Americans are so used to having cheap oil prices. Price at the pump over seas is around 6 dollars a gallon and its been like that forever. I remember when i lived in Italy 10 years ago and the price was equivalent to 3 US dollars per gallon and that was a long time ago.
Does that Justify the oil companies making billions of dollars a year! I don't know but the last time I checked people were in the business to make money. You do not have to buy gas. No one tells you to go to the pump and pay for it. Buy a electric car or start riding a bike!
2006-08-09 06:22:17
·
answer #1
·
answered by jamie s 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
I know lets turn the earth into a socialistic communist state and control everything....then you guys can just sit back and tax everything and send me a check.
Why do you ignore the fact not one single refinery has been built in America in 29 years? The problem is not oil supply its refinery capacity. Add to this burden some of the existing refineries can't even function for a full 12 months with out having to shut down for environmental recalculations in the gas (done 3x a year in California which is the worst at it).
Why does it take a month to fix 16 miles of pipeline because you and I are not there. Maybe the enviro wackos are going to want a study before any effort can even be made.
2006-08-09 06:21:12
·
answer #2
·
answered by netjr 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Oil is a commodity. It's price is set by futures traders on Wall Street. Oil companies don't define the price they just reap the benefits of high prices. The entire thing is a huge scam. Will the tar pits in Canada coming on line the world has more oil now then ever before in history. The problem is these futures brokers don't make any money on low prices so they purposely manipulate the perception that oil is rare in order to get high prices. Oil need to be de-listed as a commodity and be governed by supply and demand again if we are ever going to get oil prices that make any sense.
2006-08-09 06:18:47
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
What you say is true and you didn't even say everything. I mean, what question are you asking? Yes, something needs to be done about it. The question is who is going to do it? Who has enough power except the government? And we know they'll never do anything because they're all on the take. If everybody, like these idiots on this forum, would quit fighting each other and concentrate on removing these people we've got in government with people who will actually work for us like they are supposed to, Then maybe we, the people could do something about these things. Until that happens, the government will run out of control while idiots let them because of their pettiness.
2006-08-09 06:25:16
·
answer #4
·
answered by oldman 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Oil is a resource that has been exploited and now its running low, in quantity theres still tons of it but not enough to go the way we do. Therefore gas will either raise in price or we will eliminate it as a fuel source.
2006-08-09 06:13:37
·
answer #5
·
answered by houseman2012 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
Oil prices are being driven up by the investors on Wall Street.
This is Capitalism at its finest.
2006-08-09 06:33:00
·
answer #6
·
answered by Salem 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Congress is the wrongdoer, for 35 years they have blocked drilling our own aspects. For 30 years they have blocked development refineries. Congress is the reason of our housing finance issues. approximately 10-12 years in the past they called the genuine belongings human beings and the mortgage bankers right into a listening to and insisted they decrease their skills for loans. Create new and imaginitive techniques to finance. they did no longer prefer to, yet they did to maintain Congress off their backs. Congress panders to minorities, racial and environmentalists, for their votes and contributions. we've outfitted approximately one hundred fifty Ethanol vegetation interior the final 5 years. No refineries. Why? Ethanol substitute into considered a "eco-friendly". Now we come across that ethanol creates greater enviromental injury than petroleum and will improve nutrition costs. to no longer point out the load it places on water aspects. Congress voted two times to circulate into Iraqe. i comprehend adolescents prefer to have a wrongdoer to dislike, yet positioned the blame the place it belongs.
2016-11-04 05:19:07
·
answer #7
·
answered by hartzell 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
But don't kid yourself -- Bush and his co-conspirator, Dick Cheney, accomplished exactly what they set out to do. In case you've forgotten what their real mission was, let me remind you of White House spokesman Ari Fleisher's original announcement, three years ago, launching of what he called,
"Operation
Iraqi
Liberation."
O.I.L. How droll of them, how cute. Then, Karl Rove made the giggling boys in the White House change it to "OIF" -- Operation Iraqi Freedom. But the 101st Airborne wasn't sent to Basra to get its hands on Iraq's OIF.
"It's about oil," Robert Ebel told me. Who is Ebel? Formerly the CIA's top oil analyst, he was sent by the Pentagon, about a month before the invasion, to a secret confab in London with Saddam's former oil minister to finalize the plans for "liberating" Iraq's oil industry. In London, Bush's emissary Ebel also instructed Ibrahim Bahr al-Ulum, the man the Pentagon would choose as post-OIF oil minister for Iraq, on the correct method of disposing Iraq's crude.
And what did the USA want Iraq to do with Iraq's oil? The answer will surprise many of you: and it is uglier, more twisted, devilish and devious than anything imagined by the most conspiracy-addicted blogger. The answer can be found in a 323-page plan for Iraq's oil secretly drafted by the State Department. Our team got a hold of a copy; how, doesn't matter. The key thing is what's inside this thick Bush diktat: a directive to Iraqis to maintain a state oil company that will "enhance its relationship with OPEC."
Enhance its relationship with OPEC??? How strange: the government of the United States ordering Iraq to support the very OPEC oil cartel which is strangling our nation with outrageously high prices for crude.
Specifically, the system ordered up by the Bush cabal would keep a lid on Iraq's oil production -- limiting Iraq's oil pumping to the tight quota set by Saudi Arabia and the OPEC cartel.
There you have it. Yes, Bush went in for the oil -- not to get more of Iraq's oil, but to prevent Iraq producing too much of it.
You must keep in mind who paid for George's ranch and Dick's bunker: Big Oil. And Big Oil -- and their buck-buddies, the Saudis -- don't make money from pumping more oil, but from pumping less of it. The lower the supply, the higher the price.
It's Economics 101. The oil industry is run by a cartel, OPEC, and what economists call an "oligopoly" -- a tiny handful of operators who make more money when there's less oil, not more of it. So, every time the "insurgents" blow up a pipeline in Basra, every time Mad Mahmoud in Tehran threatens to cut supply, the price of oil leaps. And Dick and George just love it.
Dick and George didn't want more oil from Iraq, they wanted less. I know some of you, no matter what I write, insist that our President and his Veep are on the hunt for more crude so you can cheaply fill your family Hummer; that somehow, these two oil-patch babies are concerned that the price of gas in the USA is bumping up to $3 a gallon.
Not so, gentle souls. Three bucks a gallon in the States (and a quid a litre in Britain) means colossal profits for Big Oil, and that makes Dick's ticker go pitty-pat with joy. The top oily-gopolists, the five largest oil companies, pulled in $113 billion in profit in 2005 -- compared to a piddly $34 billion in 2002 before Operation Iraqi Liberation. In other words, it's been a good war for Big Oil.
As per Plan Bush, Bahr Al-Ulum became Iraq's occupation oil minister; the conquered nation "enhanced its relationship with OPEC;" and the price of oil, from Clinton peace-time to Bush war-time, shot up 317%.
In other words, on the third anniversary of invasion, we can say the attack and occupation is, indeed, a Mission Accomplished. However, it wasn't America's mission, nor the Iraqis'. It was a Mission Accomplished for OPEC and Big Oil.
2006-08-09 06:59:48
·
answer #8
·
answered by jdfnv 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes definately. How can the oil companies make billions in profits and not have us believing they are not behind some kind of conspiracy.
2006-08-09 06:13:40
·
answer #9
·
answered by michtb3 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
The question I have is: Wouldn't one oil company make a killing by trimming prices as low as practical and making up for it in sales? There is definitely collusion here.
2006-08-09 06:15:15
·
answer #10
·
answered by Schmorgen 6
·
0⤊
1⤋