Reply With Quote
Who's the "haves" and who's the "have nots"?
You two....Separate!
Don't make me come back there.
Who's the "haves" and who's the "have nots"?
Honest question, Hook.
Is it because you are rich (because you own a Tahoe) and Duff is poor (he can't pay $700 back to Jim)?
I was just referring to Duff's at ude. I am certainly not rich. Probably have less than most on this forum. I happen to like the performance of my Tahoe and Duff doesn't have any right to lump me in the rich class just because I drive one. Thats my point! okay?
Please tell me when I ever lumped you into the rich class. I never said anything about you being rich. I said your hypocrisy is what makes you stupid.
Um . . . ? . . . okay . . . so you are rich then.
Apparently not as ing stupid as you, since I wasn't responding to your post when I mentioned that vehicle.
And your 21 mpg is exceptional for a vehicle rated at 15/19. Apparently you are very gentle with the gas pedal. That does save gas. It would save gas on any vehicle.
10 gallons less in a vehicle getting 21 miles per gallon like yours adds up to 210 fewer miles per week. That's 30 fewer miles per day. If you have a short commute as you say, where exactly are you going to squeeze out 30 miles a day from your routine? Where the are you going that you drive 30 miles every day around the city not including your commute?When I said everyone should use 10 gallons less per week, I was including myself. That seems to be something you and Duff overlook so you can spread your hate in this forum. I was not preaching to anyone! I was just thinking out loud like everyone else on this forum. Sometimes you just can't talk to stupid people with an agenda of their own. Thanks for your input!
If you make an unrealistic argument, don't be surpised when it gets ripped apart.
The flipside is that by changing their driving habits slightly, people who drive higher consumption vehicles have a greater net change on demand than those who more drastically change their driving habits in lower consumption vehicles, assuming similar mileage & neglecting traffic factors.
My ex roommate has a huge F250 and is now complaining about gas prices. He owns no farms or does any constant hauling. He likes it because it is big. He uses it just as as his get around vehicle, just like a "regular" car. He is having to curb back his driving greatly. I always wondered why he had a big truck for just "running around".
He is now in the market for a small compact car.
BTW...if you know of anyone selling a small car for under $1000 let me know.
Mileage is not a factor...he is very mechanically inclined (he is an ex-mechanic). He wants a car that runs and is in decent shape.
for what its worth I own a Hyundai Accent. I have curb my driving somewhat, but not as much a some. It cost me around $23.00 to fill up my tank. I get around 33 MPG.
Well.......let's rip you apart! I'm retired and don't have a commute. Understand now? I don't have a routine.
Translation:
"I'm old...I don't have to do ."
Tears you apart doesn't it?
Man...you have some serious issues. You think everybody who is bashing your ignorance is jealous of your old ass. You aren't that special old man.Tears you apart doesn't it?
"Everybody who is bashing your ignorance" ? Let's see now....that would be you and Extra Stout. Pardon me if I'm not worried. Like I told you before one time.....keep acting like this and you are never gonna grow old. That, I can guarantee! I don't have Any issues....serious or otherwise. If we were face to face....I'd whip your dumb ass!
As opposed to .... I'm young and I dont have to do ?
Wait... so you're just some retired grandpa living in town who takes his Tahoe out for a spin?"Everybody who is bashing your ignorance" ? Let's see now....that would be you and Extra Stout. Pardon me if I'm not worried. Like I told you before one time.....keep acting like this and you are never gonna grow old. That, I can guarantee! I don't have Any issues....serious or otherwise. If we were face to face....I'd whip your dumb ass!
Sheyitt. Never mind. Carry on. Sorry.
Oil companies can say what they want about helping out consumers, sorry Scott, but the re-investment dollars don't lie...
CNNGoldman: Crude To Stay High Long Term
August 18, 2005
Goldman Sachs raised its U.S. oil price forecast for the rest of this year Thursday by $13.50 to $67 a barrel as demand outstrips supply and the industry sits on billions of dollars it could invest in finding new oil.
The investment bank, which dominates the commodities markets, also increased its average U.S. price forecast for 2006 by $13 to $68 a barrel and said it expected longer-term oil contracts to hold firm at around $60 a barrel, reflecting the increased financial risk of getting extra oil out of the ground.
Even with prices at close to record levels, it said oil companies were sitting on huge cash piles rather than pouring money into new projects because of uncertainty over their profitability.
"Even at current high price levels, re-investment rates appear to be falling not rising, pushing industry cash reserves near $500 billion," Goldman Sachs Commodity Research said in a note.
Newflash: Private corporations care about what is good for anything but their shareholders.
I wholeheartedly agree.
That is their job.
When most companies in any other industry make record profits they reinvest at least some of that extra money, not return it to their stock-holders, but as I showed in the previous post Oil companies aren't doing this, see they have found it much more lucrative to invest that money in Republican and Democratic campaign coffers
InfozineWashington, D.C. - Ins ute for Public Accuracy - infoZine - Wenonah Hauter is director of Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program; Hauter said yesterday: "Since Bush became president, the largest five oil companies operating in the U.S. -- ExxonMobil, ChevronTexaco, ConocoPhillips, BP and S -- have enjoyed profits of $254 billion, with ExxonMobil leading the way with profits of $89 billion.
"Clearly, there is a direct correlation between record prices paid by consumers and record profits enjoyed by oil companies. For example, the profit margin for U.S. oil refiners has shot up 79 percent from 1999 (the year Exxon and Mobil merged) to 2004. But rather than hold these price-gougers responsible, the energy bill signed by Bush this month gives $6 billion in tax breaks and subsidies to oil companies."
James Paul, executive director of the Global Policy Forum, has written several reports about oil including "Oil in Iraq: The Heart of the Crisis." He said yesterday: "Exxon, as the world's biggest and most profitable company, wields enormous power in Washington and in most other capitals as well. The company has plenty of lobby funds, as it enjoys more revenue than 185 national governments. Exxon has blocked a U.S. national policy on climate change and fought against environmental laws. Oil company interests are not only crucial in the war in Iraq, but also other conflicts, such as Iran. As world oil supplies begin to diminish, big oil dreams of ever-higher profits, and more oil wars to seize new and lucrative concessions."
and so the war circle goes round and round...
Dan, you're not breaking news here. This is the way Washington works, and while I don't like it both sides of the aisle do it. The energy bill is a up, and I said so from the moment I read it and it's tax breaks.
But, I'm not sad one bit that Oil Company CEOs are making money. Let them do so, because the increased cost the the average American is the only thing that is going to move us away from oil. Do you expect the oil companies to shoot their own foot?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
