OT: Gasoline Cost in Europe

No, that's only one of the issues but it's certainly an important one.

The real issue, if you insist on characterizing it as 'just one' is government interference driven by your favorite 'interest group' from environmentalists to 'not in my backyard' 0-risk advocates distorting market factors and just about everything else. Not that those concerns are invalid but the single minded, to hell with everything else, fanaticism is irrational, unrealistic, and destructive.

They've prevented just about anything practical, from no drilling, to no new refineries, to placing the U.S.'s largest deposits of clean coal off limits, to no nuclear power, to you name it with the only 'allowable' alternatives being pie in the sky fantasies that, even if they could be done, would cost a hundred times the current 'crisis' with a corresponding collapse of most economies.

The politicians, certainly, because their prime motivation is pandering to public hysteria and conspiracy theories.

I find it stunning that people have, all of a sudden, forgotten that the majority of oil production comes from nationalized oil and OPEC countries. The 'oil companies' couldn't lower the price if you put a gun to their heads.

More like thousands of factors not taken into account and, in particular, the ones that count.

Here are a 'few' things not even 'suspected' in your ratios. Katrina knocked refinery capacity offline and it's not recovered yet.

In addition, refinery maintenance normally done in the fall was prevented by Katrina and, so, is having to be done now, further reducing capacity.

The government, after mandating refineries re-work their entire processing (not a '0 cost' thing) to accommodate MTB gasoline is, this year, mandating they stop using MTB and switch to ethanol. And, to make sure that's domestic ethanol production, imposed heavy taxes on ethanol imports except we don't produce enough so we have to import ethanol anyway plus pay the high taxes on it.

The point here is not to give 'all the reasons' but to demonstrate a few reasons why 'command economies' don't work.

The problem is that your entire premise is invalid. Component percentages are only useful to tell you what the current percent content is but they don't explain why nor can they be used to predict anything.

As a simple demonstration, if the taxes were eliminated your entire set of calculations predict different results even though the remaining costs are all the same..

Another example, refining is not a '0 energy' process so increases in oil prices increase refining costs. And transporting product isn't a '0 energy' process either.

You've actually hit on two aspects that make all the punditry utter nonsense: that supply/demand-price/cost is *not* linear and not just "extremely complicated' but beyond 'understanding'. By that I mean, it is fundamentally impossible to know/take into account all the factors, interactions, and consequences. For example, force a particular price and you create shortages, and prevent alternative substitutes. Decide you're going to 'incentivize' alternatives and you invariably incentivize the wrong things because you have, a priori, decided what the alternative 'should be' rather than allowing the vast creative wealth of the world, and markets, to 'find it'.

I expect they'll pander to the worst instincts of the voting public, fueled by demagogues who see any and everything as an opportunity to gain power at whatever expense to the public good. And the public are co-complicit in their unrealistic demand for a zero risk, zero cost world along with the wholly unrealistic expectation that governments can 'mandate' manna from heaven.

Reply to
flipper
Loading thread data ...

Don't know but they produce less than 2% of the world's energy usage so even if they gave away their product it wouldn't dramatically impact world prices. Although it would put them out of business and devastate all the pension plans and 401ks invested with them.

Reply to
flipper
[snip]

Ah, Yes! My wife (Dutch ancestry) makes very nice Scotch eggs... after simply sampling them at Meyer's in Melbourne (Australia), she figured out how to do them.

Of course, to be perfectly correct... Scotch is a drink... Scots are a people ;-)

...Jim Thompson

-- | James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona Voice:(480)460-2350 | | | E-mail Address at Website Fax:(480)460-2142 | Brass Rat | |

formatting link
| 1962 | I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

Reply to
Jim Thompson

I suspect that prices would have to rise a lot more than 20% to cut consumption by 20%. Total consumer gas expenses could rise a lot.

Personally, I think that taxation is a better way to reduce gas consumption than giving the money to foreigners.

Why increase prices?

To reduce strategic dependence on countries like Iran and Venezuela, people who will hurt us if they can.

To get rid of gross, hideous vehicles like Dodge Rams and Cadillac Escallades and things named after the most fragile parts of the planet, the places they're designed to destroy, like "Outback" and "Sierra" and "Tundra."

To tone down the sick culture of cars in this country.

Spend the money on reducing the deficit. As if!

John

Reply to
John Larkin

The constant barrage spewing out of the news media on just about everything shows the government couldn't 'shut them up' if their life depended on it.

I don't know who you're listening to but it's anything but 'mum'.

That's because if you look at the numbers they are.

Reply to
flipper

Obviously true since, otherwise, consumption would be way down as prices have risen much more than 20% already.

I disagree with the theory even if it were true but all taxes do is increase the cost and you still pay 'the foreigner' since he isn't going to 'charge less' just because you've decided to rape the populace with taxes.

The only way you avoid paying 'the foreigner' is if you increase domestic production and you're not about to allow that, right?

So to avoid that potential possibility you'll hurt everyone up front, and then they get a double whammy should your fear happen anyway. But at least you've ensured they're in pain and misery under even the best scenario.

No one designs cars specifically to 'hurt' your favorite wasteland.

Before we hand over our freedoms would you mind telling us all the other things you'd 'mandate' on our 'sick culture'?

And how are you going to do that after having destroyed half the economy in the process?

Reply to
flipper

Increasing the cost of gas will reduce consumption, whatever the increase is from. If world market prices were constant and taxes were increased, consumption would fall and we'd spend *less* net money on imported oil.

Yes, I wish I made the rules, but I don't. But we're not going to increase domestic production much, for long, unless we process coal or tar sands or some such. We just don't have enough, something like 3% of the world's reserves.

You avoid "paying the foreigner" by buying less of his oil.

Of course they do. Look at the ads of 3-ton SUVs tearing the country landscape apart, huge tire gouges and clouds of dust. All that ground clearance and knobby tires aren't for hauling groceries from a Safeway in Los Angeles.

And you consider the Sierra Nevada to be a wasteland?

Like I said, I'm not in charge. But $10 gas is just a matter of time, so I'll be happy in the end. The pandering morons in Congress, whining about gas price gouging, are merely ensuring that the inevitable price increases will be shocking and panic-inducing and maximally disruptive to the economy.

Again, all this will happen with minimal effort on my part. Doubling the price of gas, or energy in general, will not destroy half the economy, it'll just cause transient distress and ultimately shuffle some priorities and reduce waste. Anything that's cheap is wasted.

Hey, flipperfish, what do you drive?

John

Reply to
John Larkin

My Outback station wagon gets 30MPG. Its AWD gets me up my 600 foot long driveway at times when no 2WD vehicle ever could. It has never destroyed any of the fragile lands you seem to think it was designed to destroy. It isn't that kind of car. It has, however, saved my ass on snowy roads more times than I care to think.

What kind of mileage does your "greenie-weenie" car get?

Reply to
Chuck Harris

Note further that oil prices are established by open, global commodity markets. Anyone who thinks there is a killing to be made is welcome to purchase their own crude-oil futures. Just remember to sell it before it comes due, or you'll have a tank truck parked in front of your house. :-)

Reply to
Richard Crowley

"Jim Thompson" a écrit dans le message de news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com...

You can have a look here

formatting link

Price is per liter

-- Christian - Grenoble

Reply to
Christian HOSTELET

Jim, you're somewhat lacking resolution in focusing to this problem. What mass transit ? The infrastructure is not really there. Not yet. Definitely not to the scale of western Europe.

I'm using mass transport for a distance of 30km. The train/ bus takes me one hour door to door, whereas the car would take 3/4 hour. But I have read the newspaper. and the of the mass transport is 12Fr while the car costs me 48Fr.

Rene

Reply to
Rene Tschaggelar

[snip]

John, according to the holly capitalism, what is wrong with getting a maximum price for a good everybody wants ? If I was a producer and had no financial problems, ahem running bills, I'd again double it. Perhaps multiple times.

Rene

Reply to
Rene Tschaggelar

"John Gaubatz" schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:KL86g.19085$ snipped-for-privacy@fe20.usenetserver.com...

The government needs the money to finance the war that brings you cheap gasoline.

Reply to
MaWin

They have their brokers take positions in the oil futures *then* they all meet and set the price ...

Reply to
Frithiof Andreas Jensen

everyone

society

Wrong - Their objective is to maximise the power of The State. The means to that end - now that marxist revolution has been shown to be inefficient in delivering the appropriate standard of living - is to engineer society such that the majority of goods, services and money somehow flows through the state (so that the "friends of us" get to skim off the top)

In this case, what "they" do is to calculate yield curves on fuel taxation and the cost of mass transport and then set the price so that the maximum of money is extorted from the combine of motorists and users of mass transit.

Reply to
Frithiof Andreas Jensen

dreaded librarian

Question -- what is Exxon-Mobil's share of the U.S. market

Reply to
jack

Wishful thinking. They are not that good.

Rene

--
Ing.Buero R.Tschaggelar - http://www.ibrtses.com
& commercial newsgroups - http://www.talkto.net
Reply to
Rene Tschaggelar

Ahh - but "they" make it up in volume!

Reply to
Frithiof Andreas Jensen

Could you explain the mechanics a little more throughly?

Is this another Enron market-gaming process?

Reply to
Richard Henry

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.