On Tue, 01 Aug 2006 05:19:24 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:


"Jack Goff" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 22:25:00 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:



Bzzzt. I asked first, and you haven't answered. Explain how the US
price is "out of hand".

The price elsewhere is completely irrelevant. That's your answer to the
Europe issue. As far as the price here, 25% to 35% of it consists of
trading
excess, like tech stocks before the bottom fell out. For stocks, it
doesn't
matter, because nobody is required to own them. For oil, the design of our
country (which only gets worse) mandates its use. The oil companies,
knowing
this, do whatever they want with the price. That's a crime, and should be
dealt with.


So now the US is an island, insulated from the rest of the world?
Everyone else is "irrelevant"? Really?

So the price is 25 - 35% "trading excess" (cite?), which is the
futures traders as you've said before, right? But then the oil
companies are to blame for the price, not the traders. Uh huh.

The same oil companies that "do whatever they want with the price" are
selling here at *half* the price as the rest of the world. And they
do this while taking, by any definition, a modest profit margin. You
are aware that their profits come on quantity, not margin?

Did the investment company run you off because of customer complaints,
or did you leave voluntarily?

Cripes, you're stupid. Look at each paragraph you just wrote, and see if you
can figure out what's wrong with them. Try it when sober, if that ever
happens.


Made to look foolish, into the corner, and out snarlin' comes Joe.
Typical.

Did the investment company run you off because of customer
complaints, or did you leave voluntarily?

Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
wrote:
Not at all, he goes by Jim H wich is his name, what do you go
by...."basskisser?"

I guess you're not bright enough to comprehend the question, which was
don't you think it's pretty childish to hide behind a killfile while
calling someone petty names and childish insults? Killfile is fine, but
don't killfile someone then start name calling like a little kid.


Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

Who have I killfiled, Bert? And who did I call childish and petty names
after I killfiled them?

ACP wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

Bassy, you know I side with you much of the time, because like me, you're
always right. But, in this case, I have to say I'm 99.9% sure you're
either
playing games, or not getting enough sleep. NOYB said he was giving you
AN
EXAMPLE. Do you want him to enumerate every single source of income for
Citi?

I thoroughly understand the example. But, if you'll go back and read my
first post, to Calif Bill, you'll see that he quoted a number of 34%.
That is what I called bull**** on, and to this end, no one here who is
arguing against that, has come up with it.

basskisser wrote:

"Horse****!! How would Citigroup make a 34% profit when their interest
rates aren't even that high?????? Let alone their operating expenses!"


None of the subsequent examples in this thread of Citi's profit percentage
has mentioned 34%. We showed you how their profits can be higher than their
interest rates. You clearly said that was horse bleep.

That statement was in DIRECT response to this statement from Calif
Bill:
Oil makes about 16% profit. Citigroup about 34%.

Show me.

basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
wrote:
Not at all, he goes by Jim H wich is his name, what do you go
by...."basskisser?"
I guess you're not bright enough to comprehend the question, which was
don't you think it's pretty childish to hide behind a killfile while
calling someone petty names and childish insults? Killfile is fine, but
don't killfile someone then start name calling like a little kid.

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

Who have I killfiled, Bert? And who did I call childish and petty names
after I killfiled them?


Kevin, and I am addressing this response to Kevin!

Grow up and stop being a prissy little bitch.

Jack Goff wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 12:51:35 GMT, Don White
wrote:


Did I miss something?

Yeah... puberty and your calling to be a professional batboy. Just
two among a long list of thing that you missed, Donny.

More petty and childish name calling. Why am I not surprised. Grow up.

"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

ACP wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

Bassy, you know I side with you much of the time, because like me,
you're
always right. But, in this case, I have to say I'm 99.9% sure you're
either
playing games, or not getting enough sleep. NOYB said he was giving
you
AN
EXAMPLE. Do you want him to enumerate every single source of income
for
Citi?

I thoroughly understand the example. But, if you'll go back and read my
first post, to Calif Bill, you'll see that he quoted a number of 34%.
That is what I called bull**** on, and to this end, no one here who is
arguing against that, has come up with it.

basskisser wrote:

"Horse****!! How would Citigroup make a 34% profit when their interest
rates aren't even that high?????? Let alone their operating expenses!"


None of the subsequent examples in this thread of Citi's profit
percentage
has mentioned 34%. We showed you how their profits can be higher than
their
interest rates. You clearly said that was horse bleep.

That statement was in DIRECT response to this statement from Calif
Bill:
Oil makes about 16% profit. Citigroup about 34%.

Show me.

Guess you don't know what subsequent means.

Did you bother to read the response from Calif Bill posted last night at
11:32PM? In case you missed it, here's the contents:

=============================================
34% what?
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=C

Profit Margin (ttm): 31.56%

Operating Margin (ttm): 47.83%

Return on Equity (ttm): 18.19%

basskisser wrote:
ACP wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

Bassy, you know I side with you much of the time, because like me, you're
always right. But, in this case, I have to say I'm 99.9% sure you're
either
playing games, or not getting enough sleep. NOYB said he was giving you
AN
EXAMPLE. Do you want him to enumerate every single source of income for
Citi?
I thoroughly understand the example. But, if you'll go back and read my
first post, to Calif Bill, you'll see that he quoted a number of 34%.
That is what I called bull**** on, and to this end, no one here who is
arguing against that, has come up with it.
basskisser wrote:

"Horse****!! How would Citigroup make a 34% profit when their interest
rates aren't even that high?????? Let alone their operating expenses!"


None of the subsequent examples in this thread of Citi's profit percentage
has mentioned 34%. We showed you how their profits can be higher than their
interest rates. You clearly said that was horse bleep.

That statement was in DIRECT response to this statement from Calif
Bill:
Oil makes about 16% profit. Citigroup about 34%.

Show me.


http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=C

ACP wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

ACP wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

Bassy, you know I side with you much of the time, because like me,
you're
always right. But, in this case, I have to say I'm 99.9% sure you're
either
playing games, or not getting enough sleep. NOYB said he was giving
you
AN
EXAMPLE. Do you want him to enumerate every single source of income
for
Citi?

I thoroughly understand the example. But, if you'll go back and read my
first post, to Calif Bill, you'll see that he quoted a number of 34%.
That is what I called bull**** on, and to this end, no one here who is
arguing against that, has come up with it.

basskisser wrote:

"Horse****!! How would Citigroup make a 34% profit when their interest
rates aren't even that high?????? Let alone their operating expenses!"


None of the subsequent examples in this thread of Citi's profit
percentage
has mentioned 34%. We showed you how their profits can be higher than
their
interest rates. You clearly said that was horse bleep.

That statement was in DIRECT response to this statement from Calif
Bill:
Oil makes about 16% profit. Citigroup about 34%.

Show me.

Guess you don't know what subsequent means.

Did you bother to read the response from Calif Bill posted last night at
11:32PM? In case you missed it, here's the contents:

=============================================
34% what?
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=C

Profit Margin (ttm): 31.56%

And that equals 34%?

"basskisser" wrote in message
ps.com...

ACP wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

ACP wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

Bassy, you know I side with you much of the time, because like me,
you're
always right. But, in this case, I have to say I'm 99.9% sure
you're
either
playing games, or not getting enough sleep. NOYB said he was giving
you
AN
EXAMPLE. Do you want him to enumerate every single source of income
for
Citi?

I thoroughly understand the example. But, if you'll go back and read
my
first post, to Calif Bill, you'll see that he quoted a number of
34%.
That is what I called bull**** on, and to this end, no one here who
is
arguing against that, has come up with it.

basskisser wrote:

"Horse****!! How would Citigroup make a 34% profit when their interest
rates aren't even that high?????? Let alone their operating expenses!"


None of the subsequent examples in this thread of Citi's profit
percentage
has mentioned 34%. We showed you how their profits can be higher than
their
interest rates. You clearly said that was horse bleep.

That statement was in DIRECT response to this statement from Calif
Bill:
Oil makes about 16% profit. Citigroup about 34%.

Show me.

Guess you don't know what subsequent means.

Did you bother to read the response from Calif Bill posted last night at
11:32PM? In case you missed it, here's the contents:

=============================================
34% what?
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=C

Profit Margin (ttm): 31.56%

And that equals 34%?

From your message of July 29th 10:32AM

" give it a shot, asshole. Show me how Citigroup makes profits in the
range of 35%. You should really consider talking to the biggest
corporations in the US, they'd love to know your secret!"


If you don't believe 31.56% is not in the "range" of 34% you can't face
reality or your just a nit picker. When someone shows you "facts", why
can't you acknowledge it?

On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 22:25:00 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:


"Jack Goff" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 11:11:11 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Jack Goff" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 06:18:21 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:


"Jack Goff" wrote in message
om...
On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 14:50:32 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:



34% return on your money? Again, Trump would love that kind of
profit!


It's not all that unusual in some businesses. But, there seems to be a
magic
number, beyond which some people think it's excessive. Even the oil
industries profits would not be considered outrageous, if the absolute
price
(which we pay) wasn't out of hand.


But it's not at all unreasonable. We pay about *half* of what the
European countries pay per gallon. I don't like paying it, but maybe
you'd like to explain how the US price is "out of hand", especially
compared to the rest of the world?



A sentient being would understand why what you have said is completely
illogical.


So you can't back up your statement, huh? That's OK.

That bit about Europe - do you think it means we should realize how good
we've go it here, and stop complaining?


Bzzzt. I asked first, and you haven't answered. Explain how the US
price is "out of hand".

The price elsewhere is completely irrelevant. That's your answer to the
Europe issue. As far as the price here, 25% to 35% of it consists of trading
excess, like tech stocks before the bottom fell out. For stocks, it doesn't
matter, because nobody is required to own them. For oil, the design of our
country (which only gets worse) mandates its use. The oil companies, knowing
this, do whatever they want with the price. That's a crime, and should be
dealt with.


What would you do, Doug?
--
******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

John