Gas Prices Poll

Gas prices need to go up. The prices have been artificially subsidized for so long, we've become decadent and wasteful. Most automakers don't want to innovate they want to do what is easy, and that has been making a car that gets 20 mpg the last 20 years. Enough already. 6 bucks a gallon and attitudes will shift, and maybe that's what we all need.

 

Can i vote none of the above?

Personally, i don't really care where gas prices go... they'll go wherever the market demands them. Yes, high prices will force consumers to rethink their gas purchased and expenditures, but on the other hand it hurts the economy. Lower prices, while helping the economy, have the risk of hiding a serious problem (peak oil) from the public until it's too late for them to avoid being stranded at home with no transportation other than their bike.

Rather, i say let gas prices fall where they may. In my job here, yearly raises should be able to offset any inflation caused by increased prices, so that doesn't concern me in the long run. additionally, i'm well aware of the potential problems of peak oil, and feel that i am doing what i can at this point to protect myself as much as possible (which means i'm riding my bike a lot more than i used to :lol. oil prices alone won't solve the problem of peak oil, and the average consumer is too reluctant to move away from what they're familiar with to make EV vehicles mainstream for a long while yet. and even when they do, there will still be a ton of vehicles that need gas. I would guess that at some point in the forseeable future we'll see serious problems from the gas cars (such as riots and such when oil runs out and there are massive shortages) even if the bulk of the car sales had moved to EV's or some other renewable source of propulsion.

So pretty much no matter what any of us do or what the gas prices do, we're all gonna be screwed pretty hard 50 years from now. Personally, i plan to have a nice little cabin up near the boundry waters, miles away from the nearest neighbor, with a warehouse full of twinkies, enough to last me the next 50 years :-p

So i guess the basic point of my post is that the problem with oil and gas isn't with "funding both sides of the war"... it's that there are much more serious problems down the road, and if something isn't done to aleviate these problems before they start, we'll all be in trouble (we reach peak oil and go to war to get more oil... other countries jump in, and suddenly we've re-ignited the cold war, and this time it's hot).

 

Down.

If Exxon can get huge profits that have nothing (per them) to do with higher prices, even if I did have stock I'd say lower is better.

Now, if Exxon is lying, I'll make sure to change my mind if I get/buy their stock...

 

I voted 'up', so that the price is closer to the cost. Any price less than full cost is a subsidy borne by everyone.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(sl7vk @ Sep 11 2006, 04:23 PM) [snapback]317920[/snapback]</div>

I have to ask. Who subsidizes gas prices?

 

I'm afraid gas prices will have to stay high to motivate the average American to do something about our dependance on foreign oil and the fossil fuel pollution issues. Our dependance on fossil fuel is an addiction that must be curbed but I don't believe the average American sees this yet.
Considering our government still subsidizes the oil industry to the tune of several billion dollars per year in spite of very high prices, we are paying an even higher price that is shown at the pump through our tax dollars. Then, figure in the price of an oil war taken further from our tax dollars and our gasoline is costing us a huge amount of money, not to mention lives.
Drilling for oil in parks and wildlife refuges set aside by great men like Theodore Roosevelt are also not the answer. That is simply enabling the addict. The truth is, raising the average mpg by 1 for the fleet of cars sold in the US would save more than twice the oil predicted to be held in the Artic National Wildlife refuge for it's estimated life of 50 years. That is based on the current mileage driven in America at this time. Imagine what raising it by 5 or 10 would do for us! Ford and GM have been fighting against this for years.
If equivalent subsides were given to green energy sources we would be making great strides to energy independance and a much greater national security. I'm including a cleaner environment in the national security area.
The down side of the higher gas price is the oil companies, the politicians that support them and the Saudi's are really gigging us. Until, that is, we can reduce that demand to a slow trickle, then we can have the last laugh.

 

I voted UP, because SUV owners should be taught a lesson. Screw them and the metaphoric high horse they rode in on!

My new landlords own an Excursion and a Chevy dually pickup with a 454. I feel soooo guilty for paying rent.

 

"Market forces" my nice person.

Like when Katrina wiped out a few refineries in the American South, gas here shot up almost 30 cents a litre. Canada is a huge net exporter of oil, so why the hell would a hurricane thousands of miles away affect gas prices here?

It's nothing more than Profit Taking to the extreme. Companies like Imperial Oil, PetroCanada, Husky, et al are laughing all the way to the bank.

Gas has gone back down to $1 a litre as the consumers need to believe that gas is "cheap" again. This way they'll use their credit cards for Thanksgiving purchases and Christmas purchases.

When I got my Prius gas was 80 cents a litre, and folks were screaming about that. When gas went up to $1.30 a litre after Katrina, folks were in an uproar. Now that it's $1 a litre, the Sheeple have breathed a sigh of relief.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jayman @ Sep 12 2006, 10:47 AM) [snapback]318345[/snapback]</div>

Prices went up for you because it's a global economy. simply put, image that those refineries going down increased prices in the US above those in canada. Well, the companies pumping oil in canada could then make more profit by selling that money in the Us than in canada, and the local supply for canada would decrease, while the demand stays the same. one of the basic primciples economic theory is based on is that if supply decreases or demand increase, all else being constant, then price increases.

Things aren't so simple any more that you can ignore stuff happening thousands of miles away. The fact that we are truely in a global economy makes those thousands of miles meaningless - any act that effects either supply or demand anywhere in the world will effect prices for everyone in the world.

 

The record-setting profits of Canadian oil companies suggests excess profit taking, not a "true" supply shortage. It's just another excuse for them.

 

Got gas today for $2.25 in Missouri.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jayman @ Sep 12 2006, 11:52 AM) [snapback]318421[/snapback]</div>

On the contrary, it is. Oil companies are making a profit because, though one means or another, they've been able to move both the supply curve and the demand curve on a standard supply-demand graph (think of an X, with one line being supply and the other demand. the intersection is the quantity (x axis) and price (y axis) at equilibrium). Through the years, oil companies have manipulated this graph to move the equilibrium point higher, increasing their profit per barrel. With Katrina, the world wide supply of oil decreased, shifting the supply curve, which resulted in a higher price at a lower quantity. Of course, it's pretty universally accepted that Oil companies used this to do some excessive price hikes, but thats neither here nor there. the price would have increased anyways do to the shift in the curves.

Using standard economic theory, the only true supply shortage is when there is 0 supply. Otherwise, there is (theoretically) a price at which the supply is equal to the demand, even if it's that point at which only bill gates can afford to gas up his Limo and the rest of the world is riding bikes.

 

It's nice to see gas prices going down, but I don't think they will stay there. Americans need to learn what it is to pay high gas prices before any real progress will be made in the effort to decrease our dependancy on foreign oil. The recent gas price decrease has been attributed to a decrease in demand. At least that
's what I've heard. It this is true, it would seem that people are looking for alt ways to get where they need to, ie work, school and running errands. I read an article that stated that Moped sales have skyrocted and that dealers can't keep them in stock. They are sold out before they can be unloaded from the container. My last fill up gas was $2.79 a gallon. In Hawaii that's almost like free as every service station you see has 3.08-3.33 a gallon. The 2.79 was at Costco.

 

Up. I don't want to see too many cars on the road. When the gas was > $3/gal., I don't have traffic jams on the way to work or home. Now I am slowed down by the traffics.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MechaJohn @ Sep 11 2006, 02:26 PM) [snapback]317890[/snapback]</div>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MechaJohn @ Sep 11 2006, 02:26 PM) [snapback]317890[/snapback]</div>

I don't really concern myself since I have no control anyway. I do find the it odd that the drop in price coincides with the new model year. If I didn't much in the new models to address the recent increased demand for greater effciency like the American Makers I would be very glad to see gas prices out of the spotlight.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(eagle33199 @ Sep 12 2006, 02:03 PM) [snapback]318491[/snapback]</div>

Thank you, but I took all 4 years of college economics, so I'm well aware of how the supply-demand graph works.

Again, this is nothing more than collusion, PRICE FIXING. Global oil production is about as "competitive" as global narcotics production.

 

I said NO and checked the poor people. I really see the working lower/middle class people like myself diverting precious $$ to greedy sand savages & greedy oil cos.

I think gas should be no more than $2/gal. After all, everyone's making a fortune in profits when gas is @ $3.

 

I would have voted for 1 and 2. And I would argue that higher prices (from taxes, not by sending it overseas) would actually help the economy by making us use it more efficiently. You are paying that SUV driver around $5 per gallon in subsidies, which is a huge drain on the economy.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jayman @ Sep 12 2006, 02:24 PM) [snapback]318580[/snapback]</div>

This might not have been the best analogy. I was under the impression that the competition between drug cartels was pretty fierce.