Gas prices in other countries

[Universe Prince]

You'd be right if we were dealing with a commodity with an elastic demand, but we're not. Oil has a very inelastic demand and increasing the supply will make no difference. A simple look at the statistics will show you that as the world production has significantly increased, yet demand has done nothing but increase significantly right alongside.

And you might be right if the problem was elasticity. The problem, however, is not elasticity. The problem is volatility. The market in oil is not so stable as you make out.

As for building a new refinery, it is generally far cheaper to expand existing refineries. Moreover it is easier to build them in countries where labor is cheaper and workers have fewer rights (why bother with their health and safety concerns?). So again, you've given me no incentive to increase supply.

Of course not. I believe the cost of building a new refinery was a part of my point.

Profit consideration is my whole point. There is no compelling reason to drill in the ANWR or build dozens of new refineries. As I've pointed out, these companies closed refineries in the 90's. Why build them now?!?

Because the average cost of gasoline is going to be $4/gallon if isn't already. And possibly $5/gallon in the next 12 months. As I said before, higher prices might not immediately result in reduced demand, but it will in the long term. People will be less likely to take frequent trips to the store, will reconsider long commutes when they move, will do little things to cut back on how much gasoline they use. And those little things will add up. People will use less gasoline. The long term interest of the oil companies is to find ways to at least plateau if not reduce the cost of gasoline. But as I said before, if building a refinery elsewhere and importing the gasoline is cheaper, then that is what will happen. It is increasingly what does happen.

No, it isn't an evil conspiracy, it is just business.

That's what I'm saying. Though while you might mean that in a bad way, I don't. We've regulated ourselves into a situation where building refineries here is less profitable than not building refineries here. Taking that into consideration, and whether or not one considers that a good thing, to complain that the oil companies are concerned about trying to remain profitable seems really petty, to put it politely.

And these companies aren't all American either. The notion of American oil independence is a joke. Many of these companies aren't American at all. The ones that are, still have international business to conduct. I don't understand what "energy independence" is supposed to mean. It is a typical political sound byte that has no meaning in the real world of economics.

I agree there, completely. Energy independence is not only impossible, it is undesirable. But it makes a good talking point for self-aggrandizing pundits and politicians.

[Christians4LessGvt]

"It is a matter of record for a publicly traded company.
It wouldn't be very difficult to obtain, the media does it all the time."

Yeah.  well then I would of said.....
"you fraud vote pandering POS "it's a matter of public record" go look it up yourself!

[Lanya]

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/38223.html
Title:
Here're the savings from Arctic drilling ? 75 cents a barrel

[_JS]

And you might be right if the problem was elasticity. The problem, however, is not elasticity. The problem is volatility. The market in oil is not so stable as you make out. Because the average cost of gasoline is going to be $4/gallon if isn't already. And possibly $5/gallon in the next 12 months. As I said before, higher prices might not immediately result in reduced demand, but it will in the long term. People will be less likely to take frequent trips to the store, will reconsider long commutes when they move, will do little things to cut back on how much gasoline they use. And those little things will add up. People will use less gasoline. The long term interest of the oil companies is to find ways to at least plateau if not reduce the cost of gasoline. But as I said before, if building a refinery elsewhere and importing the gasoline is cheaper, then that is what will happen. It is increasingly what does happen.

It is a volatile market, but that doesn't change the fact that oil is an inelastic commodity. You're missing a few key points.

1. Individual consumer consumption of gasoline is not the only use of oil. It has industrial use as well, oil-fired power plants for example. Consider all the products made from petroleum or using petroleum as a part of the manufacturing process. Oil is used in the extraction of other energy sources. In fact, and you'll love this, it takes quite a bit of oil to extract oil from the tar sands.

2. The long-term interest for oil companies is to absolutely not tap out all of the current oil supply which is finite. But we run into the same problem Prince, and I think you agree. The largest oil field in the world is in Saudi Arabia and was discovered by the British in the 1940's. We are increasingly finding smaller oil fields, in more difficult extraction locations, and of poorer quality. If the price of oil is not very high then there is absolutely no financial incentive to tap that oil.

A brilliant economist once said that in the long-run we're all dead. In the case of oil, he was spot-on. I'm not saying it is business in a degrading tone, just indifferent. Unless you and I are willing to pay premium money for oil, their is absolutely no incentive to drill in the ANWR or invest in very expensive new refineries. If and when we reach that point, you'll see it happen.

3. Increasing supply does not necessarily reduce demand.

I agree there, completely. Energy independence is not only impossible, it is undesirable. But it makes a good talking point for self-aggrandizing pundits and politicians.

Thank God, someone else understands!

By the way, there are two really good articles on oil in this month's National Geographic. One on how well Western Siberia is doing as well as how Moscow has centralised the oil production. Plus, one on oil supply. Great reads, both of them.

[sirs]

Can't think of a much more scarier scenario than our post Katrina Fed centralizing and running the nation's oil supply.  Well, actually I can.....the same post Katrina Fed that also wants to centralize and run all of our healthcare

 

[_JS]

Can't think of a much more scarier scenario than our post Katrina Fed centralizing and running the nation's oil supply.  Well, actually I can.....the same post Katrina Fed that also wants to centralize and run all of our healthcare

 

They cannot centralize our oil. We have nothing worth centralizing. If they did, you wouldn't even know it because no one would give a damn. It would be like nationalizing our coffee plantations.

Sheesh.

Russia, on the other hand, actually has oil. In fact, they are the world's leading supplier. You better get used to American leaders flying to Moscow. Russians don't hold hands though. It is ashame, I thought Vlad and George made a cute couple.

[sirs]

So when Maxine Waters was going off on the Exxon President about how "this liberal would have the Government run it all", she was just ......... blowing smoke?

[_JS]

So when Maxine Waters was going off on the Exxon President about how "this liberal would have the Government run it all", she was just ......... blowing smoke?

I have no idea what she said or meant.

What you said was this: "Can't think of a much more scarier scenario than our post Katrina Fed centralizing and running the nation's oil supply."

Our oil supply, as in the oil inside this country's borders, is nothing. Just compare it to the world supply. American oil peaked in 1970 for goodness sake!

Does it somehow surprise you that a politician says something dumb? You (nor anyone here) still haven't explained to me why the CEO lied.

[sirs]

So when Maxine Waters was going off on the Exxon President about how "this liberal would have the Government run it all", she was just ......... blowing smoke?

I have no idea what she said or meant.

She clearly stated her agenda of government centrally running the oil companies, thru DC

What you said was this: "Can't think of a much more scarier scenario than our post Katrina Fed centralizing and running the nation's oil supply."

Precisely what Miss Waters would want to do.

Does it somehow surprise you that a politician says something dumb?

Nope, not at all.

You (nor anyone here) still haven't explained to me why the CEO lied.

about what?....not knowing what his actually salary is?  I don't actually know what my salary is....so I must be lying, right?  Besides being a question that's simply posed to stir emotion at the high amount he's making, what's the revelence?  There isn't any outside of doing precisely that, invoking animosity for someone daring to make as much as big corporation CEO's make.

[Brassmask]

Do you really consider <10% profit on sales to be "charging too much"?

I do.

I'm sure this time next year we'll be reading about the oil execs getting obscene bonuses. 

As far as I'm concerned, the gas prices are wreaking havoc on our way of life and now is as good a time as any to at the very least threaten to national gas production in this country then move into generating electricity from clean resources like wind, solar and tidal combined and allow corporations to only sell electric vehicles in the US.

It is WAAAAAAAY past time to put aside that socially retarded and ideologically rigid stance of not interfering in "the market". 

Gas is a non-negotiable kind of purchase.  It is unnecessarily too integral to our economy and our way of life as Americans.  (Of course, Ami has made the ridiculous case that we can "choose" to not buy gas but I doubt my mother would like to "choose" to use a bicycle to ride the 100 miles from Memphis to Corinth, MS to visit her mother in the nursing home every week.  Maybe she could consider a horse and buggy, eh, Ami?  That's a choice, right?)

[Amianthus]

(Of course, Ami has made the ridiculous case that we can "choose" to not buy gas but I doubt my mother would like to "choose" to use a bicycle to ride the 100 miles from Memphis to Corinth, MS to visit her mother in the nursing home every week.  Maybe she could consider a horse and buggy, eh, Ami?  That's a choice, right?)

Or she could relocate.

XO does not buy petroleum based fuel for his car any longer.

So, since a 10% profit is too much, are you prepared to protest against your local grocery store which makes a 30% or more profit? Groceries are just as necessary as gasoline...

[Brassmask]

(Of course, Ami has made the ridiculous case that we can "choose" to not buy gas but I doubt my mother would like to "choose" to use a bicycle to ride the 100 miles from Memphis to Corinth, MS to visit her mother in the nursing home every week.  Maybe she could consider a horse and buggy, eh, Ami?  That's a choice, right?)

Or she could relocate.

XO does not buy petroleum based fuel for his car any longer.

So, since a 10% profit is too much, are you prepared to protest against your local grocery store which makes a 30% or more profit? Groceries are just as necessary as gasoline...

If she did relocate, she'd just have to drive back to Memphis once a week to see her grandchildren.  Or are you suggesting she choose?  Maybe it would enough to just see her three grandchildren over the internet?

And, absolutely YES, I am prepared to protest their profit as well, if it amounts in the billions and is resulting in the destruction of families and lifestyles.  Aren't you?

[Plane]

(Of course, Ami has made the ridiculous case that we can "choose" to not buy gas but I doubt my mother would like to "choose" to use a bicycle to ride the 100 miles from Memphis to Corinth, MS to visit her mother in the nursing home every week.  Maybe she could consider a horse and buggy, eh, Ami?  That's a choice, right?)

Or she could relocate.

XO does not buy petroleum based fuel for his car any longer.

So, since a 10% profit is too much, are you prepared to protest against your local grocery store which makes a 30% or more profit? Groceries are just as necessary as gasoline...

If she did relocate, she'd just have to drive back to Memphis once a week to see her grandchildren.  Or are you suggesting she choose?  Maybe it would enough to just see her three grandchildren over the internet?

And, absolutely YES, I am prepared to protest their profit as well, if it amounts in the billions and is resulting in the destruction of families and lifestyles.  Aren't you?

Without that profit there would not be any reason to bring gas or grocerys to you .

[Amianthus]

If she did relocate, she'd just have to drive back to Memphis once a week to see her grandchildren.  Or are you suggesting she choose?  Maybe it would enough to just see her three grandchildren over the internet?

Like I said, it's a choice. You decide what's important and make your decisions based on that. If living without buying gasoline is important to you, that can be done.

Oh yeah, the relocation can be to relocate the mother to Memphis as well. Hadn't thought of that?

And, absolutely YES, I am prepared to protest their profit as well, if it amounts in the billions and is resulting in the destruction of families and lifestyles.  Aren't you?

Ah, so you're jealous of the amount, not the fact that they're actually racking in more per dollar spent than the oil companies...

[Plane]

If she did relocate, she'd just have to drive back to Memphis once a week to see her grandchildren.  Or are you suggesting she choose?  Maybe it would enough to just see her three grandchildren over the internet?

Like I said, it's a choice. You decide what's important and make your decisions based on that. If living without buying gasoline is important to you, that can be done.

Oh yeah, the relocation can be to relocate the mother to Memphis as well. Hadn't thought of that?

And, absolutely YES, I am prepared to protest their profit as well, if it amounts in the billions and is resulting in the destruction of families and lifestyles.  Aren't you?

Ah, so you're jealous of the amount, not the fact that they're actually racking in more per dollar spent than the oil companies...

Normally I don't ask members of 3DHS what kind of money they make , I don't really want to know.

But how many of us know what percent of their company's expenses is pay for employees?
How many of us can state with confidence what load on their companys profit or agencys effectiveness is their own pay?

I would guess that  a large company's president ,whose company was makeing him a billionaire ,would represent a smaller load on the company than the percent drawn by an employee of a small company , or the workforce of a large one.

Is it worthwile to attract the best talent in the world to corporate positions with the best pay in the world?