Your explanation of futures is largely accurate, except that each time
they're bid up, the price at the pumps rises. This should infuriate you.


"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,

Oil futures are based upon the best guess of it's future worth. They do
not determine what someone will actually pay for the oil in the future.
If oil futures are bid up to $120 a barrel, that does not mean that will
be the market price when the future is due. It is normally that the price
of commodity will not be the same price as that on a futures contract.
The difference is the profit or lose realized by the person holding the
futures contract.

While it is easy to hold stock certificates in a bank, when it comes time
to pay off on your futures contract, most people have to sell the oil,
they do not have empty tankers sitting around to hold the oil waiting for
a better price. They will have to sell the oil at the market price, which
is determined by supply and demand. Trust me, if the US reduced it
consumption by 25% and China reduced it's consumption by 25% we would see
one hell of a drop in oil prices.






"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
True, but this does not address the current issue: The price of oil, as
it stands today, is not related to supply or demand. It is where it is
because the price has been bid up to current levels based purely on
speculation. This is no different than the way tech stocks were inflated
all out of proportion a few years ago.


"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,
As China continues to expand it manufacture capacity and it's citizens
continue to increase their consumption of oil, the price of oil will
continue to increase. I hate this as much as you do, because I too buy
gas and heat my home. The truth is the only way we can change this is
to find alternative energy and more efficient ways to use oil. If we
nationalize the oil industry, it is not going to change the long term
problem. If we elect a democratic house, senate and president, it still
is not going to change the long term direction. Al Gore wrote a book (I
think it was about 10 yrs ago) that forecasted this exact situation we
are faced with today.

It is time to face the facts, oil is a finite resource and we are using
it up very fast.


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Well....at least we know that the vehicles from the big 3 will be gone
within a few years. As far as the figures for the big trucks, I think
you have to subtract those sold to people who actually MUST have such
vehicles for their work. That would leave us with real numbers for the
yahoos who buy "a hemi" just because they feel like it.

"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,
I know you prefer to talk to the experienced salepeople to determine
buying patterns, but I found it easier to look at sales history.
These gas guzzlers purchased in 2004 will continue to guzzle gas for
the next 15 - 20 yrs.



Best-selling vehicles

Car First-half 2004 sales Base
price
. Ford F-Series 432,969 $19,920
. Chevrolet Silverado 322,907 $19,485
. Dodge Ram pickup 223,609 $20,365
. Toyota Camry 213,625 $19,560
. Honda Accord 192,106 $16,390
. Ford Explorer 168,059 $23,690
. Honda Civic 162,483 $13,500
. Ford Taurus 144,035 $20,320
. Chevrolet Impala 139,460 22,395
. Dodge Caravan 131,367 $18,995



"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Stop into a Toyota or Honda dealer, ask to speak briefly to their
most
experienced salesperson, and ask what's selling. Or, you could just
look
around. I agree that too many gas pigs are sold to people who have
absolutely zero need for a truck of any kind, but that doesn't negate
the
fact that cars like Corollas and Civics are selling like hotcakes,
and
they're not even in the category of "high efficiency", compared to
vehicles like the Prius (50+ mpg).



"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,
What is silly is your inability to see the obvious. There is one
reason
for the increase of gas prices. There is an increase in demand,
without
any increase in supply. Consumers will not pay for better fuel
efficient
cars until the cost of the gas guzzlers make it worth their while.
The
fact that a few people buy fuel efficient cars, does not negate the
fact
that too many people are buying gas guzzling SUV and Trucks, while
keeping their home thermostat set at 78 degrees.

Heck even Al Gore who was dumb as dirt, knew you had to raise the
cost of
gas to make it economically viable to find alternative energy
sources.
Al's idea was to tax gas $3/gal and use the tax to find alternative
energy.


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Most of the people in rec.boats who complain about the price of
gas,
are driving trucks with low mpg and boats that burn tons of gas.
If
they really were concerned about the price of gas, they would buy
a
hybrid car and a either a trawler or sailboat.

They refuse to see the obvious. Consumers will not buy a fuel
efficient car or boat, or pay for alternative energy sources until
the
cost of petrol fuels make it worth while to do so.

That's silly. There are plenty of fuel efficient cars being sold.
It's
been that way for years. Even a basic Corolla gets over 30 mpg.
Same
with models from Honda. Dealers don't need to whore these out with
stupid "employee discount" offers, as do the big 3.

Doug,
I hate it, but I know if the govt. got involved in the oil industry it would
be more inefficient than today, and in the long run we all would be screwed.

I can remember when Jimmy Carter was in office and credit card companies
were charging 21-25% interest on their cards. Everyone was screaming, the
govt. needs to step in and correct this problem. Well, very soon after the
boost in interest competition corrected the problem. Competition will
correct the problem much quicker and more efficiently than a governmental
bureaucracy.


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Your explanation of futures is largely accurate, except that each time
they're bid up, the price at the pumps rises. This should infuriate you.


"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,

Oil futures are based upon the best guess of it's future worth. They do
not determine what someone will actually pay for the oil in the future.
If oil futures are bid up to $120 a barrel, that does not mean that will
be the market price when the future is due. It is normally that the
price of commodity will not be the same price as that on a futures
contract. The difference is the profit or lose realized by the person
holding the futures contract.

While it is easy to hold stock certificates in a bank, when it comes time
to pay off on your futures contract, most people have to sell the oil,
they do not have empty tankers sitting around to hold the oil waiting for
a better price. They will have to sell the oil at the market price,
which is determined by supply and demand. Trust me, if the US reduced it
consumption by 25% and China reduced it's consumption by 25% we would see
one hell of a drop in oil prices.






"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
True, but this does not address the current issue: The price of oil, as
it stands today, is not related to supply or demand. It is where it is
because the price has been bid up to current levels based purely on
speculation. This is no different than the way tech stocks were inflated
all out of proportion a few years ago.


"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,
As China continues to expand it manufacture capacity and it's citizens
continue to increase their consumption of oil, the price of oil will
continue to increase. I hate this as much as you do, because I too buy
gas and heat my home. The truth is the only way we can change this is
to find alternative energy and more efficient ways to use oil. If we
nationalize the oil industry, it is not going to change the long term
problem. If we elect a democratic house, senate and president, it
still is not going to change the long term direction. Al Gore wrote a
book (I think it was about 10 yrs ago) that forecasted this exact
situation we are faced with today.

It is time to face the facts, oil is a finite resource and we are using
it up very fast.


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Well....at least we know that the vehicles from the big 3 will be gone
within a few years. As far as the figures for the big trucks, I think
you have to subtract those sold to people who actually MUST have such
vehicles for their work. That would leave us with real numbers for the
yahoos who buy "a hemi" just because they feel like it.

"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,
I know you prefer to talk to the experienced salepeople to determine
buying patterns, but I found it easier to look at sales history.
These gas guzzlers purchased in 2004 will continue to guzzle gas for
the next 15 - 20 yrs.



Best-selling vehicles

Car First-half 2004 sales Base
price
. Ford F-Series 432,969 $19,920
. Chevrolet Silverado 322,907 $19,485
. Dodge Ram pickup 223,609 $20,365
. Toyota Camry 213,625 $19,560
. Honda Accord 192,106 $16,390
. Ford Explorer 168,059 $23,690
. Honda Civic 162,483
$13,500
. Ford Taurus 144,035
$20,320
. Chevrolet Impala 139,460 22,395
. Dodge Caravan 131,367 $18,995



"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Stop into a Toyota or Honda dealer, ask to speak briefly to their
most
experienced salesperson, and ask what's selling. Or, you could just
look
around. I agree that too many gas pigs are sold to people who have
absolutely zero need for a truck of any kind, but that doesn't
negate the
fact that cars like Corollas and Civics are selling like hotcakes,
and
they're not even in the category of "high efficiency", compared to
vehicles like the Prius (50+ mpg).



"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,
What is silly is your inability to see the obvious. There is one
reason
for the increase of gas prices. There is an increase in demand,
without
any increase in supply. Consumers will not pay for better fuel
efficient
cars until the cost of the gas guzzlers make it worth their while.
The
fact that a few people buy fuel efficient cars, does not negate the
fact
that too many people are buying gas guzzling SUV and Trucks, while
keeping their home thermostat set at 78 degrees.

Heck even Al Gore who was dumb as dirt, knew you had to raise the
cost of
gas to make it economically viable to find alternative energy
sources.
Al's idea was to tax gas $3/gal and use the tax to find alternative
energy.


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Most of the people in rec.boats who complain about the price of
gas,
are driving trucks with low mpg and boats that burn tons of gas.
If
they really were concerned about the price of gas, they would buy
a
hybrid car and a either a trawler or sailboat.

They refuse to see the obvious. Consumers will not buy a fuel
efficient car or boat, or pay for alternative energy sources
until the
cost of petrol fuels make it worth while to do so.

That's silly. There are plenty of fuel efficient cars being sold.
It's
been that way for years. Even a basic Corolla gets over 30 mpg.
Same
with models from Honda. Dealers don't need to whore these out with
stupid "employee discount" offers, as do the big 3.

Competition from whom? We have what.....3 major oil companies now? They have
absolutely no reason on earth to lower prices.

"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,
I hate it, but I know if the govt. got involved in the oil industry it
would be more inefficient than today, and in the long run we all would be
screwed.

I can remember when Jimmy Carter was in office and credit card companies
were charging 21-25% interest on their cards. Everyone was screaming, the
govt. needs to step in and correct this problem. Well, very soon after
the boost in interest competition corrected the problem. Competition will
correct the problem much quicker and more efficiently than a governmental
bureaucracy.


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Your explanation of futures is largely accurate, except that each time
they're bid up, the price at the pumps rises. This should infuriate you.


"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,

Oil futures are based upon the best guess of it's future worth. They do
not determine what someone will actually pay for the oil in the future.
If oil futures are bid up to $120 a barrel, that does not mean that will
be the market price when the future is due. It is normally that the
price of commodity will not be the same price as that on a futures
contract. The difference is the profit or lose realized by the person
holding the futures contract.

While it is easy to hold stock certificates in a bank, when it comes
time to pay off on your futures contract, most people have to sell the
oil, they do not have empty tankers sitting around to hold the oil
waiting for a better price. They will have to sell the oil at the
market price, which is determined by supply and demand. Trust me, if
the US reduced it consumption by 25% and China reduced it's consumption
by 25% we would see one hell of a drop in oil prices.






"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
True, but this does not address the current issue: The price of oil, as
it stands today, is not related to supply or demand. It is where it is
because the price has been bid up to current levels based purely on
speculation. This is no different than the way tech stocks were
inflated all out of proportion a few years ago.


"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,
As China continues to expand it manufacture capacity and it's citizens
continue to increase their consumption of oil, the price of oil will
continue to increase. I hate this as much as you do, because I too
buy gas and heat my home. The truth is the only way we can change
this is to find alternative energy and more efficient ways to use oil.
If we nationalize the oil industry, it is not going to change the long
term problem. If we elect a democratic house, senate and president,
it still is not going to change the long term direction. Al Gore
wrote a book (I think it was about 10 yrs ago) that forecasted this
exact situation we are faced with today.

It is time to face the facts, oil is a finite resource and we are
using it up very fast.


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Well....at least we know that the vehicles from the big 3 will be
gone within a few years. As far as the figures for the big trucks, I
think you have to subtract those sold to people who actually MUST
have such vehicles for their work. That would leave us with real
numbers for the yahoos who buy "a hemi" just because they feel like
it.

"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,
I know you prefer to talk to the experienced salepeople to determine
buying patterns, but I found it easier to look at sales history.
These gas guzzlers purchased in 2004 will continue to guzzle gas for
the next 15 - 20 yrs.



Best-selling vehicles

Car First-half 2004 sales Base
price
. Ford F-Series 432,969 $19,920
. Chevrolet Silverado 322,907 $19,485
. Dodge Ram pickup 223,609 $20,365
. Toyota Camry 213,625 $19,560
. Honda Accord 192,106 $16,390
. Ford Explorer 168,059 $23,690
. Honda Civic 162,483 $13,500
. Ford Taurus 144,035 $20,320
. Chevrolet Impala 139,460 22,395
. Dodge Caravan 131,367 $18,995



"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Stop into a Toyota or Honda dealer, ask to speak briefly to their
most
experienced salesperson, and ask what's selling. Or, you could just
look
around. I agree that too many gas pigs are sold to people who have
absolutely zero need for a truck of any kind, but that doesn't
negate the
fact that cars like Corollas and Civics are selling like hotcakes,
and
they're not even in the category of "high efficiency", compared to
vehicles like the Prius (50+ mpg).



"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,
What is silly is your inability to see the obvious. There is one
reason
for the increase of gas prices. There is an increase in demand,
without
any increase in supply. Consumers will not pay for better fuel
efficient
cars until the cost of the gas guzzlers make it worth their while.
The
fact that a few people buy fuel efficient cars, does not negate
the fact
that too many people are buying gas guzzling SUV and Trucks, while
keeping their home thermostat set at 78 degrees.

Heck even Al Gore who was dumb as dirt, knew you had to raise the
cost of
gas to make it economically viable to find alternative energy
sources.
Al's idea was to tax gas $3/gal and use the tax to find
alternative
energy.


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Most of the people in rec.boats who complain about the price of
gas,
are driving trucks with low mpg and boats that burn tons of gas.
If
they really were concerned about the price of gas, they would
buy a
hybrid car and a either a trawler or sailboat.

They refuse to see the obvious. Consumers will not buy a fuel
efficient car or boat, or pay for alternative energy sources
until the
cost of petrol fuels make it worth while to do so.

That's silly. There are plenty of fuel efficient cars being sold.
It's
been that way for years. Even a basic Corolla gets over 30 mpg.
Same
with models from Honda. Dealers don't need to whore these out
with
stupid "employee discount" offers, as do the big 3.

Doug,

Using your logic, when the US auto industry was controlled by 3 auto
manufacturers there was no competition between them.

Exxon
Royal Dutch/Shell
BP (4)
ChevronTexaco
Fina Elf

There really is 5 major oil companies competiting for market share.

Do you believe the US would be better if we nationalized our oil companies?



"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Competition from whom? We have what.....3 major oil companies now? They
have absolutely no reason on earth to lower prices.

"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,
I hate it, but I know if the govt. got involved in the oil industry it
would be more inefficient than today, and in the long run we all would be
screwed.

I can remember when Jimmy Carter was in office and credit card companies
were charging 21-25% interest on their cards. Everyone was screaming,
the govt. needs to step in and correct this problem. Well, very soon
after the boost in interest competition corrected the problem.
Competition will correct the problem much quicker and more efficiently
than a governmental bureaucracy.


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Your explanation of futures is largely accurate, except that each time
they're bid up, the price at the pumps rises. This should infuriate you.


"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,

Oil futures are based upon the best guess of it's future worth. They
do not determine what someone will actually pay for the oil in the
future. If oil futures are bid up to $120 a barrel, that does not mean
that will be the market price when the future is due. It is normally
that the price of commodity will not be the same price as that on a
futures contract. The difference is the profit or lose realized by the
person holding the futures contract.

While it is easy to hold stock certificates in a bank, when it comes
time to pay off on your futures contract, most people have to sell the
oil, they do not have empty tankers sitting around to hold the oil
waiting for a better price. They will have to sell the oil at the
market price, which is determined by supply and demand. Trust me, if
the US reduced it consumption by 25% and China reduced it's consumption
by 25% we would see one hell of a drop in oil prices.






"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
True, but this does not address the current issue: The price of oil,
as it stands today, is not related to supply or demand. It is where it
is because the price has been bid up to current levels based purely on
speculation. This is no different than the way tech stocks were
inflated all out of proportion a few years ago.


"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,
As China continues to expand it manufacture capacity and it's
citizens continue to increase their consumption of oil, the price of
oil will continue to increase. I hate this as much as you do,
because I too buy gas and heat my home. The truth is the only way we
can change this is to find alternative energy and more efficient ways
to use oil. If we nationalize the oil industry, it is not going to
change the long term problem. If we elect a democratic house, senate
and president, it still is not going to change the long term
direction. Al Gore wrote a book (I think it was about 10 yrs ago)
that forecasted this exact situation we are faced with today.

It is time to face the facts, oil is a finite resource and we are
using it up very fast.


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Well....at least we know that the vehicles from the big 3 will be
gone within a few years. As far as the figures for the big trucks, I
think you have to subtract those sold to people who actually MUST
have such vehicles for their work. That would leave us with real
numbers for the yahoos who buy "a hemi" just because they feel like
it.

"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,
I know you prefer to talk to the experienced salepeople to
determine buying patterns, but I found it easier to look at sales
history.
These gas guzzlers purchased in 2004 will continue to guzzle gas
for the next 15 - 20 yrs.



Best-selling vehicles

Car First-half 2004 sales Base
price
. Ford F-Series 432,969
$19,920
. Chevrolet Silverado 322,907 $19,485
. Dodge Ram pickup 223,609 $20,365
. Toyota Camry 213,625 $19,560
. Honda Accord 192,106 $16,390
. Ford Explorer 168,059
$23,690
. Honda Civic 162,483 $13,500
. Ford Taurus 144,035 $20,320
. Chevrolet Impala 139,460 22,395
. Dodge Caravan 131,367
$18,995



"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Stop into a Toyota or Honda dealer, ask to speak briefly to their
most
experienced salesperson, and ask what's selling. Or, you could
just look
around. I agree that too many gas pigs are sold to people who have
absolutely zero need for a truck of any kind, but that doesn't
negate the
fact that cars like Corollas and Civics are selling like hotcakes,
and
they're not even in the category of "high efficiency", compared to
vehicles like the Prius (50+ mpg).



"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,
What is silly is your inability to see the obvious. There is one
reason
for the increase of gas prices. There is an increase in demand,
without
any increase in supply. Consumers will not pay for better fuel
efficient
cars until the cost of the gas guzzlers make it worth their
while. The
fact that a few people buy fuel efficient cars, does not negate
the fact
that too many people are buying gas guzzling SUV and Trucks,
while
keeping their home thermostat set at 78 degrees.

Heck even Al Gore who was dumb as dirt, knew you had to raise the
cost of
gas to make it economically viable to find alternative energy
sources.
Al's idea was to tax gas $3/gal and use the tax to find
alternative
energy.


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Most of the people in rec.boats who complain about the price
of gas,
are driving trucks with low mpg and boats that burn tons of
gas. If
they really were concerned about the price of gas, they would
buy a
hybrid car and a either a trawler or sailboat.

They refuse to see the obvious. Consumers will not buy a fuel
efficient car or boat, or pay for alternative energy sources
until the
cost of petrol fuels make it worth while to do so.

That's silly. There are plenty of fuel efficient cars being
sold. It's
been that way for years. Even a basic Corolla gets over 30 mpg.
Same
with models from Honda. Dealers don't need to whore these out
with
stupid "employee discount" offers, as do the big 3.

"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,

Using your logic, when the US auto industry was controlled by 3 auto
manufacturers there was no competition between them.

Exxon
Royal Dutch/Shell
BP (4)
ChevronTexaco
Fina Elf

There really is 5 major oil companies competiting for market share.

Do you believe the US would be better if we nationalized our oil
companies?

That would make it worse......could you imagine trying to get a new refinery
built if the oil companies were nationalized?




"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Competition from whom? We have what.....3 major oil companies now? They
have absolutely no reason on earth to lower prices.

"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,
I hate it, but I know if the govt. got involved in the oil industry it
would be more inefficient than today, and in the long run we all would
be
screwed.

I can remember when Jimmy Carter was in office and credit card
companies
were charging 21-25% interest on their cards. Everyone was screaming,
the govt. needs to step in and correct this problem. Well, very soon
after the boost in interest competition corrected the problem.
Competition will correct the problem much quicker and more efficiently
than a governmental bureaucracy.


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Your explanation of futures is largely accurate, except that each time
they're bid up, the price at the pumps rises. This should infuriate
you.


"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,

Oil futures are based upon the best guess of it's future worth. They
do not determine what someone will actually pay for the oil in the
future. If oil futures are bid up to $120 a barrel, that does not
mean
that will be the market price when the future is due. It is normally
that the price of commodity will not be the same price as that on a
futures contract. The difference is the profit or lose realized by
the
person holding the futures contract.

While it is easy to hold stock certificates in a bank, when it comes
time to pay off on your futures contract, most people have to sell
the
oil, they do not have empty tankers sitting around to hold the oil
waiting for a better price. They will have to sell the oil at the
market price, which is determined by supply and demand. Trust me, if
the US reduced it consumption by 25% and China reduced it's
consumption
by 25% we would see one hell of a drop in oil prices.






"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
True, but this does not address the current issue: The price of oil,
as it stands today, is not related to supply or demand. It is where
it
is because the price has been bid up to current levels based purely
on
speculation. This is no different than the way tech stocks were
inflated all out of proportion a few years ago.


"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,
As China continues to expand it manufacture capacity and it's
citizens continue to increase their consumption of oil, the price
of
oil will continue to increase. I hate this as much as you do,
because I too buy gas and heat my home. The truth is the only way
we
can change this is to find alternative energy and more efficient
ways
to use oil. If we nationalize the oil industry, it is not going to
change the long term problem. If we elect a democratic house,
senate
and president, it still is not going to change the long term
direction. Al Gore wrote a book (I think it was about 10 yrs ago)
that forecasted this exact situation we are faced with today.

It is time to face the facts, oil is a finite resource and we are
using it up very fast.


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Well....at least we know that the vehicles from the big 3 will be
gone within a few years. As far as the figures for the big trucks,
I
think you have to subtract those sold to people who actually MUST
have such vehicles for their work. That would leave us with real
numbers for the yahoos who buy "a hemi" just because they feel
like
it.

"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,
I know you prefer to talk to the experienced salepeople to
determine buying patterns, but I found it easier to look at sales
history.
These gas guzzlers purchased in 2004 will continue to guzzle gas
for the next 15 - 20 yrs.



Best-selling vehicles

Car First-half 2004 sales
Base
price
. Ford F-Series 432,969
$19,920
. Chevrolet Silverado 322,907
$19,485
. Dodge Ram pickup 223,609 $20,365
. Toyota Camry 213,625
$19,560
. Honda Accord 192,106
$16,390
. Ford Explorer 168,059
$23,690
. Honda Civic 162,483 $13,500
. Ford Taurus 144,035 $20,320
. Chevrolet Impala 139,460
22,395
. Dodge Caravan 131,367
$18,995



"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Stop into a Toyota or Honda dealer, ask to speak briefly to
their
most
experienced salesperson, and ask what's selling. Or, you could
just look
around. I agree that too many gas pigs are sold to people who
have
absolutely zero need for a truck of any kind, but that doesn't
negate the
fact that cars like Corollas and Civics are selling like
hotcakes,
and
they're not even in the category of "high efficiency", compared
to
vehicles like the Prius (50+ mpg).



"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,
What is silly is your inability to see the obvious. There is
one
reason
for the increase of gas prices. There is an increase in
demand,
without
any increase in supply. Consumers will not pay for better fuel
efficient
cars until the cost of the gas guzzlers make it worth their
while. The
fact that a few people buy fuel efficient cars, does not negate
the fact
that too many people are buying gas guzzling SUV and Trucks,
while
keeping their home thermostat set at 78 degrees.

Heck even Al Gore who was dumb as dirt, knew you had to raise
the
cost of
gas to make it economically viable to find alternative energy
sources.
Al's idea was to tax gas $3/gal and use the tax to find
alternative
energy.


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Most of the people in rec.boats who complain about the price
of gas,
are driving trucks with low mpg and boats that burn tons of
gas. If
they really were concerned about the price of gas, they would
buy a
hybrid car and a either a trawler or sailboat.

They refuse to see the obvious. Consumers will not buy a
fuel
efficient car or boat, or pay for alternative energy sources
until the
cost of petrol fuels make it worth while to do so.

That's silly. There are plenty of fuel efficient cars being
sold. It's
been that way for years. Even a basic Corolla gets over 30
mpg.
Same
with models from Honda. Dealers don't need to whore these out
with
stupid "employee discount" offers, as do the big 3.

I don't think automobile companies competed on price back then. For reasons
nobody will ever understand, people have an almost religious loyalty to
certain brands. Even now, with the big 3 offering all sorts of ridiculous
discounts, and free satellite-activated rust control, there's still a
certain amount of brand loyalty, especially for people who live in caves and
pretend that Toyota and Honda don't exist.

As far as competition between oil companies, when do you suppose it'll
begin? Next week? A year from now? Here, like everywhere else, there are
commercial strips with large intersections, often with 3 brands of gas on
opposite corners. The prices differ by perhaps a penny. So....when will the
"correction" take place, and why?

"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,

Using your logic, when the US auto industry was controlled by 3 auto
manufacturers there was no competition between them.

Exxon
Royal Dutch/Shell
BP (4)
ChevronTexaco
Fina Elf

There really is 5 major oil companies competiting for market share.

Do you believe the US would be better if we nationalized our oil
companies?



"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Competition from whom? We have what.....3 major oil companies now? They
have absolutely no reason on earth to lower prices.

"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,
I hate it, but I know if the govt. got involved in the oil industry it
would be more inefficient than today, and in the long run we all would
be screwed.

I can remember when Jimmy Carter was in office and credit card companies
were charging 21-25% interest on their cards. Everyone was screaming,
the govt. needs to step in and correct this problem. Well, very soon
after the boost in interest competition corrected the problem.
Competition will correct the problem much quicker and more efficiently
than a governmental bureaucracy.


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Your explanation of futures is largely accurate, except that each time
they're bid up, the price at the pumps rises. This should infuriate
you.


"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,

Oil futures are based upon the best guess of it's future worth. They
do not determine what someone will actually pay for the oil in the
future. If oil futures are bid up to $120 a barrel, that does not mean
that will be the market price when the future is due. It is normally
that the price of commodity will not be the same price as that on a
futures contract. The difference is the profit or lose realized by the
person holding the futures contract.

While it is easy to hold stock certificates in a bank, when it comes
time to pay off on your futures contract, most people have to sell the
oil, they do not have empty tankers sitting around to hold the oil
waiting for a better price. They will have to sell the oil at the
market price, which is determined by supply and demand. Trust me, if
the US reduced it consumption by 25% and China reduced it's
consumption by 25% we would see one hell of a drop in oil prices.






"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
True, but this does not address the current issue: The price of oil,
as it stands today, is not related to supply or demand. It is where
it is because the price has been bid up to current levels based
purely on speculation. This is no different than the way tech stocks
were inflated all out of proportion a few years ago.


"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,
As China continues to expand it manufacture capacity and it's
citizens continue to increase their consumption of oil, the price of
oil will continue to increase. I hate this as much as you do,
because I too buy gas and heat my home. The truth is the only way
we can change this is to find alternative energy and more efficient
ways to use oil. If we nationalize the oil industry, it is not going
to change the long term problem. If we elect a democratic house,
senate and president, it still is not going to change the long term
direction. Al Gore wrote a book (I think it was about 10 yrs ago)
that forecasted this exact situation we are faced with today.

It is time to face the facts, oil is a finite resource and we are
using it up very fast.


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Well....at least we know that the vehicles from the big 3 will be
gone within a few years. As far as the figures for the big trucks,
I think you have to subtract those sold to people who actually MUST
have such vehicles for their work. That would leave us with real
numbers for the yahoos who buy "a hemi" just because they feel like
it.

"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,
I know you prefer to talk to the experienced salepeople to
determine buying patterns, but I found it easier to look at sales
history.
These gas guzzlers purchased in 2004 will continue to guzzle gas
for the next 15 - 20 yrs.



Best-selling vehicles

Car First-half 2004 sales
Base price
. Ford F-Series 432,969 $19,920
. Chevrolet Silverado 322,907
$19,485
. Dodge Ram pickup 223,609 $20,365
. Toyota Camry 213,625
$19,560
. Honda Accord 192,106
$16,390
. Ford Explorer 168,059 $23,690
. Honda Civic 162,483 $13,500
. Ford Taurus 144,035 $20,320
. Chevrolet Impala 139,460 22,395
. Dodge Caravan 131,367 $18,995



"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Stop into a Toyota or Honda dealer, ask to speak briefly to their
most
experienced salesperson, and ask what's selling. Or, you could
just look
around. I agree that too many gas pigs are sold to people who
have
absolutely zero need for a truck of any kind, but that doesn't
negate the
fact that cars like Corollas and Civics are selling like
hotcakes, and
they're not even in the category of "high efficiency", compared
to
vehicles like the Prius (50+ mpg).



"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,
What is silly is your inability to see the obvious. There is
one reason
for the increase of gas prices. There is an increase in demand,
without
any increase in supply. Consumers will not pay for better fuel
efficient
cars until the cost of the gas guzzlers make it worth their
while. The
fact that a few people buy fuel efficient cars, does not negate
the fact
that too many people are buying gas guzzling SUV and Trucks,
while
keeping their home thermostat set at 78 degrees.

Heck even Al Gore who was dumb as dirt, knew you had to raise
the cost of
gas to make it economically viable to find alternative energy
sources.
Al's idea was to tax gas $3/gal and use the tax to find
alternative
energy.


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Most of the people in rec.boats who complain about the price
of gas,
are driving trucks with low mpg and boats that burn tons of
gas. If
they really were concerned about the price of gas, they would
buy a
hybrid car and a either a trawler or sailboat.

They refuse to see the obvious. Consumers will not buy a fuel
efficient car or boat, or pay for alternative energy sources
until the
cost of petrol fuels make it worth while to do so.

That's silly. There are plenty of fuel efficient cars being
sold. It's
been that way for years. Even a basic Corolla gets over 30 mpg.
Same
with models from Honda. Dealers don't need to whore these out
with
stupid "employee discount" offers, as do the big 3.

Doug Kanter wrote:
Your explanation of futures is largely accurate, except that each time
they're bid up, the price at the pumps rises. This should infuriate you.

That's exactly what happens here.
A sister province has gas price regulation and the per liter price is
usually 5 to 10 cents cheaper...and they don't even have a refinery.
There is an ongoing debate in Nova Scotia about returing to gas price
regulation to protect the public from gouging.