Gas prices - Is the Gouging Obvious to Everyone Yet?

[Zipp0 1]

The author of this oped makes some interesting points - http://thecalifornian.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070416/OPINION/704160329/1014.

Gas prices were lowest right before the mid term elections, and they have climbed steadily up ever since. Coincidence? I think not.

I think an investigation is now in order. If the prices are fluctuating due to normal market forces, the execs in Big Oil have no worrries. But until we see their files, and ask them, we will continue to be at their mercy.

--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.

[billvon 2,990]

>But until we see their files, and ask them, we will continue to be at their mercy.

"Being at their mercy" is another name for "capitalism." Don't like it? The solution is to get a flex-fuel car, or a diesel car, or a natural gas car. The solution is not to pass laws that ensure you cheap gas. Choosing what's cheapest (and what is the best investment) is _your_ job.

[Zipp0 1]

Quote

"Being at their mercy" is another name for "capitalism."

Gouging is illegal and not a part of capitalism, as are cartels. I call bullshit.

--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

The author of this oped makes some interesting points - http://thecalifornian.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070416/OPINION/704160329/1014.

Gas prices were lowest right before the mid term elections, and they have climbed steadily up ever since.

Gas prices were at the lowest levels of the past year in late January... lower than the October lows.

[billvon 2,990]

>Gouging is illegal . . .

It shouldn't be. You should be able to charge whatever you want for your product - and your customers should always have the right (and the smarts) to not buy your product if you are foolish enough to overprice it.

Now, if companies collude so that is not an option, then you have a case. But that's already covered under anti-monopoly laws.

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Quote

"Being at their mercy" is another name for "capitalism."

Gouging is illegal and not a part of capitalism, ....

It's only illegal if you can't afford to buy a government.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

I think an investigation is now in order. If the prices are fluctuating due to normal market forces, the execs in Big Oil have no worrries. But until we see their files, and ask them, we will continue to be at their mercy.

I had always thought you were a civil liberatarian - in favor of maintaining or increasing privacy rights. I'd expect to see things about opening investigations and examining private files from the Bush Administration, but not from you.

However, here are some other proposed solutions to this problem:
1) Buy vehicles that use less gasoline;
2) Buy oil stock.

You know, there will be winners and losers in everything. You might as well get in on it.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[BillyVance 34]

Quote

>Gouging is illegal . . .

It shouldn't be. You should be able to charge whatever you want for your product - and your customers should always have the right (and the smarts) to not buy your product if you are foolish enough to overprice it.

Now, if companies collude so that is not an option, then you have a case. But that's already covered under anti-monopoly laws.

It should be illegal to gouge customers at least at motel rooms when they are fleeing a hurricane. There are already laws against it in Alabama. Motels can't go over a certain percentage above their normal rates in such situations.

"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban

[billvon 2,990]

>It should be illegal to gouge customers at least at motel rooms when they are fleeing a hurricane.

Why? Demand is high, and they're going to be 110% full anyway.

If they were turning people away and keeping their rooms empty, then you would have a case that they are actively doing harm by refusing shelter to people. But if they are as full as they can get, then what is the (objective) harm in charging people more for a room?

(I understand it's "not nice" but I can't see the objective harm.)

[Zipp0 1]

Quote

Quote

I think an investigation is now in order. If the prices are fluctuating due to normal market forces, the execs in Big Oil have no worrries. But until we see their files, and ask them, we will continue to be at their mercy.

I had always thought you were a civil liberatarian - in favor of maintaining or increasing privacy rights. I'd expect to see things about opening investigations and examining private files from the Bush Administration, but not from you.

However, here are some other proposed solutions to this problem:
1) Buy vehicles that use less gasoline;
2) Buy oil stock.

You know, there will be winners and losers in everything. You might as well get in on it.

Come on, the minute I buy oil stock they will find a trillion barrels flowing out of the rocky mountains!

As far as privacy and civil liberties go, I think gasoline and heating oil are different than other products. For just about every American, they are an absolute necessity, the same as water and food. We need to know for sure if there is collusion in the marketplace, and until we get certain information, we will never know.

--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.

[NCclimber 0]

I liked this part of the piece:

Quote

There is, of course, no smoking-gun to prove oil companies set their prices in concert, acting as a cartel. There is also no evidence that a combination of collusion and opportunism led to last fall's price drop.

Funny how there don't seem to be any oil industry analysts making claims of collussion.

[ExAFO 0]

SOP for oil/gas thread:

1: Someone bitches.
2: Euros remind us that their prices are higher.
3: Billvon's customary doomsday post, with self-congratulatory bits about his electric bike, solar panels, hybrid cars, and house located 1 nanometer from his workplace (all great, if you have the $ in the first place).
4: Someone calls Peak Oil junk science.
5: We all go skydiving on the weekend, burning x Gal/hr, depending on what the jumpship is.
6: This dead horse carcass of a thread gets put back into the stable until gas prices go up a quarter or two, after a 30-cent drop.

Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW.

[kallend 2,026]

The $US is down again, too. 15 year lows against some currencies.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[masterrig 1]

Quote

>Gouging is illegal . . .

It shouldn't be. You should be able to charge whatever you want for your product - and your customers should always have the right (and the smarts) to not buy your product if you are foolish enough to overprice it.

Now, if companies collude so that is not an option, then you have a case. But that's already covered under anti-monopoly laws.

_____________________________________

I had an old boy tell me one time, in regard to selling something. "If, you have the time and the patience, put your price on it and somebody, some day, will buy it!"
That was in response to me asking about what I thought was an outrageous price for something.


Chuck

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

The $US is down again, too. 15 year lows against some currencies.

The oil companies are causing that, too.

[BillyVance 34]

Quote

>It should be illegal to gouge customers at least at motel rooms when they are fleeing a hurricane.

Why? Demand is high, and they're going to be 110% full anyway.

If they were turning people away and keeping their rooms empty, then you would have a case that they are actively doing harm by refusing shelter to people. But if they are as full as they can get, then what is the (objective) harm in charging people more for a room?

(I understand it's "not nice" but I can't see the objective harm.)

I can understand your point. I don't have a problem with motels doubling or tripling their rates for a specific weekend like a NASCAR event or major college football game nearby, because if people want to go to those events and need a place to stay, they should be able to afford the motel rooms.

What's NOT okay in my book is people, no matter how rich or poor, being forced to evacuate and find lodging in a safe area hundreds of miles away and the poorer people not being able to afford the gouging rates.

Sporting events, okay.
Disasters, not okay.

"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban

[billvon 2,990]

>and the poorer people not being able to afford the gouging rates.

I don't see much of a difference how rich/poor someone is if you're turning people away.

Like I said, if they're turning people away because they can't pay, bad. If they are just charging more (and still filling their hotel) they are doing all they can to house people. They're just making more money at it.

Nice? Definitely not. And I'd be all for an ad campaign by other hotels showing what assholes they were - and hopefully they would suffer as a result. But new laws? Don't need them. We already have a way to deal with companies like that.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Gouging is illegal

Typically only in an emergency. The reason is tha if a supplier of necessary goods raises the prices before, during or after a disaster, he is, in effect, holding the people hostage because the people have no choice to get their goods elsewhere. Other than that, a businessperson who tries to charge too much may well find his business failing.

Think of the Calvin and Hobbes, where Calvin would set up a lemonade stand, attempting to sell it for exhorbitant amounts and decrying that he had no customers. Calvin was attempting to gouge, but people who wanted lemonade could get it cheaper elsewhere.

Quote

not a part of capitalism

Sure it is. If you can get somebody to pay 100x for something that cost you x, then, well, good on you.

Quote

as are cartels

Yes, cartels can be controlled by anti-trust laws. Of course, the easiest way to break a cartel is to encourage the capitalist entities to cheat each other.

So what is to be done is, if it can be done better and cheaper, get in on the business, open up a competitor, and supply good cheap gasoline.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[BillyVance 34]

I remember one episode of The Apprentice where one of the guys tried his darnedest best to sell a glass of lemonade for $100 out near Wall Street.

Now that was a trip... and no, he wasn't successful.

"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban

[pfloyd 0]

If prices get any higher im going to have to trade my mustang in for a real horse

My drinking team has a skydiving problem

[Gawain 0]

Do you know how gas stations have to structure their pricing? They don't do it based on the gas that's in their tanks now. They do it based on what they will be paying wholesale for fuel 6-12 weeks out.

The futures market determines that as well. Oil prices spiked bacause of Iran. They spiked further because of the UK hostages.

It's been four months since the elections. In all actuality, oil prices were stable, and declining for a while. Tensions in Iran caused the markets to go up. Current oil commodities are trading for MAY, and they are down to about $63/bbl.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[Zipp0 1]

Quote

Do you know how gas stations have to structure their pricing? They don't do it based on the gas that's in their tanks now. They do it based on what they will be paying wholesale for fuel 6-12 weeks out.

The futures market determines that as well. Oil prices spiked bacause of Iran. They spiked further because of the UK hostages.

It's been four months since the elections. In all actuality, oil prices were stable, and declining for a while. Tensions in Iran caused the markets to go up. Current oil commodities are trading for MAY, and they are down to about $63/bbl.

I know that's the standard BS answer, yes, but I just don't buy it. Here's why:

So they forecast a bad hurricane season, and prices rise for weeks in anticipation. We then pay higher prices for nearly the entire season, and the hurricanes never come. Now, in a free market, there should be a backlash resulting in the bottom falling out of the prices. It never happens though, and they move on to the next excuse to raise prices based on some imaginary threat, and we are paying high prices for some Iran BS that may never happen. We end up paying for the artificially inflated gas that the retailer paid too much for, so we pay for the gas already in their tanks, unless they think the price might increase, in which case we pay for the future guess gas price.

What should happen, is that when there is no hurricane destruction, the retailer and the oil industry, and especially the futures fuckwads lose their ass for guessing wrong and ripping us off for their crystal ball disaster outlook crap.

It's the biggest flim-flam in the history of the world.

--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.

[billvon 2,990]

>It never happens though, and they move on to the next excuse to
>raise prices based on some imaginary threat . . .

I don't see them giving "excuses" - they're just raising prices.

[livendive 8]

From this year's Fortune 500 most profitable list:

Quote

1. Exxon Mobil
The oil giant racked up $39.5 billion in earnings last year, the largest-ever profit in U.S. history. That figure topped the previous record of $36.1 billion, also set by Exxon Mobil, in 2005. Profits were up 9.3% from the previous year, while sales rose 2.2%.

7. Chevron
Earnings of $17.1 billion were up 22% year-over-year, bolstered by Chevron's $16.4 billion acquisition of Unocal. That deal, as well as its 2001 purchase of Texaco, makes the company the second-largest U.S. oil outfit, behind Exxon Mobil.

8. ConocoPhillips
No. 5 on the Fortune 500 this year is another big oil company that's reaped handsome profits thanks to record crude oil prices in 2006. But it wasn't oil prices alone: ConocoPhillips managed to boost profits by 15%, to $15.5 billion, on only 4% revenue growth.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

I know that's the standard BS answer, yes, but I just don't buy it. Here's why:

So they forecast a bad hurricane season, and prices rise for weeks in anticipation. We then pay higher prices for nearly the entire season, and the hurricanes never come. Now, in a free market, there should be a backlash resulting in the bottom falling out of the prices. It never happens though, and they move on to the next excuse to raise prices based on some imaginary threat

Could you give some actual examples of this???