their profits' they'll be happy. If they can make them and charge less, they would. Isn't oil revenue/profit capped/controlled by the gov't anyway?

As for the subsidies, on the surface I am against it, but I am not one who understands the intricacies of the economy. Ideally, I say screw 'em, make yourself successful or fail. But, there's the overall effect these large companies have on the market as a whole which poeple concern themselves about.

Plus, there's the strategic resource angle that they should be protected due to their being vital to the national security. I like free markets, but once privately/publically owned companies become entwined with the protection or provide a vital service to the nation, there is a responsibility to look out for their existance. I guess. It would be better to have an open competition and have more options available, but, then there is the security factor to be concerned about. Plus, how many people actually get competing estimates (aside from all MY customers, but that's another story)? The chance of govenrment doing that is even less.

I do think these things are complicated, not Gordian Knot complicated, but close. Maybe we do need a sword to cut through everything and set a new standard but that will take a LOT more public outcry for someone to tick off that many people. And, frankly, I think people make enough to keep them comfortable and have enough to be distracted that they don't pay as much attention as they should.

Sorry for the ramble . . . but as I started, things just flowed point to point, a little free association, and since I'm on lunch, I don't have the time the edit it cleanly.

We agree!! And well stated too

Someone agrees with me??? Can you let my wife know??????

Except for the drilling an Alaska part

[Beach Bob]

A little something I found- make's you think:

$100 per barrel: the line was finally crossed on January 2nd 2008. What does this imply for profits of oil producing nations? In order to run some numbers we have to consider a key measure called the break-even price which is the amount of money it takes to extract 1 barrel of oil.
The break-even price is the first thing oil companies establish in order to determine if drilling a new well makes financial sense. From the break even price, profitability can easily be determined with the following formula:

Profitability =
(Price of Oil - Break Even Price) / Break Even Price

For example with oil at $100 and a break even price of $50, profitability is 100%. But with oil at $60 and the same break even price, profitability drops to 20%
By dialing their target profitability first, oil companies then determine if a new drilling project is feasible. Needless to say, with oil retailing now at $100, more wells will be drilled in deeper, harder to reach places than were previously profitable.

The following table provided by the Bank of Kuwait gathers current reported break-even prices of major oil producing nations:

Oil Break-Even Prices
Nation US$/Barrel
Bahrain 40
Kuwait 17
Saudi Arabia 30
U.A.E. 25
Oman 40
Qatar 30
Canada's oil sands 33


Based on the formula, profitability of these countries' oil operations are in order:

Profitability at $100/barrel oil
Nation Break-Even Price Profitability
Kuwait 17 488% - (By the way didn't we save them from becoming Saddam's beach resort)
U.A.E. 25 300%
Saudi Arabia 30 233%
Qatar 30 233%
Canada's oil sands 33 203%
Bahrain 40 150%
Oman 40 150%

This level of profitability explains the recent $7.5 billion placement in troubled Citibank from the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority, the $1.8 billion investment in UBS by a strategic Middle East investor and the 20 percent acquisition of the London Stock Exchange by the tiny nation of Qatar.
High oil prices have allowed Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries to boost their foreign assets to more than one trillion dollars during the 2002-2006 period. With a looming recession (read "western assets on sale") and high oil prices we can expect this trend to increase.

[FunkHouse9]

The gas station right outside my office has regular for $3.93 right now. On April 1st it was $3.21. That's about a 1.25¢ increase per day.

[Triathlete-Parakeet2]

Hell, let gas get to $6 a gallon. Then we'll all start riding bikes more and be healthier, too.

[SMLCHNG]

Hell, let gas get to $6 a gallon. Then we'll all start riding bikes more and be healthier, too.

Not the answer for me, I'm afraid.. can't ride 20 miles to work (one way), don't own a bike, and can't really carry bags and bags of groceries on a bike.

[flyboy55]

Investor's Business Daily?

They've been defending Big Oil profits and denying the reality of climate change for almost two decades (someone should tell them that their boy in the Oval Office has finally acknowledged the reality of climate change due to human inputs).

It doesn't surprise me that they have now hallucinated a Democrat controlled plot behind tight oil supplies and soaring fuel costs.

I think the only people surprised by what's happening with the price of crude and the cost of a gallon of gasoline are the people who faithfully read IBD to find out what's going on in the world.

PS Upon reviewing what I wrote I realized someone could take it personally, which was not my intent. Sorry TR and anyone else who may have taken it that way.

Sooo . . . the above isn't true? . . .

In so far as the above suggests that the Democrats and environmentalists are responsible for high oil prices . . . Yes . . . the above isn't true.

[FunkHouse9]

I have a hard time seeing how people think drilling in ANWR is the best answer. Yes, it would lower gas prices here but is it worth it when we have other options?

From my uneducated perspective, it seems like switching to more efficient vehicles, increasing efficiency standards like many other parts of the world so we are less dependent on both foreign and domestic oil, decreasing greenhouse emmissions and not destroying a wildlife refuge is a better option than the alternatives.