Gas prises to rise IMMEDIATELY

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

That reason would be civilization is dependent on an abundant supply of energy, and our main source is oil.

Thanks for allowing me to further my point.

Never went under 2.00 , regular went from 2.10 yesterday to 2.50 today and also noticed instead of 10 cent difference it has been ( past week ) 13 cent difference so now its 2.50 , 2.63 , 2.76 . Kinda messed up glad I ride my bike in town. and only use motor car for distances longer then 10 miles

originally posted by: Pebujesa
Never went under 2.00 , regular went from 2.10 yesterday to 2.50 today and also noticed instead of 10 cent difference it has been ( past week ) 13 cent difference so now its 2.50 , 2.63 , 2.76 . Kinda messed up glad I ride my bike in town. and only use motor car for distances longer then 10 miles

That's a big jump. Guess they want to break it to everyone hard and fast, no kittie footin' there.

originally posted by: Aldakoopa

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
Gas was 84 cents here Wednesday, it's now 98.

originally posted by: UnBreakable
When attendants pump your gas they don't do this.

98 cent gas? Gas station attendants pumping gas? Did I just get out of a time machine?

originally posted by: wasaka
One station in Las Vegas dropped to $199.99 for a few days.

Glad I don't buy gas in Vegas.

Gas never got below $2.15 here. Now it's gone back up to $2.35

No timewarp. I live near NJ and it's full-serve only. You can't pump your own gas in NJ.

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

That reason would be civilization is dependent on an abundant supply of energy, and our main source is oil.

Thanks for allowing me to further my point.

Indeed, oil companies make a lot of profit because lots of people buy oil.

Therefore your statement on the first page is false by your own logic.

Glad to further your point.

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder


Indeed, oil companies make a lot of profit because lots of people buy oil.

Therefore your statement on the first page is false by your own logic.

Glad to further your point.

Cute, but you can't play me so easily.

You tried to make a point that the oil companies are somehow rigging the system, and attempted to prove this by showing they were in the top 500 list. It's illogical. I correctly stated in my original post that they had one of the lowest profit margins of any sector. Care to take on that point? I thought not.

You can take your circular logic and push it to people who are foolish enough to buy into it.

In the meantime, if you would like me to bother with you any further, then I'll challenge you to back up your last post with direct quotes from my original. You're either not thinking clearly, or incapable of following the reasoning from one post to the next. I will point out the reasoning presented in context of each hop, to prevent any further twists you attempt.

a reply to: pl3bscheese

You tried to make a point that the oil companies are somehow rigging the system

Care to point out exactly where I was making that claim? I was simply correcting your false statement. But if I did make that claim it would probably be quite easy to substantiate.

I correctly stated in my original post that they had one of the lowest profit margins of any sector. Care to take on that point? I thought not.

My take on that point would be that once again it's a totally false statement. The net profits of many oil companies is among the highest in the world. This article from Oct 2014 specifically looks at the companies with the highest net profits: The 20 most profitable companies in the world

Based on data provided by FactSet on companies' net income before discontinued operations and extraordinary items for their latest fiscal year, these are the world’s 20 most profitable companies.
...
In all, four industries account for the majority of companies among the world’s most profitable. Seven companies are in the energy industry, led by Gazprom and ExxonMobil, the most of any sector. Six of the most profitable companies are banks, with four based in China, and two based in the U.S.

You can take your circular logic and push it to people who are foolish enough to buy into it.

Lol...

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

My god, you're absolutely ignorant to the difference between a sum, and a percentage.


3rd graders are beyond you, kid

a reply to: pl3bscheese

Let me assure you I know what a profit margin is, the thing you don't seem to realize, or don't want to admit, is that even with a low profit margin you can still make insane profits if your revenue is high enough. What really matters at the end of the day is net profit, and the facts show that oil companies are not straggling behind in that department. Keep on digging sir, your hole can only get deeper...

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Nope, this is actually fun destroying your reasoning.

So are you aware that the increase in R & D to keep at our supplies so high has increased exponentially over the last 15 years?

Would it not make perfect sense that ever increasing profits would be absolutely necessary to keep this massive increase fundable?

I'm sorry that you can't figure this out, but that's not my deal.

So are you aware that the increase in R & D to keep at our supplies so high has increased exponentially over the last 15 years?

Would it not make perfect sense that ever increasing profits would be absolutely necessary to keep this massive increase fundable?

Net profit doesn't include revenue which has been spent on R&D by the business. Net profit is what they have left after all the business costs have been accounted for, it's what they use to pay their shareholders.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

That's irrelevant, you're missing the point. You can't increase expenses if you're in the red.

Now, being the biggest player, with how many millions of investors? You're trying to tell me a profit shouldn't be had?

You're losing perspective. It's what I have to keep pointing out over and over on this site. It's so annoying that I have to take breaks because it's everywhere I look on here.

If you want to change the law to limit how much a ceo can get, I'm all for it, but don't go thinking what they take home makes a dent in the price you pay at the pump. Certainly don't try to push that here on this site. It's a lie.

a reply to: pl3bscheese

That's irrelevant, you're missing the point. You can't increase expenses if you're in the red.

No it's actually totally relevant, and you're missing the point. At the end of the day the net profit is what really matters, and that's why they often call it "the bottom line".

Now, being the biggest player, with how many millions of investors? You're trying to tell me a profit shouldn't be had?

I am telling you no such thing. I'm simply correcting the misleading information you have presented in this thread.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

I'm not the one misleading, and it's for other members to discern the truth from your obvious errors in reasoning.

You're incapable of holding the many things in mind needed to gain proper perspective and weigh the variables within their contexts.

originally posted by: UnBreakable
No timewarp. I live near NJ and it's full-serve only. You can't pump your own gas in NJ.

I have seriously never heard of such a thing. I've only seen it/heard of it from the "good old days".

Everybody knew they wouldn't stay down long. I ordered fuel oil and got it for 2.17 a gallon.

I consider that a treat which I probably won't ever see again. People dream that it might stay low, but that is just a dream. When the price goes lower, states seem to raise gas taxes and people don't seem to object at that time. When it goes back up, it's too late and the states already got their extra money.

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

I'm not the one misleading, and it's for other members to discern the truth from your obvious errors in reasoning.

I'm sure many will discern the truth from our conversation, many will not however. Unlike you I don't really care what other people think, you seem to be taking this far too personally.

originally posted by: pryingopen3rdeye
well the price had only dropped artificialy anyhow. it was done as a political tactic to hurt russia. i guess their tired of footing the bill for that strategy.

I heard that the gas prices were dropped by the Middle-East in order to hurt our fracking industry - because if the price gets low enough, it isn't cost-effective to frack anymore and shale oil is a big U.S. thing.

(Bloomberg) -- Back in October, Jill Potts waved off concerns about falling crude prices, pointing to the long lines of trucks forming outside her oil field supply store in South Texas as evidence that the shale boom was still going strong.

But then oil kept plunging -- from $82.70 a barrel back on that sunny mid-October day to $70, then $60, and ultimately touching as low as $43.58 before settling at about $50 Thursday.

Potts’s mood has changed.

Texas Swagger Fades as Oil Town Finds Itself in OPEC Squeeze

My guess is that someone in the West found a way to artificially raise oil prices to maintain the shale oil boom.

We call February and March "Spring shutdown season" for a reason. We work it in the refineries every year in the spring and again in the fall.

a reply to: StoutBroux
Not sure but I believe there is still an oil refinery/steal workers strike going on. Barrel of oil up past 50.00. I'm keeping my eye on the longshoremen's strike that may take place. Our gas has gone up 30 cents in 4 days.