How long will we let the oil companies SHAFT us?

$10.71 FUCKING BILLION QUARTERLY PROFIT DURING THE SUPPOSED KATRINA OIL SHORTAGE WHEN PRICES WERE GOUGED BEYOND BELIEF!!! WAKE UP, CONSUMPTION DID NOT RISE, IT'S A LIE. JUST THE PRICE THEY WERE CHARGING YOU CHANGED. THEY CLAIM SUPPLY AND DEMAND BUT DEMAND WAS THE SAME AND SUPPLY WAS NOT EVEN SIGNIFICANTLY AFFECTED.

 

FUCKING LYING ASS OIL COMPANIES! WE'VE ALL BEEN FUCKED HARD BY THEM!

 

$36.13 BILLION PROFIT...1 COMPANY.

 

OUT OF FUCKING CONTROL!!!

 

SOMEBODY PLEASE TELL ME ONCE AGAIN HOW BUSH'S OIL BUDDIES AREN'T GETTING DISGUSTINGLY RICH RIPPING PEOPLE OFF. RIGHT.

 

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/01/30/business/main1253326.shtml

 

(AP) Exxon Mobil Corp. posted a record quarterly profit for a U.S. company on Monday, $10.71 billion in the fourth quarter, as the world's biggest publicly traded oil company benefited from high oil and gas prices and demand for refined products.

 

The company's earnings amounted to $1.71 per share, up from $8.42 billion, or $1.30 per share, in the year ago quarter. The result topped the then-record quarterly profit of $9.92 billion Exxon posted in the 2005 third quarter.

 

The recent quarter included a $390 million gain related to a litigation settlement. Excluding special items, earnings were $10.32 billion, or $1.65 per share. The result topped Wall Street's expectations. Analysts surveyed by Thomson Financial predicted earnings of $1.44 per share.

 

Quarterly revenue ballooned to $99.66 billion from $83.37 billion a year ago but came in shy of the $100.72 billion Exxon posted in the third quarter, which was the first time a U.S. public company generated more than $100 billion in sales in a single quarter.

 

By segment, exploration and production earnings rose sharply to $7.04 billion, up $2.15 billion from the 2004 quarter, reflecting higher crude oil and natural gas prices. Production decreased by 1 percent due to the lingering effects of hurricanes Katrina and Rita, which battered the Gulf Coast in August and September.

 

The company's refining and marketing segment reported $2.39 billion in earnings, as higher refining and marketing margins helped offset the residual effects of the hurricanes.

 

Exxon's chemicals business saw earnings, excluding special items, decline by $413 million to $835 million, as higher materials costs squeezed margins.

 

For the full year, net income surged 43 percent to $36.13 billion, or $5.71 per share, from $25.33 billion, or $3.89 per share, in 2004. Annual revenue grew to $371 billion from $298.04 billion.

What you have to recognize is that profit was approximately 10% of revenues. If you eliminated profit completely prices would only be 10% lower. Hardly a ripoff.

What you have to recognize is that profit was approximately 10% of revenues. If you eliminated profit completely prices would only be 10% lower. Hardly a ripoff.

 

Well, this is assuming of course, that the corporate books are not cooked to the max which I fear that all corporations books are to some extent today.

 

However...

 

Damn Good Point You Got There.

 

Fucker...

What you have to recognize is that profit was approximately 10% of revenues. If you eliminated profit completely prices would only be 10% lower. Hardly a ripoff.

 

If I could have given you good rep. I would have. But the system won't let me. Stupid system.

I am in favor or requiring the Oil giants to put no less than 5% of their quarterly profits toward Hydrogen Fuel research, without increasing the price to compensate... They have bilked us long enough, it's high time we bilk them a bit!

 

But we really wouldn't be bilking them a bit... just requiring them to do something that they should have done years ago! And the kicker of it is, when they do make a breakthrough of sorts, they will have royalties, and distribution profits as well as being the primary provider of the fuel, materials, technology etc.... They would actually make ALOT more money in the form of Western nations getting off Arab oil and buying into American Hydrogen fuel and it's technology!

 

We could bankrupt the East while we ensure that the West's energy reserves are never compromised! Win Win situation... And think of all the war and security problems that would go away if we stopped relying on Islam for oil! WOW ! ! !

 

Not to mention the cost of medical treatment for Fossil fuel related illness, pollution, etc....

 

$10.71 FUCKING BILLION QUARTERLY PROFIT DURING THE SUPPOSED KATRINA OIL SHORTAGE WHEN PRICES WERE GOUGED BEYOND BELIEF!!! WAKE UP, CONSUMPTION DID NOT RISE, IT'S A LIE. JUST THE PRICE THEY WERE CHARGING YOU CHANGED. THEY CLAIM SUPPLY AND DEMAND BUT DEMAND WAS THE SAME AND SUPPLY WAS NOT EVEN SIGNIFICANTLY AFFECTED.

 

FUCKING LYING ASS OIL COMPANIES! WE'VE ALL BEEN FUCKED HARD BY THEM!

 

$36.13 BILLION PROFIT...1 COMPANY.

 

OUT OF FUCKING CONTROL!!!

 

SOMEBODY PLEASE TELL ME ONCE AGAIN HOW BUSH'S OIL BUDDIES AREN'T GETTING DISGUSTINGLY RICH RIPPING PEOPLE OFF. RIGHT.

 

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/01/30/business/main1253326.shtml

 

(AP) Exxon Mobil Corp. posted a record quarterly profit for a U.S. company on Monday, $10.71 billion in the fourth quarter, as the world's biggest publicly traded oil company benefited from high oil and gas prices and demand for refined products.

 

The company's earnings amounted to $1.71 per share, up from $8.42 billion, or $1.30 per share, in the year ago quarter. The result topped the then-record quarterly profit of $9.92 billion Exxon posted in the 2005 third quarter.

 

The recent quarter included a $390 million gain related to a litigation settlement. Excluding special items, earnings were $10.32 billion, or $1.65 per share. The result topped Wall Street's expectations. Analysts surveyed by Thomson Financial predicted earnings of $1.44 per share.

 

Quarterly revenue ballooned to $99.66 billion from $83.37 billion a year ago but came in shy of the $100.72 billion Exxon posted in the third quarter, which was the first time a U.S. public company generated more than $100 billion in sales in a single quarter.

 

By segment, exploration and production earnings rose sharply to $7.04 billion, up $2.15 billion from the 2004 quarter, reflecting higher crude oil and natural gas prices. Production decreased by 1 percent due to the lingering effects of hurricanes Katrina and Rita, which battered the Gulf Coast in August and September.

 

The company's refining and marketing segment reported $2.39 billion in earnings, as higher refining and marketing margins helped offset the residual effects of the hurricanes.

 

Exxon's chemicals business saw earnings, excluding special items, decline by $413 million to $835 million, as higher materials costs squeezed margins.

 

For the full year, net income surged 43 percent to $36.13 billion, or $5.71 per share, from $25.33 billion, or $3.89 per share, in 2004. Annual revenue grew to $371 billion from $298.04 billion.

 

 

They'll shaft us as long as we depend on them...

Walk, it's good excercise. Get in shape, the muslims are coming.

Have you ever thought what is going to happen when the all the oil is gone? We use it like its a never ending source, but its days are numbered and if something is not done to find a new source of cheap clean power the world in a hole will be screwed. You have to wonder if that is what's driving up oil prices and not just the war in the middle east?

 

In australia we're paying around $1.30 per litre now that is a kick in the balls

Have you ever thought what is going to happen when the all the oil is gone? We use it like its a never ending source, but its days are numbered and if something is not done to find a new source of cheap clean power the world in a hole will be screwed. You have to wonder if that is what's driving up oil prices and not just the war in the middle east?

 

In australia we're paying around $1.30 per litre now that is a kick in the balls

 

Well, since we only pay 60 cents a litre you are clearly being overly taxed. In the US we pay I believe about 35 cents a gallon in taxes. If the 10% profit margin is also true for gasoline we are currently paying less than 25 cents a gallon to the oil company in profits, Stop blaming the oil companies and blame your government.

Well, since we only pay 60 cents a litre you are clearly being overly taxed. In the US we pay I believe about 35 cents a gallon in taxes. If the 10% profit margin is also true for gasoline we are currently paying less than 25 cents a gallon to the oil company in profits, Stop blaming the oil companies and blame your government.

 

My god that is cheap!

The Howard goverment taxes us a flat rate or around 60 cents a liter, then good and services tax on top of that, which has a variable rate tied into the cost proce of oil and inflation rate, so all up we pay around 70-90 cents tax per liter of fuel

Well, since we only pay 60 cents a litre you are clearly being overly taxed. In the US we pay I believe about 35 cents a gallon in taxes. If the 10% profit margin is also true for gasoline we are currently paying less than 25 cents a gallon to the oil company in profits, Stop blaming the oil companies and blame your government.

 

Hugo understates the truth here...

 

Hugo's version of "reality" is all predicated on an assumption that the oil companies are telling the truth that they only netted 10% profit on their 100 billion worth of sales after "expenses". I highly doubt it.

 

Remember, they can cook off their books to show expenses which really aren't there, overstate their expenses, provisions for reserves, etc. so that they make it look like they are living off of a 10% margin. Rest assured, they are not. If you are stupid enough to not realize that they do this, then you are hopeless. Corporate book cooking is the name of the game nowadays and every week, some other company is being indicted or CEO taken to criminal court. It's a reality today. Sad.

 

Next, the taxes on fuel in this country consist of federal excise tax, state fuel tax, local fuel tax, state sales tax, local sales tax, and state environment/inspection fees. The tax burden on motor fuels is staggering! In some cases, it represents at least 1/3 of the price of motor fuel!

 

Funny thing is, I'm curious how much at the end of the day, the American Oil companies paid in income taxes because once again they are able to jiggle the books, defer tax payments, alter corporate depreciation schedules at a whim to make huge changes in tax liabilities - for example - ExxonMobil closed 2003 with $20.1 billion in deferred income tax liabilities on the balance sheet. In regulatory filings, the company doesn't break out actual cash taxes paid.

 

Of course not...

 

Wouldn't you like to defer you income tax indefinitely and be able to "adjust" your expenses and depreciations years later to offset your previous tax liabilities? Nice hat trick.

 

Our country will seriously improve when EVERYBODY, including corporations, pays a FLAT TAX. No more deductions, no smoke and mirrors, no more fancy pants accountants cooking the books, just a simple math flat tax system that a 6th grade child could computer the taxes owed.

 

This country would be out of debt so fast it wouldn't even be funny. Finally, everybody would pay an equal share just like they already do with sales taxes.

But CES, how will the glorious showboat show such colours of triumph without gouging the fuck out of the working class?

 

War costs money. Showboating costs money. Just keep your nose to the grindstone, and everything will work out just fine. Maybe. no promises.

...Hugo's version of "reality" is all predicated on an assumption that the oil companies are telling the truth that they only netted 10% profit on their 100 billion worth of sales after "expenses". I highly doubt it.

 

Remember, they can cook off their books to show expenses which really aren't there, overstate their expenses, provisions for reserves, etc. so that they make it look like they are living off of a 10% margin. Rest assured, they are not. If you are stupid enough to not realize that they do this, then you are hopeless. Corporate book cooking is the name of the game nowadays and every week, some other company is being indicted or CEO taken to criminal court. It's a reality today. Sad....

 

Do you have any proof of this? CES, anyone can claim this. For example I could claim that we live in US if THEY are not lying to us, The British actually set up an experiment back in 1776 to see if they could dupe us into thinking we are our own sovreignty and they just made up the War of 1812 and the Revolution.

 

This is what you are doing by claiming that they (Exxon) is lying without any proof... It's just your weird, baseless theory.

Do you have any proof of this? CES, anyone can claim this. For example I could claim that we live in US if THEY are not lying to us, The British actually set up an experiment back in 1776 to see if they could dupe us into thinking we are our own sovreignty and they just made up the War of 1812 and the Revolution.

 

This is what you are doing by claiming that they (Exxon) is lying without any proof... It's just your weird, baseless theory.

 

Okay, now I ask you...are you awake? Have you been in a drug induced stupor for the last few years?

 

President Bush signed the Corporate Corruption Bill into law because the corporate lying and cheating was completely rampant and out of control.

 

Millions of American citizens saw their investments turn into dirt overnight as each successive corporate accounting "irregularity" was exposed and eventually plunged the company into financial ruin taking the stockholders and like with it.

 

So far we've seen the prosecution of numerous CEO's and CFO and there are still many more companies under federal investigation.

 

Shit, just a few weeks ago, the head of a Japanese firm killed himself because he was caught in corporate corruption.

 

Corporations, especially the men/women who run them, think that they are above the law, that they can lie at will and get away with it.

 

I haven't got a clue where you could somehow label this as my "weird, baseless theory"

Corporations, especially the men/women who run them, think that they are above the law, that they can lie at will and get away with it.

 

CES, when you draw on like this you sound like Stephen Seagal. Who, by the way, puts so much oil in that hair of his that OPEC will use him in their 2006 campaign; aptly named "Kick the Hell out of Towelheads".

Okay, now I ask you...are you awake? Have you been in a drug induced stupor for the last few years?

Why YES! I have in fact been smoking pot every day for the past couple of years. Thank You, but I don't see what that has to do with your very baseless allogation of corporate corruption at Exxon.

 

President Bush signed the Corporate Corruption Bill into law because the corporate lying and cheating was completely rampant and out of control.

Yes, It was called Sarbanes-Oxley and was a knee-jerk reaction to the stock devaluation of Enron and Global Crossing cooking their books to make their companies look more profitable than they actually were.

 

Millions of American citizens saw their investments turn into dirt overnight as each successive corporate accounting "irregularity" was exposed and eventually plunged the company into financial ruin taking the stockholders and like with it.

Yes, those who invested heavily in Enron and Global Crossing. (anyone who puts all of their eggs in one basket is asking for trouble; but that's another topic)

 

So far we've seen the prosecution of numerous CEO's and CFO and there are still many more companies under federal investigation.

Keneth Lay is the only one I know of, though their may be more... Not ONE Exxon employee is being tried or under indictment. Not that I'm a fan of Exxon, I just want to see more proof than "One or two did it so ALL are doing it". I remember a time when one black man would commit a crime and society would indict all blacks, let's not digress to that era, please.

 

Shit, just a few weeks ago, the head of a Japanese firm killed himself because he was caught in corporate corruption.

Hare-Kare? Who gives a shit? Was he an Exxon Employee? Still no proof of your claim.

 

Corporations, especially the men/women who run them, think that they are above the law, that they can lie at will and get away with it.

Every last one of them, eh? And I'm the bad-guy because I believe Islam is inherently evil... sheesh.

 

I haven't got a clue where you could somehow label this as my "weird, baseless theory"

Well, that's because it's weird and baseless. Come back with verifiable evidence that Exxon is actually breaking law. And I will be the first to capitulate my stance. Until then, I will view them as inocent 'till proven guilty.

Hugo understates the truth here...

 

IRemember, they can cook off their books to show expenses which really aren't there, overstate their expenses, provisions for reserves, etc. so that they make it look like they are living off of a 10% margin. Rest assured, they are not. If you are stupid enough to not realize that they do this, then you are hopeless. Corporate book cooking is the name of the game nowadays and every week, some other company is being indicted or CEO taken to criminal court. It's a reality today. Sad.

 

How 1970's thinking. Most CEO's being indicted are being indicted for overstating the corporations income in order to attract investors in the era of the day trader.

 

The books tend to be cooked to inflate income (e.g. Enron, Fannie Mae) not deflate it.

 

Independent businessman keep more money by understating income, CEO's make more money by overstating income. If Exxon is corrupt they would be overstaing income, not understating it.

[Concerning number one it is this simple: You the consumer will pay what ever they charge, period. They try to pacify you by doing the gradual price slide over time, but in the end you will pay, because you are dependant on Oil period.

[

 

You are a bleeping<---Phreak say's.. THE WORD IS FUCKING we don't BLEEP here!! moron. If the consumer would pay whatever they charged the price would be much higher than it is today. Additionally oil prices have been stable for long periods of time with occassional intervals of sudden price raises (which for some odd reason coincide with supply problems) not a gradual price rise over time. Remove your head from your ass, you might be able to see a bit clearer.

Why YES! I have in fact been smoking pot every day for the past couple of years. Thank You, but I don't see what that has to do with your very baseless allogation of corporate corruption at Exxon.

 

Yes, It was called Sarbanes-Oxley and was a knee-jerk reaction to the stock devaluation of Enron and Global Crossing cooking their books to make their companies look more profitable than they actually were.

 

Yes, those who invested heavily in Enron and Global Crossing. (anyone who puts all of their eggs in one basket is asking for trouble; but that's another topic)

 

Keneth Lay is the only one I know of, though their may be more... Not ONE Exxon employee is being tried or under indictment. Not that I'm a fan of Exxon, I just want to see more proof than "One or two did it so ALL are doing it". I remember a time when one black man would commit a crime and society would indict all blacks, let's not digress to that era, please.

 

Hare-Kare? Who gives a shit? Was he an Exxon Employee? Still no proof of your claim.

 

Every last one of them, eh? And I'm the bad-guy because I believe Islam is inherently evil... sheesh.

 

Well, that's because it's weird and baseless. Come back with verifiable evidence that Exxon is actually breaking law. And I will be the first to capitulate my stance. Until then, I will view them as inocent 'till proven guilty.

 

How DARE you use logic and reason whilst making the sacred argument with his majesty CES ! !

 

And to assume ones innocence until such proof is given to the contrary?

Who the hell do you think you are?!

 

And My favorite blunder of logical people... To admit that it is possible for your position to be flawed, and account for this anomaly by admitting that you will change your position as new evidence comes to light!

 

Man... What a war mongering FOOL you must be to admit you don't have all the info! You don't see CES claiming that he may not know everything, DO YOU?!

 

HELL NO... He's Yoda, The fucking Oracle a Delphi, and a corporate accountant all rolled into one big fucking Cerebral Tacito!

 

All Heil CES ! ! !

 

The giver of light!

The Slayer of that mean ass dragon on the west side of the Mountain!

Father of Quantum Mechanics

And the only person around who claims to understand "The collapse of the Wave Function!"

 

All Praise be unto CES ! ! !

Yeah...all hail me. I like that. Thanks.

 

However, I am not the King. That's Hugh G. Rekshun's title.

 

Thanks for playing.

Occasional periods of sudden price increases? If that’s what you want to call it OK…but your wrong.

The government you all like to bash is the only thing standing in the way of the Oil companies charging $5.00 a gallon right now. And the only reason the government holds the price down is because it is non-conducive to public pacification and economical growth. The government give subsidies to the oil companies much in the same way they subsidies farming, your paying more for gas then what is posted at the pumps it’s just buried in your tax’s.

America consumes the vast majority of the oil produced in the world; it has been this way for a long time, and the biggest contributing factor to obtaining cheep oil. But that is changing; emerging markets and social changes all across the world are consuming more oil and beginning to compete for the available oil on the market. That means you’re going to pay more and should be paying more right now compared to gas prices everywhere else in the world. In the end you will pay what ever the oil companies charge for a gallon of gas, just like you will pay what ever they charge for a loaf of bread at the super market, and just like you will pay what ever inflated price housing is going for in your area right now.

My heads not up my ass just because you chose to live in a fantasy world and chose to believe everything you read in economics 101

 

Your head is up your ass. I suggest you retake Economics 101. The oil industry is relatively competitive and at some point reduced supplies and increased demand will create competitive alternative energy sources. Please go back and take Econ 101 again.

 

Individuals react to higher energy costs by reducing consumption and investing more in conversation.

Econ 101, believe it folks.

 

profit maximization

In economics, profit maximization is the process by which a firm determines the price and output level that returns the greatest profit. There are several approaches to this problem. The total revenue -- total cost method relies on the fact that profit equals revenue minus cost, and the marginal revenue -- marginal cost method is based on the fact that total profit in a perfectly competitive market reaches its maximum point where marginal revenue equals marginal cost.

 

 

Basic Definitions

Any costs incurred by a firm may be classed into two groups: fixed cost and variable cost. Fixed costs are incurred by the business at any level of output, including none. These may include equipment maintenance, rent, wages, and general upkeep. Variable costs change with the level of output, increasing as more product is generated. Materials consumed during production often have the largest impact on this category. Fixed cost and variable cost, combined, equal total cost.

 

Revenue is the total amount of money that flows into the firm. This can be from any source, including product sales, government subsidies, venture capital and personal funds.

 

Average cost and revenue are defined as the total cost or revenue divided by the amount of units output. For instance, if a firm produced 400 units at a cost of 20000 USD, the average cost would be 50 USD.

 

Marginal cost and revenue, depending on whether the calculus approach is taken or not, are defined as either the change in cost or revenue as each additional unit is produced, or the derivative of cost or revenue with respect to quantity output. For instance, taking the first definition, if it costs a firm 400 USD to produce 5 units and 480 USD to produce 6, the marginal cost of the sixth unit is approximately 80 dollars, although this is more accurately stated as the marginal cost of the 5.5th unit due to linear interpolation. Calculus is capable of providing more accurate answers if regression equations can be provided.

 

 

Total Cost-Total Revenue Method

To obtain the profit maximizing output quantity, we start by recognizing that profit is equal to total revenue minus total cost. Given a table of costs and revenues at each quantity, we can either compute equations or plot the data directly on a graph. Finding the profit-maximizing output is as simple as finding the output at which profit reaches its maximum. That is represented by output Q in the diagram.

 

 

Profit Maximization - The Totals ApproachThere are two graphical ways of determining that Q is optimal. Firstly, we see that the profit curve is at its maximum at this point (A). Secondly, we see that at the point (B) that the tangent on the total cost curve (TC) is parallel to the total revenue curve (TR), the surplus of revenue net of costs (B,C) is the greatest. Because total revenue minus total costs is equal to profit, the line segment C,B is equal in length to the line segment A,Q.

 

Computing the price at which to sell the product requires knowledge of the firm's demand curve. The price at which quantity demanded equals profit-maximizing output is the optimum price to sell the product.

 

 

Marginal Cost-Marginal Revenue Method

If total revenue and total cost figures are difficult to procure, this method may also be used. For each unit sold, marginal profit equals marginal revenue minus marginal cost. Then, if marginal revenue is greater than marginal cost, marginal profit is positive, and if marginal revenue is less than marginal cost, marginal profit is negative. When marginal revenue equals marginal cost, marginal profit is zero. Since total profit increases when marginal profit is positive and total profit decreases when marginal profit is negative, it must reach a maximum where marginal profit is zero - or where marginal cost equals marginal revenue. This intersection of marginal revenue (MR) with marginal costs (MC) is shown in the next diagram as point A. If the industry is competitive (as is assumed in the diagram), the firm faces a demand curve (D) that is identical to its Marginal revenue curve (MR), and this is a horizontal line at a price determined by industry supply and demand. Average total costs are reprsented by curve ATC. Total economic profits are represented by area P,A,B,C. The optimum quantity (Q) is the same as the optimum quantity (Q) in the first diagram.

 

 

Profit Maximization - The Marginal Approach

If the firm is operating in a non-competitive market, minor changes would have to be made to the diagrams.

 

 

Modes of Operation

It is assumed that all firms are following rational decision-making, and will produce at the profit-maximizing output. Given this assumption, there are four categories in which a firm's profit may be considered.

 

A firm is said to be making an economic profit when its average total cost is less than the price of the product at the profit-maximizing output. The economic profit is equal to the quantity output multiplied by the difference between the average total cost and the price.

 

A firm is said to be making a normal profit when its economic profit equals zero. This occurs where average total cost equals price at the profit-maximizing output.

 

If the price is between average total cost and average variable cost at the profit-maximizing output, then the firm is said to be in a loss-minimizing condition. The firm should still continue to produce, however, since its loss would be larger if it was to stop producing. By continuing production, the firm can offset its variable cost and at least part of its fixed cost, but by stopping completely it would lose equivalent of its entire fixed cost.

 

If the price is below average variable cost at the profit-maximizing output, the firm is said to be in shutdown. Losses are minimized by not producing at all, since any production would not generate returns significant enough to offset any fixed cost and part of the variable cost. By not producing, the firm loses only its fixed cost.

Econ 101, believe it folks.

 

I took both Micro and Macro Econ courses. What a joke. Never before in my life had I seen an opinion stated so strongly as fact!

 

The truth about Economics is, that although some observations and calculations may be appropriate and function at a given moment in time, the real magic of Economic theory are the variables; Chaos personified and unpredictable.

 

Truly, I like the definition that learned mathematicians use for Economists...

 

"Glorified Dice-Rolling Soothsayers..."

 

If Economic Theory was foolproof, so would be business.

 

Nice try Hugo. Weak.

I see that the sixty to ninety day memory of the average citizen is still working . When Rita hit Texas The damage was reported as 10% motor fuel 30% loss of supply for aviation fuel. The price didn.t go up 10% 0n fuel for your cars I increased by about 40% to three dollars plus per gallon. God bless those humanitarian oil companies, and the rag head in atlanta that was charging six bucks a gallon.

So what you are simply saying is when gas goes up to 3,4 or 5 bucks a gallon you wont pay it?

 

At a certain point alternative energy sources will be competitive. The market price will be quite close to where marginal revenue equals marginal cost. I drive less than I did a couple years ago. Many others do the same.