going up?.....gas prices, that is...

If it's news, but not politics, then it goes here.
lordofthecockrings
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1318
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2004 11:06 pm

Postby lordofthecockrings » Tue May 01, 2007 7:57 pm

RockHopper wrote:
lordofthecockrings wrote:
RockHopper wrote:
lordofthecockrings wrote:
RockHopper wrote:There are always going to be temporary bottlenecks in the supply of gasoline.

How is that the fault of motorists?

Periodic shortages are a fact of life.

I concur.
How is that the fault of the motorists?

Those events are largely uncontrollable as to when they will occur - that they will occur is certain.

I agree.
How is that the fault of motorists?

RockHopper
Forum Addict
Posts: 452
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2006 10:47 pm
Location: Exxon Worldwide Headquarters, Irving Texas
Contact:

Postby RockHopper » Tue May 01, 2007 8:19 pm

lordofthecockrings wrote:
RockHopper wrote:
lordofthecockrings wrote:
RockHopper wrote:
lordofthecockrings wrote:
RockHopper wrote:There are always going to be temporary bottlenecks in the supply of gasoline.

How is that the fault of motorists?

Periodic shortages are a fact of life.

I concur.
How is that the fault of the motorists?

Those events are largely uncontrollable as to when they will occur - that they will occur is certain.

I agree.
How is that the fault of motorists?

Round and round we go.

Periodic shortage events are not the fault of motorists. The price increases following those events are the fault of motorists for the reasons I have given before. Motorists have the ability without going too far out of their way to cope with the shortages in such a way as to avoid price increases.

If you know a punch is coming, and you choose not to avoid it, it is your fault for getting punched - no matter who throws, or how that punch is thrown.

mmmm23
Member
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 12:56 am

Postby mmmm23 » Tue May 01, 2007 11:40 pm

Chuck_Schick wrote: I'd much rather be piloting a solar-powered hovercraft, but the damn industry has been asleep at the motherfucking switch on that one.


...huh. I've been lurking here for some time, but that comment really threw my through a loop. I just had to ask: should the gov't mandate that auto manufacturers make such a vehicle available, or will consumer demand make such machinery a reality at some point?

I really want one of those too (seriously!) and was just wondering how I can help make it happen.

lordofthecockrings
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1318
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2004 11:06 pm

Postby lordofthecockrings » Wed May 02, 2007 9:00 am

RockHopper wrote:
lordofthecockrings wrote:
RockHopper wrote:
lordofthecockrings wrote:
RockHopper wrote:
lordofthecockrings wrote:
RockHopper wrote:There are always going to be temporary bottlenecks in the supply of gasoline.

How is that the fault of motorists?

Periodic shortages are a fact of life.

I concur.
How is that the fault of the motorists?

Those events are largely uncontrollable as to when they will occur - that they will occur is certain.

I agree.
How is that the fault of motorists?

Round and round we go.


Well if you'd just answer the question already we could stop.
RockHopper wrote:Periodic shortage events are not the fault of motorists.

A-ha! Progress!
So, unlike your previous claims, someone (or something) other than motorists are at fault.

RockHopper wrote:The price increases following those events are the fault of motorists

Wha....?
Aren't the pice increases the fault of whoever allowed those events to happen? It wasn't motorists -- it was miners, manufacturers, suppliers and distributors!

RockHopper wrote:If you know a punch is coming, and you choose not to avoid it, it is your fault for getting punched - no matter who throws, or how that punch is thrown.
Now I begin to understand the confusion: You're a complete moron.
By your analysis, Hurricane Katrina was the fault of its victims. After all, they knew it was coming but they chose not to do anything about it. See how stupid that sounds?

Chuck_Schick
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 10385
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2001 4:41 pm
Location: back atcha

Postby Chuck_Schick » Wed May 02, 2007 9:18 am

RockHopper wrote:If you know a punch is coming, and you choose not to avoid it, it is your fault for getting punched - no matter who throws, or how that punch is thrown.

Riiiiight. Try using that defense in court, ya friggin' dolt.

"Your Honor, I'm not guilty of assault and battery. Dude didn't duck in time!"

Great analogy. Seriously, you're flogging yourself so thoroughly on this thread it's embarrassing.

RockHopper
Forum Addict
Posts: 452
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2006 10:47 pm
Location: Exxon Worldwide Headquarters, Irving Texas
Contact:

Postby RockHopper » Wed May 02, 2007 11:11 am

lordofthecockrings wrote:Now I begin to understand the confusion: You're a complete moron.
By your analysis, Hurricane Katrina was the fault of its victims. After all, they knew it was coming but they chose not to do anything about it. See how stupid that sounds?

I do not think you are allowing yourself to understand. (Perhaps you should try listening as if you were sure you are wrong)

Katrina was a physical phenomena, human beings, no matter how many try however hard, are not capable of stopping a hurricane. Gas prices on the other hand are an economic phenomena, and are a consequence of the balance between supply and demand. As such, you cannot ignore the role the consumers of gasoline play in determining the price of gasoline.

The key metric that measures the role that consumers play is called "demand elasticity". Demand elasticity is a function that answers the question: "If the price of Gas was Y, what amount X of gasoline would consumers purchase?".

see: http://www.sparknotes.com/economics/micro/elasticity/section1.html

At any given point, this function has a slope X/Y which tells you for every dollar increase in price, how much less gasoline will consumers purchase. Well, it turns out that the slope of this function is almost ZERO in the US. That means, when a shortage occurs, that the price must go very high in order to get consumers to reduce their consumption to cover the shortage.

A nice paper on this phenomena can be found at:

http://www.econ.ucdavis.edu/faculty/knittel/papers/gas_demand_083006.pdf

I might note this from the summary:

We find that the short-run price elasticity of U.S. gasoline demand is significantly more inelastic today than in previous decades.

This suggests that motorists are doing somthing that is decreasing elasticity. What could it be? Well, the answer to that question can be found in section 4 on the 15th page of the link I cited:

It may be the case that today’s U.S. consumers are more dependent on automobiles for daily transportation than during the 1970s and 1980s and as a result, are less able to reduce vehicle miles traveled in response to higher prices. One hypothesis is that an increase in suburban development has led to larger distances between travel destinations. This could mean that drivers have less ability to respond to price changes because greater distances decrease the viability of non-motorized modes such as walking or biking. In addition, when development patterns increase the distance between home and non-discretionary destinations such as the workplace, a greater share of the total vehicle miles traveled are fixed. An increase in multiple income households would further decrease flexibility if a greater share of the population requires
a daily work commute. Finally, these effects are compounded if the availability of public transit is less than in earlier decades.

All of these reasons are the results of choices made by consumers of gasoline (motorists). In short, too many motorists have set up their lifestyle in a way that amplifies the magnitude of gas price spikes. Therefore, the magnitide of those spikes are the fault of motorists.

RockHopper
Forum Addict
Posts: 452
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2006 10:47 pm
Location: Exxon Worldwide Headquarters, Irving Texas
Contact:

Postby RockHopper » Thu May 03, 2007 2:10 pm

TheBookPolice wrote:Toll roads and/or privatization. That's your answer?

[nice picture omitted]

Can you explain to me why this won't work as a means to ensure that motorists pay their fair share of the tax burden so I don't end up paying 40% of my taxes to something I use infrequently?

Prof. Wagstaff
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 9648
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2002 6:35 pm
Contact:

Postby Prof. Wagstaff » Thu May 03, 2007 2:58 pm

RockHopper wrote:
TheBookPolice wrote:Toll roads and/or privatization. That's your answer?

Can you explain to me why this won't work as a means to ensure that motorists pay their fair share of the tax burden so I don't end up paying 40% of my taxes to something I use infrequently?

So what if you only use roads "infrequently"?
You still use'em, and they have to be maintained so that when your selfish little ass wants'em, they're in proper working order, no? And go ask anyone in Illinois if they pay less taxes because of the toll roads. The very idea is laughable.

Anyway, if you're looking to assign blame and/or pass along the cost burden based on usage, it ain't "motorists" that are the problem, it's trucks, so why aren't you up the ass of mega-corporations with massive fleets?

Scooterboy
Senior Member
Posts: 70
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2005 11:35 pm

Postby Scooterboy » Fri May 04, 2007 4:11 am

Maybe we need to stop trying to assign blame and instead look for solutions. One solution might be to re-introduce C.A.F.E. standards and include all vehicles produced, including trucks, SUV's and commercial vehicles.

Another might be a moratorium on the building of new roads, especially Freeways and divided highways, and divert those funds to maintaining the roads that we have and to mass transit.

Motorcycles and scooters should be allowed to split lanes with traffic and park on sidewalks (as long as pedestrian traffic is not interfered with) to encourage their use for commuting instead of cars.

Of course we can only delay the inevitable, and sooner or later we will no longer be living in an age of cheap energy. Gas prices will eventually be high enough to force people to change their behaviors and choices. $3 or $4 per gallon isn't much compared to Europe, where prices are $7 - $8 per gallon. Perhaps a federal gas tax of say, $3 or $4 per gallon, would bring us in line with the much of the rest of the world, putting gas prices at a level where people will begin to change their lifestyles and make more frugal transportation choices. As I don't make much money I've already cut back on the amount of gasoline I use. My car is a '89 Honda that gets 35-40 mpg and more on the highway. My scooter has given me over 90 mpg on some trips. I've cut back on my travels out of town. I'm willing to bear the cost of higher fuel prices if it results in changes to our transportation policy and individuals' transportation decisions.

Chuck_Schick
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 10385
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2001 4:41 pm
Location: back atcha

Postby Chuck_Schick » Fri May 04, 2007 9:59 am

Scooterboy wrote:Maybe we need to stop trying to assign blame and instead look for solutions.

That's just crazy talk!

And what will become of the self-righteous indignation of dumbfucks like ClodHopper here?

RockHopper
Forum Addict
Posts: 452
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2006 10:47 pm
Location: Exxon Worldwide Headquarters, Irving Texas
Contact:

Postby RockHopper » Fri May 04, 2007 12:17 pm

Scooterboy wrote:Maybe we need to stop trying to assign blame and instead look for solutions. One solution might be to re-introduce C.A.F.E. standards and include all vehicles produced, including trucks, SUV's and commercial vehicles.

The solution I propose is that motorists accept their responsibility for the magnitude of gas price spikes and act accordingly. Proving culpability is required in order to make motorists see that the problem is their fault.

As far as CAFE goes: it is not a solution. The solution requires improving demand elasticity and improving CAFE standards does not do that. Demand elasticity can only be increased thru the choices of motorists - and motorists have to believe that the solution rests on their shoulders before they will get off ther asses.
Another might be a moratorium on the building of new roads, especially Freeways and divided highways, and divert those funds to maintaining the roads that we have and to mass transit.

Good luck with that one. We have a Governor that wants to tax oil companies so we can build more roads. Until we change the perception that motorists are blameless for gas price spikes, no politician will get elected on a platform of no new road building.
Motorcycles and scooters should be allowed to split lanes with traffic and park on sidewalks (as long as pedestrian traffic is not interfered with) to encourage their use for commuting instead of cars.

This does nothing to increase demand elasticity.
Of course we can only delay the inevitable, and sooner or later we will no longer be living in an age of cheap energy. Gas prices will eventually be high enough to force people to change their behaviors and choices. $3 or $4 per gallon isn't much compared to Europe, where prices are $7 - $8 per gallon. Perhaps a federal gas tax of say, $3 or $4 per gallon, would bring us in line with the much of the rest of the world, putting gas prices at a level where people will begin to change their lifestyles and make more frugal transportation choices. As I don't make much money I've already cut back on the amount of gasoline I use. My car is a '89 Honda that gets 35-40 mpg and more on the highway. My scooter has given me over 90 mpg on some trips. I've cut back on my travels out of town. I'm willing to bear the cost of higher fuel prices if it results in changes to our transportation policy and individuals' transportation decisions.

Wrong. At some point, if we refuse to pin the blame on motorists, we will simply switch to another fuel. Perhaps it will be ethanol, perhaps something derived from methane hydrate. But, a slight shortfall will still produce massive price spikes because of motorist lifestyle choices.

You have proposed no solution that is likely to work. The real solution absolutely depends on motorists coming to grips with certian erroneous beliefs about their poor lifestyle choices and exercising their economic freedom to take care of the problem themselves.

This is not self-righteousness, this is the result of years of ruminating on the problem. Studies show that it takes repeating something seven times before it sinks in. I suggest that we stop trying to coddle motorists, and get on to the task of giving them the message that will help solve the problem.

Chuck_Schick
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 10385
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2001 4:41 pm
Location: back atcha

Postby Chuck_Schick » Fri May 04, 2007 12:42 pm

RockHopper wrote:This is not self-righteousness, this is the result of years of ruminating on the problem.

Go ruminate in traffic, pedant.

dstol62
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 672
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 2:15 am
Contact:

Postby dstol62 » Fri May 04, 2007 12:55 pm

A possible vision of the future:

The year is 2010. In an effort to keep gas prices below $8 dollars a gallon, the state institutes a mandatory carpool lottery for those who travel more than 10 miles to get to work. Those who do not comply will be sent to area work camps to help make tee shirts promoting wisconsin's #2 dairy state status.

RockHopper
Forum Addict
Posts: 452
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2006 10:47 pm
Location: Exxon Worldwide Headquarters, Irving Texas
Contact:

Postby RockHopper » Fri May 04, 2007 1:02 pm

Chuck_Schick wrote:
RockHopper wrote:This is not self-righteousness, this is the result of years of ruminating on the problem.

Go ruminate in traffic, pedant.

I assume you intend to use this definition of "pedant":

1. a person who adheres rigidly to book knowledge without regard to common sense.

If so, then my argument is that "common sense" itself as it exists in our nation is the problem that causes gas price spikes. The false belief that it is cheaper to live more than 7 miles from work is one example of this counter-productive common sense.

I have no allusions that what I am battling here are the myths that have somehow found there way into our collective "common sense". As such, "pedant" isn't the right word. I believe the word you should have chosen is "heretic."

Chuck_Schick
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 10385
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2001 4:41 pm
Location: back atcha

Postby Chuck_Schick » Fri May 04, 2007 1:07 pm

pedant (noun): one who is unimaginative or who unduly emphasizes minutiae in the presentation or use of knowledge

Don't try to play the dictionary game with me, Skip. You're way the fuck out of your league.


Return to “Headlines”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests