The Free Market, price of gas, class warfare or socialism?

[724Skinsfan]

Since 1995, gas prices have tripled (~$1 to ~3). Americans have kept up with their consumption. Doubling gas will have the same effect. At best you'll see a decrease in SUV purchases and an increase in economy cars. We like having the freedom to drive and will modify our spending on other luxuries until you take away our driving rights.

Hmm, maybe I'm still missing the point of this thread? Are we trying to force American dependency off of gas for other alternative forms of fuel/transportation? I think the part about killing off the middle class confuses me.

[Redskins8588]

Originally Posted by 724Skinsfan

Since 1995, gas prices have tripled (~$1 to ~3). Americans have kept up with their consumption. Doubling gas will have the same effect. At best you'll see a decrease in SUV purchases and an increase in economy cars. We like having the freedom to drive and will modify our spending on other luxuries until you take away our driving rights.

Hmm, maybe I'm still missing the point of this thread? Are we trying to force American dependency off of gas for other alternative forms of fuel/transportation? I think the part about killing off the middle class confuses me.

You are right about the price jumping from $1 to $3 from 1995 until now. So over 13 years the price of gas went up an average of $0.15 per year. However with that increase in gas each year, people's wages also went up. The idea in this thread is saying that our government should double the price of gas "overnight" from $3 to $6, not do it over 13 years. A big difference, with gas only going up $0.15 a year most people can cope with that.

[724Skinsfan]

Yeah, I guess the initial sticker shock will be extremely hard to cope with but I still think most people will adjust fairly quickly. I don't know the particular methods, but I stand by my belief that Americans will find a way to keep the pedal to the metal.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by 724Skinsfan

Yeah, I guess the initial sticker shock will be extremely hard to cope with but I still think most people will adjust fairly quickly. I don't know the particular methods, but I stand by my belief that Americans will find a way to keep the pedal to the metal.

I agree, but I think that eventually America will say enough is enough and stop driving. Basically, people will be using their paychecks just to have a nice day out rather than going out a lot during the weeks and spending out at restaurants, stores and bars.

The stores also feel the pinch by their distributors charging more to bring the products to their store, so they have to increase prices to pay for the gas increase. I agree with the people talking about recession with a gas price increase. I have to say that, while I do my normal driving, the price on gas definitely has an effect on my weekends plans in general. I stay in a lot more now than I ever did thanks to the price on gas.

[dmek25]

why cant the price be capped? a gallon of milk is regulated by the govt.

[BaltimoreSkins]

Originally Posted by dmek25

why cant the price be capped? a gallon of milk is regulated by the govt.

The milk industry doesn't have the lobbying efforts of the gas industry.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by dmek25

why cant the price be capped? a gallon of milk is regulated by the govt.

This is a fantastic example of why the government shouldn't cap gas prices. The capping of milk prices has created an completely imbalanced milk market that essentially killed milk farming in the US as it existed for decades. Because of the costs involved with producing milk it is near impossible for small and even medium sized farms to operate at a profit. Large incoporated farms milking thousands of cows a day drive the market now and put small farmers out of work. These farmes now have no job and probably lose their homes since they can't pay off their farms where ther homes are. Financial disaster. So what does the gov't do? THEY GIVE SUBSIDIES TO THEM SO THEY CAN OPERATE AT A LOSS. This therefore eliminates their motivation to work more efficiently and keeps the entire market in a state of flux with people on the daily verge of losing everything.

Now this is not anything like what would happen with oil but it shows how introducing false outside pressures on a market can easily destroy it and make things worse. Almost always the consequences of such actions are difficult and even impossible to predict.

Two sayings come to mind:

"No good deed goes unpunished"
"The road to hell is paved with good intentions"

It is time to start thinking about SMART ways to affect markets. Promoting healthy markets is the best thing for consumers and for companies.

[dmek25]

all i know is that creative book keeping has been around since people started keeping records. and politicians looking for a handout has been around for, well, forever. schneed, im not sure why you take it personal when someone disagrees with you. we can agree to disagree. because i know what you say isn't changing my thought process. and im sure my viewpoints aren't changing yours. its known as healthy discussion. the name calling isn't very productive, and it tends to change someones opinion of your personality. which is kind of funny

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by dmek25

all i know is that creative book keeping has been around since people started keeping records. and politicians looking for a handout has been around for, well, forever. schneed, im not sure why you take it personal when someone disagrees with you. we can agree to disagree. because i know what you say isn't changing my thought process. and im sure my viewpoints aren't changing yours. its known as healthy discussion. the name calling isn't very productive, and it tends to change someones opinion of your personality. which is kind of funny

Schneed doesn't mean to attack people personally, he just doesn't pull any punches with regard to how he feels about someone's opinion.

As for cooking the books, let me just say the SEC can bring the hammer when companies get too cute. In the post-Sarbanes Oxley (i.e., post-Enron/WorldCom) world, it's become a lot more difficult to overstate/understate earnings. As a securities lawyer, I must say that I have a lot of confidence in the SEC. The SEC and securities laws are not perfect, but they are pretty damn good. Moreover, dmek, companies have a vested interest in OVERstating their profits.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

Schneed doesn't mean to attack people personally, he just doesn't pull any punches with regard to how he feels about someone's opinion.

As for cooking the books, let me just say the SEC can bring the hammer when companies get too cute. In the post-Sarbanes Oxley (i.e., post-Enron/WorldCom) world, it's become a lot more difficult to overstate/understate earnings. As a securities lawyer, I must say that I have a lot of confidence in the SEC. The SEC and securities laws are not perfect, but they are pretty damn good. Moreover, dmek, companies have a vested interest in OVERstating their profits.

Speaking of SOX, does anyone have any links to quality articles on the subject?

I have a paper due in 9 hours on Sarbanes Oxley.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Speaking of SOX, does anyone have any links to quality articles on the subject?

I have a paper due in 9 hours on Sarbanes Oxley.

I have quality articles on SOX in the office, but they all deal with very narrow topics that probably would not be of much help. Sorry, but good luck.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

I have quality articles on SOX in the office, but they all deal with very narrow topics that probably would not be of much help. Sorry, but good luck.

lol. It's okay. Thanks much anyway.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by dmek25

all i know is that creative book keeping has been around since people started keeping records. and politicians looking for a handout has been around for, well, forever. schneed, im not sure why you take it personal when someone disagrees with you. we can agree to disagree. because i know what you say isn't changing my thought process. and im sure my viewpoints aren't changing yours. its known as healthy discussion. the name calling isn't very productive, and it tends to change someones opinion of your personality. which is kind of funny

I agree about name calling but when he presents a logical and factual argument and your counter argument is basically "Everyone is lying, it's all a conspiracy" it makes you sound dumb(which you are not) and emotionally blinded"

And I am sorry but ignorant simply means to not know what you are talking about. If you present an argument that could reasonably lead someone to think you don't know what you are talking about then you need to be prepared to be called out on it. It isn't like he called you a dumb shit or something personal like that.

I'm just sayin'...

[FRPLG]

And finally...

What hasn't been discusssed in this thread is why Exxon and their ilk only make .07 a gallon. First off the cost of oil in the world is largely set by a cartel called OPEC. Now a cartel in an industry seeks to:

Collude amongst all competitors to increase profit by reducing actual competition.

Direct effects are limited supply and/or raised prices.

The price of gas is determined by:

cost of product(crude from OPEC) ~50%
refinment ~25%
taxes ~15%
distribution and overhead ~10%

When all is said and done it costs a lot of money for big oil to get a gallon of gas to a gas station.

Now I don't know enough to quite understand why oil companies make so much money. I'd like for someone who does know to explain it.

[FRPLG]

Price controls simply do not work. They are a utopian idea that empirically always cause havoc and almost always make the situation worse for those that the price control is supposed to help.