$2.29 a Gallon!!

[Brucelee]

Perfect,

You can't have it both ways.

One minute, it is a massive govt/industry conspiracy that has our prices moving.

The next minute, the govt can't find its way out of a paper bag.

Ditto, the spot traders. One minute they are pulling all the strings, the next, well, what's a 6B loss?

The fact is, the prices go up, and then they go down.

It is the history of commodities, throughout all time.

The funny thing is that G. Soros, that great liberal windbag, rode the commodities gravy train to Billionaire status.

Now, once he got there, well, time to have the REST of us fund the govt to do everything.

What a hypocrite! He almost took down the British economy while getting rich but now he has a heart!

PS-The bottom of the US economic scale still has it better than it ever did and better than most of the rest of the world.

Not bad for paying no taxes, huh?


PPS-the lastest data on taxes is that the bottom 50% of wage earners pay on average 3% their income in federal taxes. That is down 50% from 2000, when they paid just 4.5%.

This does not count refundable tax credits, which makes the number even lower.

Makes you proud to be an American.

[jeffsquire]

Avg. Fuel Economy (MPG)

1987 - 22.1
2006 - 21.0

Avg. Weight (Lbs.)

1987 - 3320
2006 - 4142

Avg. Horsepower

1987 - 118
2006 - 219

Avg. 0-60 MPH (Sec.)

1987 - 13.1
2006 - 9.7

% Cars/Trucks

1987 - 72/28
2006 - 50/50
_______________________

According to these figures from MNboxster if correct, we've been able to make 20% of the cars heavier (i.e. larger, smoother riding, safer, roomier), 30% faster, almost 50% more powerful with only a 1mpg sacrifice for fuel economy. Is this bad? If only the goverment could be so effective. . . .

[MNBoxster]

Originally Posted by jeffsquire

Is this bad? If only the goverment could be so effective. . . .

Hi,

You just don't get it. After 20 years of trying to improve the situation, we've slipped backwards, and not because of need, but because of want...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

[jeffsquire]

Originally Posted by MNBoxster

Hi,

You just don't get it. After 20 years of trying to improve the situation, we've slipped backwards, and not because of need, but because of want...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

_______________________________________________

Errr, actually I do get it. My point is in your definition of "bad." There are plenty of people who think bigger, faster, stronger, roomier, smoother, safer vehicles at the cost of 1 mpg over 20 years is a damn fine improvement indeed. Many people believe that this is progress, not regression. After all, nobody really "needs" a car when there's public transportation, horses, shoes, bicycles, rollerblades, skateboards. In fact, I've seen an increase of at least %1000 of people using non-fossil fuel modes of transportation at rush hour every day. They''re everywhere. They don't want to pay high gas prices so they dont.

I "want" my cars and motorcyles and I'm willing to pay the gas to drive them. Which is why I drive my motorcyle 10 months out of the year (IN MICHIGAN!!) to save on gas.

[Brucelee]

Originally Posted by jeffsquire

_______________________________________________

Errr, actually I do get it. My point is in your definition of "bad." There are plenty of people who think bigger, faster, stronger, roomier, smoother, safer vehicles at the cost of 1 mpg over 20 years is a damn fine improvement indeed. Many people believe that this is progress, not regression. After all, nobody really "needs" a car when there's public transportation, horses, shoes, bicycles, rollerblades, skateboards. In fact, I've seen an increase of at least %1000 of people using non-fossil fuel modes of transportation at rush hour every day. They''re everywhere. They don't want to pay high gas prices so they dont.

I "want" my cars and motorcyles and I'm willing to pay the gas to drive them. Which is why I drive my motorcyle 10 months out of the year (IN MICHIGAN!!) to save on gas.

God bless the free capital markets!

[MNBoxster]

Originally Posted by jeffsquire

_______________________________________________

Errr, actually I do get it. My point is in your definition of "bad." There are plenty of people who think bigger, faster, stronger, roomier, smoother, safer vehicles at the cost of 1 mpg over 20 years is a damn fine improvement indeed. Many people believe that this is progress, not regression. After all, nobody really "needs" a car when there's public transportation, horses, shoes, bicycles, rollerblades, skateboards. In fact, I've seen an increase of at least %1000 of people using non-fossil fuel modes of transportation at rush hour every day. They''re everywhere. They don't want to pay high gas prices so they dont.

I "want" my cars and motorcyles and I'm willing to pay the gas to drive them. Which is why I drive my motorcyle 10 months out of the year (IN MICHIGAN!!) to save on gas.

Hi,

Nowhere did I say anything was bad, just what is. Also, while people using alternative means may be more noticeable, their numbers aren't currently accounting for much at all. Look at any Major Municipality and Urban Crawl is an increasing, not a declining issue.

But, you do raise an interesting point. If significant numbers do move away from fossil fuel dependence for personal transportation, that would leave fewer of us to support the Oil & Gas Industry infrastructure, and of course margins. Seems to me that this will, at least in a short term micro-economic sense, have a negative effect on prices for the consumer as well. Sounds like there's just no winning...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

[Brucelee]

Over time, Supply and demand adjust to the equilibrium price.

As demand drops, price drops, then supply, then prices increase etc.

Magic!