Down with the evil Gas lords III: Kaak's Redemption

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
Dear Apolyton,


Please put me out of my misery


Thank You


Signed,

Thread #151831

NEVER !! It is a fundamental feature of cap-com threads that the debate is never-ending and that applies even when every commie has retreated in the face of facts showing their previous arguments are wrong

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Spiffor

Which is about one month worth of average income in Mali.

What's your point? I also own an MP3 player which cost me 200$, a TV which cost me 350$ and a computer which cost me 1000$

People in Mali should live close enough to their place of work that they don't have to burn oil to get there.

And the main problem is the fact that Malians earn that little, not that gas is so expensive...

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
What's your point?

My point is that the price increase of gas might seem puny to a westerner, all things considered, but it is a catastrophe for the people inhabiting a poor country. As such, when you say that if price doubled tomorrow, it would mean basically nothing to your finances, it isn't really a political argument. It's a personal one.

I took the example of an average Malian income as an extreme. However, even in the west, a hike in gas prices can have dire consequences for poor people. I'm thinking of those who barely make ends meet, and who'll have serious trouble coughing up an extra 50$ out of their already tight budget.

And the main problem is the fact that Malians earn that little, not that gas is so expensive...

I agree wholeheartedly. But still, the sad truth is that for millions if not billions of people on this earth (and many of them use oil), 50$ is definitely not a " " matter.

[Flubber]

JUst as a btw--apparently most of the refining capacity in the US is not currently set up for "West Canadian Sour" which is the crude standard that comes from the oilsands once it has been through an upgrader (with the huge amounts of sulfur byproduct.

So whether or not there is new refineries, there will be a fair amount of refitting needed as oilsands crude becomes a bigger and bigger chunk of Canadain production

[Arrian]

explainer
Power to the Pumpers
Do gas boycotts really work?
By Daniel Engber
Posted Monday, May 1, 2006, at 6:18 PM ET


The governing board of Bee County, Texas, has called for a boycott of ExxonMobil gas stations starting Monday. According to a poll conducted by the Beeville Bee-Picayune, 72 percent of county residents will participate; they hope to force pump prices down to $1.30 a gallon. Can a consumer boycott really affect gas prices?

Not in America. The e-mail that appears to have inspired the Bee County board claims that a widespread consumer boycott would push Exxon to lower its gas prices. This would in turn break the price-fixing monopoly and yield price decreases across the board. Economists point out that this isn't likely to happen for several reasons.

First of all, you might expect prices to go up if everyone began to shun Exxon filling stations. That's because the remaining companies would enjoy a greater demand for their product. (They'd split Exxon's share of the consumer gas market.) Exxon could respond by temporarily lowering its prices a small amount, which would almost certainly break the boycott.

Even if the people held true in their allegiance to Captain Boycott, they still wouldn't achieve their goals. As the other oil companies struggled to meet the rising demand, they'd be forced to buy wholesale gasoline from their competitors. (Their refineries are already operating at maximum capacity, so there's no way they'd be able to meet that demand by themselves.) Guess which competitor would step in to sell them that gasoline? Exxon.

A large-scale boycott of a single oil company wouldn't do much to affect gas prices or help the average motorist. But Exxon might still feel the pinch, especially if its brand and reputation took a hit. A well-orchestrated boycott can generate enough bad publicity to turn off investors and sink share prices.

Royal/Dutch Shell has gotten tagged by international gasoline boycotts several times. In 1995, Greenpeace helped organize a widespread protest against Shell after the company threatened to sink the defunct Brent Spar oil rig into the Atlantic Ocean. Enough German motorists turned away that local sales fell 30 percent. After four months of pressure (from Greenpeace, the boycotters, and European governments), Shell changed its mind about the oil rig.

Last March, the president of Argentina urged a national boycott of Shell and Exxon after both companies raised gas prices by several percent. Militant protesters called piqueteros took up the call and shut down more than 30 gas stations. Argentines stayed away from the others, and sales dropped precipitously. The gas companies lowered their prices a few weeks later. (President Kirchner's recent effort to organize a beef boycott has proved far less successful.)

Got a question about today's news? Ask the Explainer.

Explainer thanks Tom Haab of The Ohio State University.

Daniel Engber is a regular contributor to Slate.

Article URL: http://www.slate.com/id/2140848/

Tee hee. It shall never die!

-Arrian

[GhengisFarbâ„¢]

Exactly the reasons I told you it wouldn't work in the first thread.

[Kidlicious]

I don't know if this has been mentioned but the Energy Secretary said recently that gas prices could remain high for 3 years. In his words, "suppliers have lost control of the market."

Now if you look at the futures market the price of oil is expected to fall within a year. So margins for refining are just going to increase more and more in the short run. The thing about this industry though is that the short run is much longer than most industries. Good for the oil companies (shareholders) if you like them, but bad for consumers if you like consumers.

It wouldn't be so bad if they were going to invest all this windfall profit into expansion, but from what we've seen so far most of it will go to the fat cats.