Paid $2.91 at a normally competitive filling station for unleaded 92
octane yesterday.

Looks like a repeat of the 2005 fuel pricing may be in store. Those
*******s. But I guess you can't blame them, since most of the increase
last year went straight to the Record Profit Bottom Line of the big oil
companies and their stock prices have now been adjusted to take those
profits into account. Failure to reproduce the same type of earnings
this year would have a negative impact on future stock values, and we
certainly couldn't have that, could we?

On 23 Mar 2006 09:23:29 -0800, wrote:

Paid $2.91 at a normally competitive filling station for unleaded 92
octane yesterday.

Looks like a repeat of the 2005 fuel pricing may be in store. Those
*******s. But I guess you can't blame them, since most of the increase
last year went straight to the Record Profit Bottom Line of the big oil
companies and their stock prices have now been adjusted to take those
profits into account. Failure to reproduce the same type of earnings
this year would have a negative impact on future stock values, and we
certainly couldn't have that, could we?

What are you burning that high octane stuff in? I know Acura's require it,
but most cars don't.

Yesterday, in Holland, the price was almost $6 per gallon. Guess we
shouldn't bitch too much.
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On 23 Mar 2006 09:23:29 -0800, wrote:

Paid $2.91 at a normally competitive filling station for unleaded 92
octane yesterday.

Looks like a repeat of the 2005 fuel pricing may be in store. Those
*******s. But I guess you can't blame them, since most of the increase
last year went straight to the Record Profit Bottom Line of the big oil
companies and their stock prices have now been adjusted to take those
profits into account. Failure to reproduce the same type of earnings
this year would have a negative impact on future stock values, and we
certainly couldn't have that, could we?

What are you burning that high octane stuff in? I know Acura's require it,
but most cars don't.

Yesterday, in Holland, the price was almost $6 per gallon. Guess we
shouldn't bitch too much.
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On 23 Mar 2006 09:23:29 -0800, wrote:

Paid $2.91 at a normally competitive filling station for unleaded 92
octane yesterday.

Looks like a repeat of the 2005 fuel pricing may be in store. Those
*******s. But I guess you can't blame them, since most of the increase
last year went straight to the Record Profit Bottom Line of the big oil
companies and their stock prices have now been adjusted to take those
profits into account. Failure to reproduce the same type of earnings
this year would have a negative impact on future stock values, and we
certainly couldn't have that, could we?

What are you burning that high octane stuff in? I know Acura's require it,
but most cars don't.

Yesterday, in Holland, the price was almost $6 per gallon. Guess we
shouldn't bitch too much.

Why John? Why the hell should we feel good about our gas prices running up
just because the price of gas is higher somewhere else. I've never
understood that argument.

On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 05:24:41 GMT, "Bryan" wrote:


"JohnH" wrote in message
.. .
On 23 Mar 2006 09:23:29 -0800, wrote:

Paid $2.91 at a normally competitive filling station for unleaded 92
octane yesterday.

Looks like a repeat of the 2005 fuel pricing may be in store. Those
*******s. But I guess you can't blame them, since most of the increase
last year went straight to the Record Profit Bottom Line of the big oil
companies and their stock prices have now been adjusted to take those
profits into account. Failure to reproduce the same type of earnings
this year would have a negative impact on future stock values, and we
certainly couldn't have that, could we?

What are you burning that high octane stuff in? I know Acura's require it,
but most cars don't.

Yesterday, in Holland, the price was almost $6 per gallon. Guess we
shouldn't bitch too much.

Why John? Why the hell should we feel good about our gas prices running up
just because the price of gas is higher somewhere else. I've never
understood that argument.


"Feel good?" Did I say that somewhere?

Have you never felt a little self-satisfied when you got a little better
deal than the next guy?

There are people here who wish to have flame wars. I'm not one of them.
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

Given the ungodly profits, etc., and the daily fluctuations (usually
upwards) I believe there is a special place in Hell for the oil people.

Ray
wrote in message
oups.com...
Paid $2.91 at a normally competitive filling station for unleaded 92
octane yesterday.

Looks like a repeat of the 2005 fuel pricing may be in store. Those
*******s. But I guess you can't blame them, since most of the increase
last year went straight to the Record Profit Bottom Line of the big oil
companies and their stock prices have now been adjusted to take those
profits into account. Failure to reproduce the same type of earnings
this year would have a negative impact on future stock values, and we
certainly couldn't have that, could we?

But,of course. Why would they not move up this time of the year. It's only logical.

wrote:
Paid $2.91 at a normally competitive filling station for unleaded 92
octane yesterday.

Looks like a repeat of the 2005 fuel pricing may be in store. Those
*******s. But I guess you can't blame them, since most of the increase
last year went straight to the Record Profit Bottom Line of the big oil
companies and their stock prices have now been adjusted to take those
profits into account. Failure to reproduce the same type of earnings
this year would have a negative impact on future stock values, and we
certainly couldn't have that, could we?

It was and is not unexpected. Regardless of what one thinks of Economics
101 and Commodities they have rigged the market place.
The buddy in Washington endorses what they are doing as righteousness
endorsed by the CATO Institute. He could have used Regulatory agencies
in the Market and in anti trust in our national interests. The whole
world would have benefited. Instead we have a devalued dollar, rising
prices, and lowering wages in the rush to Globalism. The dollar's death
was sealed with the cessation of the M3 Report I think. It's just a
question of how slow it is.
Let the rest of the world look to their affairs and fortunes and our
Elected Officials attend the the Republic and Americans' freedoms and
prosperity.
Did you like the speech about the benefits of outsourcing/exporting
Americans' jobs to India and Globalism?
Dismal appraisal. I hope it is dead wrong.