National Don't Buy Gas Day?
Found this on some site..
DONT BUY GAS ON SEPT 3rD!!!!!!!
Dont Buy gas on September 3rd!!!!
Boycotting the gas company will decrease the price dramatically. Ive checked into it
and if over half the US didnt buy gas for 1 day, the gas companys would be close to
bankrupcy!!! So Lets show them how to lower gas prices. So repost this to all your
friends. We have to get the word out.
Its NATIONAL DONT BUY GAS DAY!!!
So repost it!!!
DONT BUY GAS ON SEPT 3rD!!!!!!!
Dont Buy gas on September 3rd!!!!
Boycotting the gas company will decrease the price dramatically. Ive checked into it
and if over half the US didnt buy gas for 1 day, the gas companys would be close to
bankrupcy!!! So Lets show them how to lower gas prices. So repost this to all your
friends. We have to get the word out.
Its NATIONAL DONT BUY GAS DAY!!!
So repost it!!!
A widely read e-mail purports that "if everyone in the United States did not purchase a drop of gasoline for one day and all at the same time, the oil companies would choke on their stockpiles." Not so. For one thing, it's not even a true boycott, which involves doing without something. Instead, people are just postponing or moving up their gas purchasing by one day. We would affect only those at the bottom of the oil-to-gas chain--service station operators--who have the least influence on gasoline prices. Again, only a significant, long-term reduction in gas demand will have the desired effect.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/gasoline/nogas.asp
http://www.snopes.com/politics/gasoline/nogas.asp
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by miller.91.HB »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">A widely read e-mail purports that "if everyone in the United States did not purchase a drop of gasoline for one day and all at the same time, the oil companies would choke on their stockpiles." Not so. For one thing, it's not even a true boycott, which involves doing without something. Instead, people are just postponing or moving up their gas purchasing by one day. We would affect only those at the bottom of the oil-to-gas chain--service station operators--who have the least influence on gasoline prices. Again, only a significant, long-term reduction in gas demand will have the desired effect.</TD></TR></TABLE>
makes sense
makes sense
Trending Topics
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JuanNeeto »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> Its NATIONAL DONT BUY GAS DAY!!!
</TD></TR></TABLE>
This is a completely ignorant idea for a number of obvious reasons:
1) anyone paying attention knows that the increase in price has not affected sales (they are still selling as much gas as ever). As long as basic demand stays the same, there is minimal competitive pressure to reduce prices.
2) In real dollars (adjusted for inflation) we are still a bit below the record gas prices of the 80s, so the hysteria is a bit over-blown.
3) The real problem with the industry is REFINING capacity - not raw crude supply. This country has not built a new refinery since the late seventies (or so) and common sense dictates that if the refining capacity is static and demand increases, there is going to be an imbalance and prices will rise. So, if you want to put the blame in the right place, go yell at an aging left-coast, liberal, tree-hugging hippie for screwing us all over with his anit-refinery protests in the 70s. Typical liberal short-sighted views have put us in this bind.
Have a nice day and try to limit your knee-jerk reaction to stupid Internet ideas.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
This is a completely ignorant idea for a number of obvious reasons:
1) anyone paying attention knows that the increase in price has not affected sales (they are still selling as much gas as ever). As long as basic demand stays the same, there is minimal competitive pressure to reduce prices.
2) In real dollars (adjusted for inflation) we are still a bit below the record gas prices of the 80s, so the hysteria is a bit over-blown.
3) The real problem with the industry is REFINING capacity - not raw crude supply. This country has not built a new refinery since the late seventies (or so) and common sense dictates that if the refining capacity is static and demand increases, there is going to be an imbalance and prices will rise. So, if you want to put the blame in the right place, go yell at an aging left-coast, liberal, tree-hugging hippie for screwing us all over with his anit-refinery protests in the 70s. Typical liberal short-sighted views have put us in this bind.
Have a nice day and try to limit your knee-jerk reaction to stupid Internet ideas.
I agree w/you on most points you made but let me add some thoughts to them.
Oil companies are making record profits-not record gross reciets,profits.If they are only adding the higher cost of oil to cover themselves as they say,how do profits go up?
The oil companies don't want to build new refineries because then the gas price will go down and they would have to do more refining for the same profit.
The person who said it wouldn't affect a thing is most likely right.I find it hard to believe that a one day boycott would bankrupt the oil companies,it will only increase the lines the next day when who boycotted the previous day gets gas w/the normal gas users of the day.
Oil companies are making record profits-not record gross reciets,profits.If they are only adding the higher cost of oil to cover themselves as they say,how do profits go up?
The oil companies don't want to build new refineries because then the gas price will go down and they would have to do more refining for the same profit.
The person who said it wouldn't affect a thing is most likely right.I find it hard to believe that a one day boycott would bankrupt the oil companies,it will only increase the lines the next day when who boycotted the previous day gets gas w/the normal gas users of the day.
Yeah, there is no way a one day boycott would effect the prices. The pockets of the oil companies is bottomless. They have so much money it's really unbelieveable.
Maybe if you convince your country to take the bus and ride their bikes to where they have to for about a year or so, then you might see the decrease in gas prices.
Maybe if you convince your country to take the bus and ride their bikes to where they have to for about a year or so, then you might see the decrease in gas prices.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Ed’s Racing Heads »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I agree w/you on most points you made but let me add some thoughts to them.
Oil companies are making record profits-not record gross reciets,profits.If they are only adding the higher cost of oil to cover themselves as they say,how do profits go up?</TD></TR></TABLE>
Didn't say they are only adding the higher cost of oil. In fact, you are essentially agreeing with my primary point: demand has not changed with the price increase, so why would they leave money on the table by scrimping margins - no good business would do that.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The oil companies don't want to build new refineries because then the gas price will go down and they would have to do more refining for the same profit.</TD></TR></TABLE>
You state this as if it were a fact, but it is counter to both basic economic theory and historical facts. Oil companies have been begging to build more refineries, but no one will let them (the classic 'not in my back yard' syndrome). Again, they are selling all the gas they can make at whatever price they set, so your claim makes no sense. More capacity = more profits.
Second, your theory would only be valid if every oil company got together and made that decision as a cartel (not even the most paranoid hippy conspiracy theorist would believe that). In reality, any company that could add a refinery to its own supply system would make vast profits from it at the expense of the companies that can't add capacity.
Also, the current refineries are old, tired and running at a capacity higher than they were ever designed to handle. That is not efficient at all. We are not talking about a true commodity situation where retail price is driving the whole industry sturcture.
There are only two ways to lower prices in a market like gas:
1) Lower fundamental, overall demand
2) Increase supply
If you are not doing either of those, you are doing nothing.
Oil companies are making record profits-not record gross reciets,profits.If they are only adding the higher cost of oil to cover themselves as they say,how do profits go up?</TD></TR></TABLE>
Didn't say they are only adding the higher cost of oil. In fact, you are essentially agreeing with my primary point: demand has not changed with the price increase, so why would they leave money on the table by scrimping margins - no good business would do that.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The oil companies don't want to build new refineries because then the gas price will go down and they would have to do more refining for the same profit.</TD></TR></TABLE>
You state this as if it were a fact, but it is counter to both basic economic theory and historical facts. Oil companies have been begging to build more refineries, but no one will let them (the classic 'not in my back yard' syndrome). Again, they are selling all the gas they can make at whatever price they set, so your claim makes no sense. More capacity = more profits.
Second, your theory would only be valid if every oil company got together and made that decision as a cartel (not even the most paranoid hippy conspiracy theorist would believe that). In reality, any company that could add a refinery to its own supply system would make vast profits from it at the expense of the companies that can't add capacity.
Also, the current refineries are old, tired and running at a capacity higher than they were ever designed to handle. That is not efficient at all. We are not talking about a true commodity situation where retail price is driving the whole industry sturcture.
There are only two ways to lower prices in a market like gas:
1) Lower fundamental, overall demand
2) Increase supply
If you are not doing either of those, you are doing nothing.
I never dissagreed w/you that's why I said add - not counter.
I don't know about you but I live next to many refineries and have heard absolutely nothing about them wanting to expand or build new here,and I don't think anybody in the northeast/mid atlantic area would compalin about more high paying jobs.
Your saying that the oil companies would be able to build refineries,and the price still wouldn't go down?That doesn't make sence to me if you want the high profits you only release as much as needed and no more.Have you ever in the past 10 yrs had to go from station to staion to find gas?There seems to be enough for the US market.For example if the drug cartels flooded the market would the price still stay high?No.
I don't know about you but the law of supply and demand works both ways,you don't need an over the table agreement to have collusion,all you need to do is not have a price war.If the station across the street is charging the same as you then why charge less it will only benifit you a very short time untill they all charge the same as you.Take the airlaine as another example they didn't have any cash problems till they started price wars,I'm not saying that's there only problem but they were going under long before 9/11 put a hurt on them.They moved more people but for less per person because they were cutting into there profits,make sence now?
I don't know about you but I live next to many refineries and have heard absolutely nothing about them wanting to expand or build new here,and I don't think anybody in the northeast/mid atlantic area would compalin about more high paying jobs.
Your saying that the oil companies would be able to build refineries,and the price still wouldn't go down?That doesn't make sence to me if you want the high profits you only release as much as needed and no more.Have you ever in the past 10 yrs had to go from station to staion to find gas?There seems to be enough for the US market.For example if the drug cartels flooded the market would the price still stay high?No.
I don't know about you but the law of supply and demand works both ways,you don't need an over the table agreement to have collusion,all you need to do is not have a price war.If the station across the street is charging the same as you then why charge less it will only benifit you a very short time untill they all charge the same as you.Take the airlaine as another example they didn't have any cash problems till they started price wars,I'm not saying that's there only problem but they were going under long before 9/11 put a hurt on them.They moved more people but for less per person because they were cutting into there profits,make sence now?
Originally Posted by Ed’s Racing Heads
Your saying that the oil companies would be able to build refineries,and the price still wouldn't go down?That doesn't make sence to me if you want the high profits you only release as much as needed and no more.Have you ever in the past 10 yrs had to go from station to staion to find gas?There seems to be enough for the US market.For example if the drug cartels flooded the market would the price still stay high?No.
Also, while we have not yet seen retail outages, the supply IS shrinking. The amount of reserve gas in the system has been going down for about a year now. If it continues, we will probably have actual shortages in some places. Keep in mind, this is a shortage of refined gas, not of raw crude. Check the industry numbers and you will see this is true. You may live near some refineries, but oil and gas are what built Texas. I have friends at the corp headquarters of almost every major US oil company. They all wish they had more capacity right now.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I don't know about you but the law of supply and demand works both ways,you don't need an over the table agreement to have collusion,all you need to do is not have a price war.If the station across the street is charging the same as you then why charge less it will only benifit you a very short time untill they all charge the same as you.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Why charge less? Its called 'competition' - you sell more, you make more. If that factor was not a fundamental part of how they do business, why have there been vicious retail gas price wars every tiime the cost of refined gas dropped? Walmart has destroyed the rest of their industry using that same tactic. If you are arguing that tacit collusion is part of the current prices, then I have to wonder about the validity of all your points....
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Take the airlaine as another example they didn't have any cash problems till they started price wars,I'm not saying that's there only problem but they were going under long before 9/11 put a hurt on them.They moved more people but for less per person because they were cutting into there profits,make sence now?</TD></TR></TABLE>
The airline example is a false analogy. The airline's problem's are less a result of the price wars than they are of legacy issues. When the industry was regulated, they didn't care that the unions were screwing them because they just passed the cost along. Now that the govt no longer sets prices, they are carring the huge burden of the strangle-hold unions have on their cost structure. Gas prices and price wars are not what is killing them, it is their inability to control their labor costs. That is why Southwest (who does not have the union issues that the old-line carries have) is doing just fine. They are the only major airline that never took a penny from the Feds during the post 9/11 bail-out. Southwest pays the same amount for fuel as the other airlines and charges less for tickets, yet they are the only one making real money. And, counter to your point, they are doing it for less money per person. This situation existed well before 9/11, but it did worsen it. And, yes, the airlines had cash problems well before sept. 11 - they were going bankrupt every couple of years and many of the older airlines don't even exist anymore.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I never dissagreed w/you that's why I said add - not counter.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Not a problem. Not trying to bicker; just adding another point of view.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Top Ramen »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
This is a completely ignorant idea for a number of obvious reasons:
1) anyone paying attention knows that the increase in price has not affected sales (they are still selling as much gas as ever). As long as basic demand stays the same, there is minimal competitive pressure to reduce prices.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
It has not affected sales, in fact by the statistics we have actually increased gas purchases. I know where I work, a bunch of guys went to walmart bought 3 -5 gas containers and filled them up to store. (RIDICULOUS)
Everyone needs to stop freakin' out, don't get me wrong the gas prices "HURT" right now. But it should get better. The Sunoco by my house yesterday at noon was $2.98 for 93 and this morning on the way to work it was $3.56.
This is a completely ignorant idea for a number of obvious reasons:
1) anyone paying attention knows that the increase in price has not affected sales (they are still selling as much gas as ever). As long as basic demand stays the same, there is minimal competitive pressure to reduce prices.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
It has not affected sales, in fact by the statistics we have actually increased gas purchases. I know where I work, a bunch of guys went to walmart bought 3 -5 gas containers and filled them up to store. (RIDICULOUS)
Everyone needs to stop freakin' out, don't get me wrong the gas prices "HURT" right now. But it should get better. The Sunoco by my house yesterday at noon was $2.98 for 93 and this morning on the way to work it was $3.56.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Top Ramen »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
2) In real dollars (adjusted for inflation) we are still a bit below the record gas prices of the 80s, so the hysteria is a bit over-blown.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
This is incorrect, please see the chart on this page: http://money.howstuffworks.com/gas-price1.htm
2) In real dollars (adjusted for inflation) we are still a bit below the record gas prices of the 80s, so the hysteria is a bit over-blown.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
This is incorrect, please see the chart on this page: http://money.howstuffworks.com/gas-price1.htm
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Buzzbomb »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
This is incorrect, please see the chart on this page: http://money.howstuffworks.com/gas-price1.htm</TD></TR></TABLE>
Okay, I may be off by a matter of a few cents. Your link shows inflation adjusted gas prices peaked in 1980. If we are now (right this second) higher, then it is recent (as in the past month or so). What the average for this year will be is undetermend and may be higher, but it is not certian. Nonetheless, my point is valid - gas prices are not much over the historical high (if at all).
Back to the core arguement. Here are some quotes from oil industry experts:
"Since 1981, the number of U.S. refineries has declined to 149, from more than 300, and only one new facility has been built since 1975. Meanwhile, demand for gasoline is up 24 percent since 1990. While many existing refineries have expanded operations, it hasn't been enough to keep pace with demand. Nearly all refineries are operating at near 100 percent capacity, and the United States now has to import 10 percent of already refined gasoline."
"Crude is not the problem," said Deborah White, senior energy analyst at SG Commodities. "The heart of the problem is how much refining capacity we have lost."
ICF Consulting believes that in the past year, and over the next roughly five-year period, the ability to meet forecast demands for oil will be driven by refinery capacity issues, not crude availability.
At least we all seem to agree on one thing - the 'don't buy gas for one day' idea is stupid. : )
Modified by Top Ramen at 6:59 AM 9/2/2005
This is incorrect, please see the chart on this page: http://money.howstuffworks.com/gas-price1.htm</TD></TR></TABLE>
Okay, I may be off by a matter of a few cents. Your link shows inflation adjusted gas prices peaked in 1980. If we are now (right this second) higher, then it is recent (as in the past month or so). What the average for this year will be is undetermend and may be higher, but it is not certian. Nonetheless, my point is valid - gas prices are not much over the historical high (if at all).
Back to the core arguement. Here are some quotes from oil industry experts:
"Since 1981, the number of U.S. refineries has declined to 149, from more than 300, and only one new facility has been built since 1975. Meanwhile, demand for gasoline is up 24 percent since 1990. While many existing refineries have expanded operations, it hasn't been enough to keep pace with demand. Nearly all refineries are operating at near 100 percent capacity, and the United States now has to import 10 percent of already refined gasoline."
"Crude is not the problem," said Deborah White, senior energy analyst at SG Commodities. "The heart of the problem is how much refining capacity we have lost."
ICF Consulting believes that in the past year, and over the next roughly five-year period, the ability to meet forecast demands for oil will be driven by refinery capacity issues, not crude availability.
At least we all seem to agree on one thing - the 'don't buy gas for one day' idea is stupid. : )
Modified by Top Ramen at 6:59 AM 9/2/2005
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Top Ramen »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">So, if you want to put the blame in the right place, go yell at an aging left-coast, liberal, tree-hugging hippie for screwing us all over with his anit-refinery protests in the 70s. Typical liberal short-sighted views have put us in this bind.</TD></TR></TABLE>
You sir, are an idiot. You think environmental views are short sided? Don't you mean that conservative views toward natural resources of "use it now, worry later" are short sided? Don't you think that encouraging alternative fuels and requiring stricter mileage standards would have avoided this whole mess? Unfortunately Bush shot that **** down. Do you want to know where the blame really lies? SUVs. Large trucks. These things have shot up in popularity, but theyre not held to the same standards as normal class cars. They're used as daily drivers, so they should be held to the same standards.
The freeways are crowded with stay-at-home mom's and yuppy-*** wanna-be gangsters in large lifted trucks and SUVs with oversized chrome spinners on the way to the grocery store and it just makes me sick.
Try comparing the air quality from a metro area in a non pollution controlled state to one in CA and you start to appreciate those strict *** smog logs courtesy of your friendly neighborhood hippies aka rational human beings with an eye to the future. Enjoy your freedom to hollow out your cat converter when you and your grandchildren wonder why you can't muster up the energy to go outside and play and inevitably suffer and die from lung cancer.
I personally can't wait until gas climbs above 4$ per gallon and then I'll have these roadways to myself and my 32+ mpg 160+hp Civic or at least I can see over the hybrid and small sized cars.
You sir, are an idiot. You think environmental views are short sided? Don't you mean that conservative views toward natural resources of "use it now, worry later" are short sided? Don't you think that encouraging alternative fuels and requiring stricter mileage standards would have avoided this whole mess? Unfortunately Bush shot that **** down. Do you want to know where the blame really lies? SUVs. Large trucks. These things have shot up in popularity, but theyre not held to the same standards as normal class cars. They're used as daily drivers, so they should be held to the same standards.
The freeways are crowded with stay-at-home mom's and yuppy-*** wanna-be gangsters in large lifted trucks and SUVs with oversized chrome spinners on the way to the grocery store and it just makes me sick.
Try comparing the air quality from a metro area in a non pollution controlled state to one in CA and you start to appreciate those strict *** smog logs courtesy of your friendly neighborhood hippies aka rational human beings with an eye to the future. Enjoy your freedom to hollow out your cat converter when you and your grandchildren wonder why you can't muster up the energy to go outside and play and inevitably suffer and die from lung cancer.
I personally can't wait until gas climbs above 4$ per gallon and then I'll have these roadways to myself and my 32+ mpg 160+hp Civic or at least I can see over the hybrid and small sized cars.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by suspendedHatch »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
You sir, are an idiot.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Thanks for reducing a discussion to name-calling. Which of us is the idiot?
I do not have a problem with environmental issues - I have a problem with blindly following a no-growth policy at the expense of our culture's well-being. The fundamental problem is that the liberals prevented the building of ANY refineries. This is obviously a short-sighted policy and if you can't see that, then you are an idiot.
Any new construction in any industry, wether it is an oil refinery or a soda stand, has an environmental impact. The correct thing to do is to judge that impact against the value the new construction brings in a realistic and far-sighted manner. If you can't see that, then you are an idiot.
You left-coasters recently went through a massive electricity shortage, especailly in northern Cali. The cause was simple - you didn't build enough power plants (you were short-sighted) and exceeded the production capacity available to you. Texas never had that problem because we build enough power plants to not only produce the power we need now, but the power we will need in the future. When CA ran out of power, they had to come begging to us for electricity hand-outs - which of us is the idiot?
The gas situation is about to become the same, but on a much larger scale. For the first time in the history of this country, we are importing massive amounts of refined oil instead of crude. If you think this is a good thing, then you are an idiot. If you are happy it is happening so that other people are forced off the road making your life easier, then you are a self-centered idiot.
The 'don't buy gas for a day' thing is still a stupid idea.
Have a nice day.
Modified by Top Ramen at 1:27 PM 9/4/2005
You sir, are an idiot.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Thanks for reducing a discussion to name-calling. Which of us is the idiot?
I do not have a problem with environmental issues - I have a problem with blindly following a no-growth policy at the expense of our culture's well-being. The fundamental problem is that the liberals prevented the building of ANY refineries. This is obviously a short-sighted policy and if you can't see that, then you are an idiot.
Any new construction in any industry, wether it is an oil refinery or a soda stand, has an environmental impact. The correct thing to do is to judge that impact against the value the new construction brings in a realistic and far-sighted manner. If you can't see that, then you are an idiot.
You left-coasters recently went through a massive electricity shortage, especailly in northern Cali. The cause was simple - you didn't build enough power plants (you were short-sighted) and exceeded the production capacity available to you. Texas never had that problem because we build enough power plants to not only produce the power we need now, but the power we will need in the future. When CA ran out of power, they had to come begging to us for electricity hand-outs - which of us is the idiot?
The gas situation is about to become the same, but on a much larger scale. For the first time in the history of this country, we are importing massive amounts of refined oil instead of crude. If you think this is a good thing, then you are an idiot. If you are happy it is happening so that other people are forced off the road making your life easier, then you are a self-centered idiot.
The 'don't buy gas for a day' thing is still a stupid idea.
Have a nice day.
Modified by Top Ramen at 1:27 PM 9/4/2005
if the gas prices stay high we will go into recession and not have any money for the environment. Food prices will go higher and we will be reduced to third world status. Who will pay for the public works will we start dumping sewer becuase cities cant afford to pay the public works people or afford fuel to run on. Just a thought. When gas is higher than your mortgage do you sell your house so youi can get to work. Im not agaist the environment either im against the loss of the american standard of living which one day will be the chinese standard of living if we dont get this under control and current liberalism is pushing us on our way.
Actually you had already resorted to name calling.
Quote, originally posted by Top Ramen »
So, if you want to put the blame in the right place, go yell at an aging left-coast, liberal, tree-hugging hippie for screwing us all over with his anit-refinery protests in the 70s. Typical liberal short-sighted views have put us in this bind.
AGING LEFT-COAST, LIBERAL, TREE HUGGING
this is name calling.
You accused liberals of what conservatives are guilty of. That's a typical conservative tactic. Tell me this, when have conservatives ever been right and liberals wrong? Slavery? Vietnam? Woman's suffrage? What have conservatives ever done for progress? If the liberals of the 70s had got their way, would we be in this predicament now? Would we be in this war now? Would Sadam have been put in power and shown in news footage shaking hands with Dick Cheney and Bush Sr? Or would I be looking at my hydrogen car sitting in my driveway.
"No growth" is a concept invented by conservatives. Liberals advocate a range of policies from smart usage of limited resources on one end of the spectrum to alternative fuels on the other. Alternative fuels are the only viable, economically feasible, and ecologically responsible hope for the future. But there's lots of money to be made in oil, especially for big oil families like the Bush's and former heads of oil companies like Dick Cheney.
I agree that a "don't buy gas day" is totally worthless, in fact, it will probably help the industry because it will cause the day before and after to spike in sales, and they can close the store on the boycott day.
The energy shortage in california was pure politics. Bush and his cronies were in on it. You had all these companies shutting down plants and lines for "maintenance", and then the out of state companies royally fucked us. God bless Texas.
The best way to save money on gas isn't to increase your gas mileage. It's to decrease your gas usage. I don't believe for one minute that gas is expensive. GAS IS NOT EXPENSIVE! You know how I know? Cuz there's all these ******* big trucks, SUVs, Jeeps etc on the road. One person in them going to get the groceries. People driving two blocks to their neighbors house. There's still tons of traffic. If gas WAS expensive, the traffic would look different. People would carefully plan their trips to get the most out of their gas. People would sell off those big *** gas hogs. Even the poor people would switch to old *** cars that get good mileage. This is simply not the case.
I only drive when necessary. I'm tired of sitting in traffic behind cars that I can't see around. I want gas prices to increase! I've pushed my car to the limits of fuel economy, and I can't wait to swap in a 96 HX motor and tune it with a programmable ECU.
Stop bitching and ride a ******* bike.
Modified by suspendedHatch at 11:36 AM 9/18/2005
Quote, originally posted by Top Ramen »
So, if you want to put the blame in the right place, go yell at an aging left-coast, liberal, tree-hugging hippie for screwing us all over with his anit-refinery protests in the 70s. Typical liberal short-sighted views have put us in this bind.
AGING LEFT-COAST, LIBERAL, TREE HUGGING
this is name calling.
You accused liberals of what conservatives are guilty of. That's a typical conservative tactic. Tell me this, when have conservatives ever been right and liberals wrong? Slavery? Vietnam? Woman's suffrage? What have conservatives ever done for progress? If the liberals of the 70s had got their way, would we be in this predicament now? Would we be in this war now? Would Sadam have been put in power and shown in news footage shaking hands with Dick Cheney and Bush Sr? Or would I be looking at my hydrogen car sitting in my driveway.
"No growth" is a concept invented by conservatives. Liberals advocate a range of policies from smart usage of limited resources on one end of the spectrum to alternative fuels on the other. Alternative fuels are the only viable, economically feasible, and ecologically responsible hope for the future. But there's lots of money to be made in oil, especially for big oil families like the Bush's and former heads of oil companies like Dick Cheney.
I agree that a "don't buy gas day" is totally worthless, in fact, it will probably help the industry because it will cause the day before and after to spike in sales, and they can close the store on the boycott day.
The energy shortage in california was pure politics. Bush and his cronies were in on it. You had all these companies shutting down plants and lines for "maintenance", and then the out of state companies royally fucked us. God bless Texas.
The best way to save money on gas isn't to increase your gas mileage. It's to decrease your gas usage. I don't believe for one minute that gas is expensive. GAS IS NOT EXPENSIVE! You know how I know? Cuz there's all these ******* big trucks, SUVs, Jeeps etc on the road. One person in them going to get the groceries. People driving two blocks to their neighbors house. There's still tons of traffic. If gas WAS expensive, the traffic would look different. People would carefully plan their trips to get the most out of their gas. People would sell off those big *** gas hogs. Even the poor people would switch to old *** cars that get good mileage. This is simply not the case.
I only drive when necessary. I'm tired of sitting in traffic behind cars that I can't see around. I want gas prices to increase! I've pushed my car to the limits of fuel economy, and I can't wait to swap in a 96 HX motor and tune it with a programmable ECU.
Stop bitching and ride a ******* bike.
Modified by suspendedHatch at 11:36 AM 9/18/2005
yeah its pretty much worthless cuz u gotta buy it sometime. either way people dont listen or forget to not buy on boycott gas day. face it. the bigwigs got us by the ***** and they know it. the only way to lower the price of gas is to bomb the damb sand ******s.




