Skip to main content

With gasoline prices rising, political rhetoric is rising even faster. Liberals in Congress and in the media have launched a war of words, whose net result may well be a demand for some form of price control.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/05/what_...an_by_obscene_p.html

************************ Every society gets the kind of criminal it deserves. What is equally true is that every community gets the kind of law enforcement it insists on. Robert Kennedy

Μολὼν λαβέ

1*

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

quote:
Originally posted by Sassy Kims:
With gasoline prices rising, political rhetoric is rising even faster. Liberals in Congress and in the media have launched a war of words, whose net result may well be a demand for some form of price control.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/05/what_...an_by_obscene_p.html


Thanks Kim, that's a good article, I've been reading Sowell for years especially on capmag.com, and I'm all for no price controls imposed by politicians. I'm also against government handouts for big oil too.
Sowell is certainly right about one thing, "political rhetoric is rising." But as usual, it's coming from the apologists for the oil corporations who leave out facts and mislead the public. And I would say Armrey sure knows about demagoguery, he and his fellow demigods Delay and Gingrich, as well as with help from others in the corporate media like Sowell, have made an art of it as the right wing smears their political opposition and pushed their right wing politics and corporate agenda down the throats of the American people.

Price gouging does have a meaning and it's when forces help manipulate profit to rise sharply due to unexpected or out of the ordinary events and hardships. Like during a drought water companies raising the price of water, or doctors and pharmacies rasing their prices of during flu or cold seasons, etc. There are certain commodities that are necessities.

The price of oil is rising due to the wars in the region and Bush's threats against Iran. China's needs are expanding but are well below our consumption and not a serious threat at this time. I don't want to misquote the exact number of barrels China consumes but it's no where near our consumption) They are already securing other sources in the world like Africa and Venezuela. They also buy from Iran and Russia I believe too.

We can debate the effectiveness of price controls but New York and San Francisco have price controls because rents were out of control and it all had to due with profits. When we are dealing with a product like oil, which there is no alternative market it is like a monopoly and we do need some type regulations. The governments are "instituted" by the governed to secure all our rights, not just the profits of a few.

The building of new oil refineries are not due to acts of congress or environmentalists. Just where they can be built. You can't build one where it endangers people or the environment. It's the oil corporations decision not to build any new refineries which shortened up ready supplies and pushed the prices to fluctuate on the spot market.

Shows you how decadent our society really is, not only is middle America sacrificing their children and their dollars to a war for oil profits in the Mideast the corporations are then turning around and soaking them at the pumps, putting even more strain on our lives.

When is congress going to be concerned about protecting the wages and lives of the average America as they push their protecting Corporate profits and Globalization and anti union agenda?

Bottom line is Oil Corporations are having record profits.
quote:
Bottom line is Oil Corporations are having record profits.


Because the US and the rest of the mechanized world, including China, are using record amounts of oil. When you buy more, the oil companies make more.

If you were selling watermelons at a profit of $1.00 each, and you sold 20 today...that's $20.00 profit. If you sell 400 tomorrow, that's $400.00 profit...same thing with oil.

Sell 1 million gallons at .05 profit per gallon, and you've made $50,000.00 overall. Sell 100 million gallons, and you've made $5,000,000.00.
quote:
Originally posted by miamizsun:
quote:
Originally posted by Sassy Kims:
With gasoline prices rising, political rhetoric is rising even faster. Liberals in Congress and in the media have launched a war of words, whose net result may well be a demand for some form of price control.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/05/what_...an_by_obscene_p.html


Thanks Kim, that's a good article, I've been reading Sowell for years especially on capmag.com, and I'm all for no price controls imposed by politicians. I'm also against government handouts for big oil too.


I'm with you on this Miami, No price controls, no tax handouts for big oil, and don't forget, make the oil companies pay the royalities they owe to this country for the oil they pump out of public lands and waters.
I must agree with Sassy Kim on this one. The people of this country must bear some of the responsibility for gas prices. Gasoline is just like anything else in a free market, its price is based mainly on supply and demand. While governments, politicians, OPEC, and oil companies among other things are responsible for supply, the responsibility for the demand for gasoline rests mainly with the public. While I'm certainly not defending high prices, I'm not in the " it must be someone else's fault because it certainly isn't mine" camp.
A question for anyone: If big oil is gouging us at the pumps and is mainly responsible for high gas prices, how much should a gallon of gasoline cost ?
Excerpt:

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/23143


PALAST: IRAQ INVASION WAS TO ENSURE NATION DID NOT EXCEED OPEC QUOTA

Submitted by davidswanson on Thu, 2007-05-31 15:33. Media By Sherwood Ross

"Whether by design or happenstance, this decline in [Iraqi] output has resulted in tripling the profits of the five US oil majors to $89 billion for a single year, 2005, compared to pre-invasion 2002," Palast writes.

"When OPEC raises the price of crude, Big Oil makes out big time," says Palast, who has contributed to BBC Television and the Guardian newspapers.

He points out the oil majors are not simply passive resellers of the Organization for Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) production but have reserves of their own which rise in tandem with oil prices.

"The rise in the price of oil after the first three years of the [Iraq] war boosted the value of the reserves of ExxonMobil Oil alone by just over $666 billion," Palast wrote. What's more, Chevron Oil, "where [Secretary of State] Condoleezza Rice had served as a director, gained a quarter trillion dollars in value."
quote:
Originally posted by Pogo142:
Excerpt:

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/23143


PALAST: IRAQ INVASION WAS TO ENSURE NATION DID NOT EXCEED OPEC QUOTA

Submitted by davidswanson on Thu, 2007-05-31 15:33. Media By Sherwood Ross

"Whether by design or happenstance, this decline in [Iraqi] output has resulted in tripling the profits of the five US oil majors to $89 billion for a single year, 2005, compared to pre-invasion 2002," Palast writes.

"When OPEC raises the price of crude, Big Oil makes out big time," says Palast, who has contributed to BBC Television and the Guardian newspapers.

He points out the oil majors are not simply passive resellers of the Organization for Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) production but have reserves of their own which rise in tandem with oil prices.

"The rise in the price of oil after the first three years of the [Iraq] war boosted the value of the reserves of ExxonMobil Oil alone by just over $666 billion," Palast wrote. What's more, Chevron Oil, "where [Secretary of State] Condoleezza Rice had served as a director, gained a quarter trillion dollars in value."


America still produces roughly 2 million barrels of oil a day, so if oil goes from $20 to $60, I see a huge increase in their income, and that would apply to their reserves as well. At this point I'm not sure what their expenses are, exploration, etc., but I do know that most oil companies are flush with cash and have turned to purchasing alternative energy companies and their technology. Expect them to try and transition with us to another source(s).
I have a question. I've tried to find the answer but cannot come up with it. With rising gas prices, why is demand also rising?

This makes no sense to me. If it is more costly, the normal response is to cut back. Forget normal, it would be necessary for both individuals and businesses.

So, I thought I'd try to find where the increase lies, but can't find the exact data. Perhaps some of you have already researched this and know?

It's just a nagging suspicion. I hope I'm wrong but do they include fuel used for war purposes when figuring US demand? Many of you seem to be very knowledgeable in this area; so I'm hoping you may know.
Joy:

I have a question. I've tried to find the answer but cannot come up with it. With rising gas prices, why is demand also rising?

This makes no sense to me. If it is more costly, the normal response is to cut back. Forget normal, it would be necessary for both individuals and businesses.

So, I thought I'd try to find where the increase lies, but can't find the exact data. Perhaps some of you have already researched this and know?

It's just a nagging suspicion. I hope I'm wrong but do they include fuel used for war purposes when figuring US demand? Many of you seem to be very knowledgeable in this area; so I'm hoping you may know.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

As far as I understand consumers are only cutting back slightly on gasoline use but cutting back in other area's which are affecting businesses, especially smaller businesses. They still need to use gas to get to work and are still using it to travel. Many businesses also depend on gas and travel, like buses, trucks and repair men and plumbers, etc.

The population is growing and there are more cars on the road but worldwide economies like China and Indian are expanding and demanding more energy.

Interesting observation about US military use of oil for wars. Might be, I don't know.
miamizsun

[]
[]
The answer is that demand is outstripping supply. Other developing countries are coming into their own economically, so demand is high, but supply is very limited.

Remember we're 6% of the population and we consume 25% of the oil. The only way to maintain this disparity is through military force.

*See Iraq*

________________________________________________________________________________________________


"The only way to maintain this disparity is through military force."

???

So you are condoning Bush's endless global war for oil? You show the photo of Einstein but he was a man of peace.

Funny too because the oil corporations are profiting and soaking us at the pump. This war is not for your benefit but theirs and the profits of other corporations and the Military Industrial Complex. We are just pawns and cannon fodder. Serfs to the ruling royalty. That's why they are slowly taking away our rights and dismantling the constitution.

We need energy, not oil or war.
quote:
Originally posted by Pogo142:
miamizsun

[]
[]
The answer is that demand is outstripping supply. Other developing countries are coming into their own economically, so demand is high, but supply is very limited.

Remember we're 6% of the population and we consume 25% of the oil. The only way to maintain this disparity is through military force.

*See Iraq*

________________________________________________________________________________________________


"The only way to maintain this disparity is through military force."

???

So you are condoning Bush's endless global war for oil? You show the photo of Einstein but he was a man of peace.

Funny too because the oil corporations are profiting and soaking us at the pump. This war is not for your benefit but theirs and the profits of other corporations and the Military Industrial Complex. We are just pawns and cannon fodder. Serfs to the ruling royalty. That's why they are slowly taking away our rights and dismantling the constitution.

We need energy, not oil or war.
Right again pogo, I don't have to bother posting most of the time because of you and a few others.

But, I want to quote the article Sassy presented, the last lines:
quote:
But facts are not nearly as exciting as rhetoric -- and the role of most political rhetoric is to be a substitute for facts.
And this on Real Clear Politics, a site that I find heavy on rhetoric, and light on facts most of the time.
Thank you for your answers. Population growth would explain the increase (I think?), but I still don't know the answer to this question...

quote:
Originally posted by _Joy_:
It's just a nagging suspicion. I hope I'm wrong but do they include fuel used for war purposes when figuring US demand? Many of you seem to be very knowledgeable in this area; so I'm hoping you may know.


It really bothers me because it would greatly alter the argument that US overindulgence or total dependence on oil is the problem. I'll keep digging.
I am with you joy,,its confusing. I understand supply/demand process of things . But as pointed out here,other countries are coming into their age of useage. So why is it many of those countries pay much less for gas than we do? It is appearing the more advanced a country is,the higher the price and not necessarily the amount of oil used. Several European countries pay ungodly prices,while some pay much less. North America pays,South America has it at such an abundance it has been "offered" to the less fortunate here in America. It gets confusing
What I'm finding is a little disturbing. Apparently, they don't want us to know exact figures on military oil consumption. I found some very informative sites - somebody else with similar questions I had & did the exhaustive (know this because I felt like pulling my hair out navigating my way through military sites - ugh!) research.

http://www.energybulletin.net/29925.html

From site:

The truth is that the U.S. military is the single largest consumer of energy in the world...The reality is that even U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) does not know precisely where and how much energy it consumes...Whatever the true figure, oil consumed by the U.S. military does not show up in world oil demand...Oil accounts for more than three-fourths of DoD’s total site delivered energy consumption.

How much oil does the U.S. military consume abroad? There exist no official estimates. Let me know if you see or hear one. According to my most pessimist estimates it is about 150 thousand barrels per day. Note that in this estimate I take DESC sales figures as granted. However, keep in mind that official figures for U.S. military oil consumption do not take into account of unpaid oil.




http://www.energybulletin.net/2390.html

Explanation for why the US Military oil consumption overseas disappears in world oil demand:

According to the US Defense Department's annual 'Base Structure Report' for fiscal year 2003, the Pentagon currently owns or rents 702 overseas bases in about 130 countries. Since it is known that some of those countries (e.g. Japan) report oil sold to the US bases as export to the US, the question arise as to whether the US reports the figures as import and consequently as US oil consumption. A closer investigation of this issue resulted in the conclusion that most (if not all) US military consumption overseas simply disappears in international oil statistics. Fuels consumed by the aircraft, the destroyers and the bases are most probably not included in the supply surveys [1] of the EIA.

The end-use surveys collect data directly from US energy consumers (and their energy suppliers). Statistics from the end-use surveys appear in comprehensive reports that cover the residential, commercial buildings, manufacturing, and residential transportation sectors and are summarized in the AER. In general, consumption data for US military units and facilities in both the US and foreign countries are not included in the end-use consumption survey statistics.[2]

However, energy use in the following kinds of military facilities in the US is included but are not separately enumerated: (1) small facilities that are open to the public and are not considered restricted, (2) non-restricted facilities that are considered academic in nature, such as the military academies, and (3) facilities where the primary function is comparable to a civilian activity, such as hospitals, administrative centers, personnel centers, and residential housing on military bases.

They are not reported as imports even in US Bureau of the Census statistics. The basic reason why they are not reported as imports is because they do not cross a US border for consumption in the US, its territories or possessions. However, bunker and deployment fuels purchased in the US are known but if they are purchased in foreign countries they are not shown. The only place where they show up is Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP). However it is important to note that none of those data sets is incorporated into or otherwise reconciled with each other. That is, the supply survey data are not incorporated into the consumption survey data and, with minor exceptions, the consumption survey data are not incorporated into the supply survey data. The FEMP data also stand alone and are not incorporated into either the supply survey or consumption survey data. To make the story short, the US military consumption overseas is incorporated neither in EIAs nor IEAs world oil demand.

1. Not having exact data on military spending is irresponsible not to mention ludicrous.

2. A solution to decrease oil demand and/or depletion is to bring our soldier in Iraq home.

JMHO
Last edited by _Joy_
You are very welcome. I understand now why I was having such a hard time finding exact figures. It finally hit me that although I naively believed it unlikely, it was possible they didn't exist & if so, surely someone else had discovered this. With that in mind, I found what I was looking for. It sincerely ticks me off, to be frank.
quote:
Originally posted by Pogo142:
miamizsun

[]
[]
The answer is that demand is outstripping supply. Other developing countries are coming into their own economically, so demand is high, but supply is very limited.

Remember we're 6% of the population and we consume 25% of the oil. The only way to maintain this disparity is through military force.

*See Iraq*

________________________________________________________________________________________________


"The only way to maintain this disparity is through military force."

???

So you are condoning Bush's endless global war for oil? You show the photo of Einstein but he was a man of peace.

Funny too because the oil corporations are profiting and soaking us at the pump. This war is not for your benefit but theirs and the profits of other corporations and the Military Industrial Complex. We are just pawns and cannon fodder. Serfs to the ruling royalty. That's why they are slowly taking away our rights and dismantling the constitution.

We need energy, not oil or war.


===============================================

No, I don't condone any warfare or welfare by the government. Self defense, yes, and private charity, like you and I funding and working in local charities.

All I'm stating, is that at this point our energy infrastructure is based on oil. And without it we're done. How did we get there? Simply corporatistic, fascist Democrats and Republican politicians in bed with the ruling money class.

Furthermore, I've posted links many, many times to the top economic and energy experts on the planet and their assessment of probable energy transitions, like oil and other fossil fuels to alternate sources. We're looking at 25 years or so, the window for an easy transition has long past. Peak oil is here, the world most probably peaked in 2005. Declining supply with growing demand makes for higher prices and more volatility. Should we work on greener alternate sources? Absolutely.

We've been sold out by our leaders, especially over the last 50 - 75 years.

Our current situation is at a climax, it has come down to war for resources. I d*mn sure don't like it, but our options at this point are extremely limited. Unfortunately, and realistically it is either an "us or them" scenario for the remaining oil supply.

If China gets control of that oil, they will dominate the world, literally. Iraq has over 60% of the earth's remaining high quality oil, and that is exactly why we are there.

If you or anyone else is serious about this, let me know and I'll post some sobering links. I personally, have reduced my home energy (and water) consumption drastically, I have the latest, and probably expensive technology available. I have laid out the money up front and I'm already seeing the benefit. At current energy prices, I should recoup my investment in 24 to 48 months. I'm also looking at a hybrid vehicle as my current auto has 110,000 miles on it.

I'm not trying to be argumentative here, just posting the data as I see it. I can't or won't take credit for any of it, that has been exposed and verified by credible people far more qualified and intelligent than I.

Good luck and regards, miamizsun
miamizsun


No, I don't condone any warfare or welfare by the government. Self defense, yes, and private charity, like you and I funding and working in local charities.

All I'm stating, is that at this point our energy infrastructure is based on oil. And without it we're done. How did we get there? Simply corporatistic, fascist Democrats and Republican politicians in bed with the ruling money class.

Furthermore, I've posted links many, many times to the top economic and energy experts on the planet and their assessment of probable energy transitions, like oil and other fossil fuels to alternate sources. We're looking at 25 years or so, the window for an easy transition has long past. Peak oil is here, the world most probably peaked in 2005. Declining supply with growing demand makes for higher prices and more volatility. Should we work on greener alternate sources? Absolutely.

We've been sold out by our leaders, especially over the last 50 - 75 years.

Our current situation is at a climax, it has come down to war for resources. I d*mn sure don't like it, but our options at this point are extremely limited. Unfortunately, and realistically it is either an "us or them" scenario for the remaining oil supply.

If China gets control of that oil, they will dominate the world, literally. Iraq has over 60% of the earth's remaining high quality oil, and that is exactly why we are there.

If you or anyone else is serious about this, let me know and I'll post some sobering links. I personally, have reduced my home energy (and water) consumption drastically, I have the latest, and probably expensive technology available. I have laid out the money up front and I'm already seeing the benefit. At current energy prices, I should recoup my investment in 24 to 48 months. I'm also looking at a hybrid vehicle as my current auto has 110,000 miles on it.

I'm not trying to be argumentative here, just posting the data as I see it. I can't or won't take credit for any of it, that has been exposed and verified by credible people far more qualified and intelligent than I.

Good luck and regards, miamizsun

________________________________________________________________________________________________

It won't take 25 years to switch our economy it will take 10 years and will create new jobs and expand the economy. A number of economists have also outlined how it can be done coupled with minor conservation efforts.

They have already come out with an electric car that works fairly well and it's just in it's early stages. It was forced off the market by pressure from the oil corporations. There is enough wind power to supply the West Coast and half across America with energy. That's just the beginning.

It is highly unlikely that China is going to try to seize the Mideast oil fields. That's the typical kind of scare talk that the military industrial complex uses. China has been going around the world buying supplies with economic aid and assistance to oil producing countries in the 3rd world. It's the US that is seizing the oil fields by force.

Oil pollutes and is a cause of global warming and is also a finite substance. It's price will rise higher and higher as the supplies dwindle.

To fight a war over a substance that will run out is not good economic sense.

Also, so you agree that the war is about oil and it was never about Saddam or WMD. The protesters who chanted right from the beginning "No Blood for Oil" were correct and the government and corporate media who ridiculed them and denied up and down that it's not about oil lied.

I's about oil and profits and power. The war is not for the benefit of the American people.
I say let the prices go up. Necessity is the mother of invention. It's a necessity to have an affordable way to go to work, school, and shopping. That necessity is quickly slipping away along with moral consequences of having to be tied to the middle east. Let the prices go up, it simply inspires smarter people than myself to find alternate ways to meet the necessity. Soon, oil will go the way of the telegraph.
miamizsun

pogo, i'm interested and i trust what you're saying to the extent that i'd buy into the 10 year plan, literally, for myself and possibly clients. so my curiosity is peaked and i'd be very appreciative if you could share the plan with me. i'm always open to new info.

regards, miamizsun

________________________________________________________________________________________________

NashBama:

I say let the prices go up. Necessity is the mother of invention. It's a necessity to have an affordable way to go to work, school, and shopping. That necessity is quickly slipping away along with moral consequences of having to be tied to the middle east. Let the prices go up, it simply inspires smarter people than myself to find alternate ways to meet the necessity. Soon, oil will go the way of the telegraph.

________________________________________________________________________________________________

As far as sites where you can find alternative plans I will have to look to see if I have any in files but I am pressed for time but I will try to look. But you can check some of the environmental groups and some progressive sites. I believe World Watch may have information on it.

George Monbiot has just come out with a book but the name escapes me at the moment. You can do a search of his articles. He was recently on the program Democracy Now, (www.democracynow.org) You can do a search of their archives.

In a quick search of my files I found this article by Monbot in Z. You may have to be a subscriber to access it though but some articles are free.

http://www.zmag.org/sustainers/content/2006-11/23monbiot.cfm

ZNet
Here's the Plan For fast and effective action on climate change
By George Monbiot
November 23, 2006

There are others and I believe I read something by Robert Kennedy Jr also.

As far as things go Nash we are way past that stage. There has been a controlled effort by special interests to squash any alternative energy. Goes back to the destabilization of Carter when he began programs to make the switch. We are now fighting wars over it while at home they are building a surveillance police state to squash any dissent to their wars and rule.
I prefer to stay away from radical websites, their information is rarely accurate and always distorted. Personally, I don't believe in the scam of global warming. If the temperature is changing, it's natural just like it always has been. Groups are selling "carbon credits" for high polluters so that they can keep polluting but not feel guilty. If that's not a sure sign that this is a scam, besides the lack of conclusive evidence, I don't know what is.
NashBama

I prefer to stay away from radical websites, their information is rarely accurate and always distorted. Personally, I don't believe in the scam of global warming. If the temperature is changing, it's natural just like it always has been. Groups are selling "carbon credits" for high polluters so that they can keep polluting but not feel guilty. If that's not a sure sign that this is a scam, besides the lack of conclusive evidence, I don't know what is.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


I am not sure what you mean when you say "radical websites." But I have found the independent progressive media to highly accurate and relevant. I think the Iraq War and Bush's lies are the most recent examples. They also lied about NAFTA, Corporate Globalization, the Bush tax cuts and the economy.

The corporate media is the one that is fantasy and distraction. Leading people around in circles. Your views of Global Warming is the perfect example.
quote:
I am not sure what you mean when you say "radical websites." But I have found the independent progressive media to highly accurate and relevant. I think the Iraq War and Bush's lies are the most recent examples. They also lied about NAFTA, Corporate Globalization, the Bush tax cuts and the economy.

The corporate media is the one that is fantasy and distraction. Leading people around in circles. Your views of Global Warming is the perfect example.


I mean wacko leftist propaganda sites that promote insane ideas like socialism. Any source that only reports one side can't be trusted. The "corporate" media as you call it reports global warming as fact all the time. Personally, I don't think there is enough evidence to support it. There is however evidence to support it's all a scam.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8f8v5du5_ag
The majority of scientists have agreed with the evidence, global warming is real.

I will watch it when I have time. Talk about "wacky websites."

But you can see some good stuff on You Tube and I have but investigative reporters have found that much of the global warming critics research are funded by Exxon Mobile and oil corporations who emphasize that they just cause doubt.

Talk about junk science.

I have watched them discredit Global Warming for over twenty years, meanwhile weather changes, droughts and polar ice caps melting continue.

I will stick with credible scientists.
You don't know if it's junk science until you watch it. It was produced independently in England. Watch it with an open mind, I can tell you've already closed yours.

Here's some junk science for you. Global warming folks say CO2 released into the atmosphere is causing global warming. CO2 is heavier than air, it does not rise into the atmosphere, it stays low to the ground. Plants absorb CO2 and release oxygen. That's basic elementary school science that global warming scam artists are trying to overlook. Open your mind a little, think independantly instead of relying on some wacked out web site, and you'll see for yourself.
Richard Heinberg, peak oil educator speaks.

And Matthew Simmons, the world's foremost energy investment banker.

pogo, with all due respect, I believe - no I know that you have drastically under estimated our power consumption and the critical role it plays in our lifestyle, and that you have done the same on the flip side of over estimating alternative (or green) energy production. Out of common courtesy and respect, I thought I would give you a chance to make your case. I have done an extraordinary amount of research on this subject, and I fully recognize the ramifications. I hope that we discover or come up with some sort of cheap readily available energy, but it isn't likely since we're the largest energy consumers, our transition will be the most difficult.

I encourage everyone to search the web for current info.

Regards, miamizsun
quote:
Originally posted by Pogo142:
Sowell is certainly right about one thing, "political rhetoric is rising." But as usual, it's coming from the apologists for the oil corporations who leave out facts and mislead the public. And I would say Armrey sure knows about demagoguery, he and his fellow demigods Delay and Gingrich, as well as with help from others in the corporate media like Sowell, have made an art of it as the right wing smears their political opposition and pushed their right wing politics and corporate agenda down the throats of the American people.

Price gouging does have a meaning and it's when forces help manipulate profit to rise sharply due to unexpected or out of the ordinary events and hardships. Like during a drought water companies raising the price of water, or doctors and pharmacies rasing their prices of during flu or cold seasons, etc. There are certain commodities that are necessities.

The price of oil is rising due to the wars in the region and Bush's threats against Iran. China's needs are expanding but are well below our consumption and not a serious threat at this time. I don't want to misquote the exact number of barrels China consumes but it's no where near our consumption) They are already securing other sources in the world like Africa and Venezuela. They also buy from Iran and Russia I believe too.

We can debate the effectiveness of price controls but New York and San Francisco have price controls because rents were out of control and it all had to due with profits. When we are dealing with a product like oil, which there is no alternative market it is like a monopoly and we do need some type regulations. The governments are "instituted" by the governed to secure all our rights, not just the profits of a few.

The building of new oil refineries are not due to acts of congress or environmentalists. Just where they can be built. You can't build one where it endangers people or the environment. It's the oil corporations decision not to build any new refineries which shortened up ready supplies and pushed the prices to fluctuate on the spot market.

Shows you how decadent our society really is, not only is middle America sacrificing their children and their dollars to a war for oil profits in the Mideast the corporations are then turning around and soaking them at the pumps, putting even more strain on our lives.

When is congress going to be concerned about protecting the wages and lives of the average America as they push their protecting Corporate profits and Globalization and anti union agenda?

Bottom line is Oil Corporations are having record profits.
Labor Unions. It is time American working people put the Fat Cats on a diet for the good of the country, and the health of the Fat Cats.

Eveyone should take a short course in the history of colonial Spain, boring as all get out until the comparison with the USA is made. We are making the same mistake Spain made in the 16th and 17th Centuries. We are using up our wealth by having others do the hard work. While we sit around enjoying Our Steak and lobster, all the capital in the country is being squandered on cheap goods from outside our borders. It is a formula for collapse, and we have been doing it for about 65 years now.
Sort of, I agree that we have a bad trade imbalance and we are importing too much from China and out sourcing our jobs. I agree that this is a recipe for disaster, but labor unions won't help. A company that has to choose between building a plant in the US and dealing with a union or building one in China without unions would pick the later.

Get rid of illegals undercutting American wages and let the market run it's course. When a company offers fair wages, they'll have workers. America is a consumer nation, so by building plants in the US, a lot of money is saved in shipping. When a company is too cheap, turnover will be high and profit will be lost. Paying fair wages and building in the US means more profit in the long run.

Illegal immigrants and unions are short circuiting this system. Unions demand too much and illegals will work for far less, so the illegals get the jobs and Americans in unions complain about wages being too low.
The US is the largest energy consumer in the world and we consume more then double the closest country. But countries like China and India will reach our out put in the next decade or two. Our transition will be difficult but not impossible but only because the oil powers are so entrenched. It will create new jobs and a new economy. As I say we already have an electric car and there is enough wind power to supply energy to half across America, maybe more, this is only early technology.

What is happening today is as if horse ranchers and railroad barons around the turn of the century were able to prevent the automobile and airplane from coming to the market by political manipulation and control and claiming our economy is growing and they are so slow and ineffective that to develop them further is a waste of time and energy. They can never replace the horse and train.

I have been aware of peak oil since the middle to late 1990's and have been following it since. Though I accept it in reality the speculation is just speculation. They predicated great reserves in the Caspian Sea, one of the reasons for our Afghanistan invasion and occupation, but now they find it is not as much as they thought. On the other hand they have now discovered new wells in Iraq. But it's still inevitable, it will run out one day and the price will continually rise as demand rises. We need to get off it, period.

We argued about the dangers of selling off farm land and losing our manufacturing base since the 80's and 90's but the corporate "Economic Royalists," who were raking in huge profits filled the corporate media with their demagoguery on the "Free Market," backed up by their paid stooges in congress and the corporate media.

Oil also pollutes and is a cause of global warming.

As far as Global Warming goes I have actually been aware and following this since the late 70's and early 1980's. All through the 80's and 90's they denied it was happening but now they admit it is happening but are arguing over why. I also know Exxon and oil corporations and special interests have put out propaganda and paid scientists to discredit it. It's happening and I trust my sources. I also now read reports in the news from the UN by scientists world wide. Finally the corporate media is paying attention. Some in the corporate world see our greed and lies will only lead to pain and misery.

What is destroying America is the loss of our manufacturing sector and our debt. Immigrants are here because of our trade policies that benefit the corporate class and hurt the average person. They scapegoat immigrants. Workers are in the same situation around the world and need to organize and unionize and then elect governments that represents us and support a media that protects us.
If there is ever a world's workers union, I'll let you join. I'm not going to. I'll be a scab and undercut you so that way I'll get your job. There will be plenty of us scabs to keep product prices down, a global union would just inflate them so that companies can recoup the enormous cost. Eventually, the union will collapse and everyone will have to take care of themselves, just the way it should be. You can enjoy your union, I'll enjoy my job.
When we had the unions they protected the worker and we had the best wages and benefits and enjoyed a quality standard of life. Since their demise it's been workers pitted against each other as to who will work for the least as the Corporate "Economic Royalists" rake in the cash. We have the greates wealth gap since the Robber Baron days.

Are you familiar with the old union song, "Oh You Can't Scare Me I'm Sticking To The Union."
Unions also made the price of goods increase and encouraged companies to move out of the country for cheap labor. You can't have it both ways. People have to make a certain amount to live. That amount increases with the skills and education they have to offer. If a company isn't willing to pay, the worker moves to a company that does. It's a system that works when left alone. The problem is with illegal aliens and government interference, the system is being disrupted.
Prices under unions were fine for decades. We also taxed corporations and the wealthy at higher rates. Then corporate CEO's decided they wanted to make more and moved the jobs to sweatshops overseas. Their profits are booming. They are also making a cheaper product. The American people are forced to buy cheap products from overseas because their wages are not covering the cost of living.

Immigrants are coming here because of these trade policies that are displacing them.
Sorry, but that's all crap. I've tried every way I can to explain it but you still aren't seeing it. Illegals don't care about trade policies, they care about making money. They can't make money in a corrupt system that Mexico has and the US isn't preventing them from invading us and cutting wages. I suggest you open your eyes for once and look for yourself. The things you are saying just simply is not reality.
The "crap" is what the corporate media is feeding you. Thanks for trying to "explain" it to me but I am well aware of the scapegoating of the media, I see it 24/7. But it's not true. You have to look behind their excuses and examine all sides of the debate.

The immigrants are coming here because they are being displaced by corporate trade policies that allow us to dump products in their countries and set up sweatshops. Thousands of farmers have gone out of business and small businesses also. They can't live on sweatshop labor down there either. And it's not only Mexicans. The trade deals they are making with Panama, Peru and others will bring in more immigrants.

These policies hurt the American worker and send our jobs overseas and keep wages down but their profits up.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×