Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Petroleum has not been subject to actual supply and demand pricing since it was monopolized by Standard Oil in the late 19th century. The closest to a market is the current oligopoly operated by OPEC. These people set prices to maximize profit while still discouraging investment in alternatives. The biggest problem facing OPEC is the oversupply on the world market so they control access to keep prices at a profitable level.
Interesting quotation, EG. But Benny had a thing about centralized control, so I fixed his statement:
"A free people considers that private enterprise in the sphere of production is the most effective and useful instrument in the interest of citizens in a free society."
This is a little more reflective of the American experience.
Having learned from Mussolini, of course... it makes sense to tweak it now.
As for centralized control, you're right, he wanted control... after all, he wasn't exactly a preacher of anarchy. So, a centralized control was meant to be but to operate on the premise you propose... that private enterprise is the solution to all ills.
I'm not stupid and and have structured my life to not use much gas. Perhaps others should try to be smarter and minimized their need for gas. Energy is way too cheap in this country.
Energy should be as cheap as possible. I should be able to use as much as I want.
Having learned from Mussolini, of course... it makes sense to tweak it now.
As for centralized control, you're right, he wanted control... after all, he wasn't exactly a preacher of anarchy. So, a centralized control was meant to be but to operate on the premise you propose... that private enterprise is the solution to all ills.
Nah, EG, I'm not some kind of nutball. The free market and private enterprise are only the solution to MOST ills, not all. Our society made more progress in any fifty year period after 1840 than any society did in the thousand years from 600 to 1600. Why? Because there was a buck to be made in doing so.
This is not meant to imply that we don't need a judiciary, a legislature, and government to provide societal goods and services like street lights and a police force.
Back to the point of the thread: I believe the premier way to assure that we have the right supplies of the optimal energy mix in the future is to trust the same mechanism that provides us with food, clothing, shelter, entertainment, and most other things: the market.
Nah, EG, I'm not some kind of nutball. The free market and private enterprise are only the solution to MOST ills, not all. Our society made more progress in any fifty year period after 1840 than any society did in the thousand years from 600 to 1600. Why? Because there was a buck to be made in doing so.
This is not meant to imply that we don't need a judiciary, a legislature, and government to provide societal goods and services like street lights and a police force.
Back to the point of the thread: I believe the premier way to assure that we have the right supplies of the optimal energy mix in the future is to trust the same mechanism that provides us with food, clothing, shelter, entertainment, and most other things: the market.
It is very obvious that Ms. Jackson and her cohorts are ready to pound us on the price of gasoline. They are ready to attempt to force a cut in the amount of sulfur in gasoline and I believe that they are pushing this one as part of the failure of the Congress to pass Cap and Trade for the administration.
Liberals like Steven Chu look to be moving closer to their dream of $8/gal gas.
Chu: "Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe."
"There's no way we can create a better future without the price of [fossil-fuel-based] energy going up," said Jay Hakes, who headed the Energy Information Administration under President Bill Clinton. "But it's tough for a politician to get up and say 'Your prices are going to have to go up.' "
I choose the store in which to spend my grocery dollars, and from thousands of items within the store from hundreds of suppliers. I select the clothes I wear, furnishings for my home, and virtually everything else on the same basis. Some of my suppliers work in massively competitive markets; some are in highly concentrated industries where scale has given those at the top a large share of the market. My computers run on Intel chips, as do more than 80% of all computers. Yet the value proposition for the buyer of an Intel-powered computer has gotten better geometrically year by year for decades.
The massive capital and scale required to produce petroleum products has resulted in extensive consolidation. Yet even there I am not sure this has hurt me economically. After all, I can go anywhere in the country and find gasoline--I don't need to own an oil well, a refinery, pipelines and wholesale transport system--I just pull up to the pump and get what I need for a few bucks a gallon. By itself, this is a square deal. But when you consider that I am free to buy percentage ownership interests in Exxon and Chevron, so that my share of their earnings equals the cost of gasoline I use, it is a miracle.
I figured out how to most profitably employ my labor from among thousands of occupations, millions of employers, and the opportunity for self-employment. There is a relatively free market for my labor; my competitors are always trying to buy me out or hire me.
So although no market is perfectly free, we benefit from market forces every day, in every way.
I choose the store in which to spend my grocery dollars, and from thousands of items within the store from hundreds of suppliers. I select the clothes I wear, furnishings for my home, and virtually everything else on the same basis. Some of my suppliers work in massively competitive markets; some are in highly concentrated industries where scale has given those at the top a large share of the market. My computers run on Intel chips, as do more than 80% of all computers. Yet the value proposition for the buyer of an Intel-powered computer has gotten better geometrically year by year for decades.
The massive capital and scale required to produce petroleum products has resulted in extensive consolidation. Yet even there I am not sure this has hurt me economically. After all, I can go anywhere in the country and find gasoline--I don't need to own an oil well, a refinery, pipelines and wholesale transport system--I just pull up to the pump and get what I need for a few bucks a gallon. By itself, this is a square deal. But when you consider that I am free to buy percentage ownership interests in Exxon and Chevron, so that my share of their earnings equals the cost of gasoline I use, it is a miracle.
I figured out how to most profitably employ my labor from among thousands of occupations, millions of employers, and the opportunity for self-employment. There is a relatively free market for my labor; my competitors are always trying to buy me out or hire me.
So although no market is perfectly free, we benefit from market forces every day, in every way.
Bottom line, I do not understand your question.
Why not?
Clearly, you got my question, and responded to it, also realizing that there has never been such thing as a free market. What does that tell you?
Simple, because the self appointed master minds, who are simple-minded bureaucrats and politicians, have been forcing their own ideas onto the free market, with punitive regulations, taxes and using taxpayer money, and their own political ideology, to pick the winners and losers. Obama and his admin have been playing crony venture capitalist for years, and each time they seem to fail, they screw up the free market and waste billions in taxpayer dollars.
"Senators warn new EPA rules would raise gas prices"
Wow, shocker We've been hearing this same anti-environment "But the price of gas will go up!" angst for decades. I'm not swayed.
You know what raises gas prices? Everything.
If a trader doesn't carry the 1.
If a sheik sneezes in Jordan.
If a Dictator talks tough.
If a President doesn't talk tough enough.
If a tornado hits near a refinery.
If a butterfly flaps its wings.
blah, blah blah
Speculators on the commodity market raise and lower the price of gas at their whim, making money on both ends. We have no control over that, it has zero positive effect, all it does is line people's pockets.
If an EPA regulation that will reduce emissions "costs" us a hypothetical 25 cents a gallon, that increase will be totally lost in the far larger swings caused by the other dozen factors in gas price fluctuations.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We've been hearing this same anti-environment "But the price of gas will go up!" angst for decades. I'm not swayed.
