Ridiculous Gas prices? I'll thank Bush.
Tuesday, May 18, 2004 by ToolWraith | Discussion: WinCustomize Talk
 |
|
Page 1 of 7 | |
|
|---|
Jafo
Reply #2 Tuesday, May 18, 2004 11:37 PM
Reply #2 Tuesday, May 18, 2004 11:37 PM
I think Australia at $1.00 per Litre [not gallon, US or otherwise], with a continent of the same size and therefore same mileage to cover has it a tad worse off......[though we'd rather sell our first-born for medical research....better value]...
TheStranger22
Reply #3 Tuesday, May 18, 2004 11:47 PM
Reply #3 Tuesday, May 18, 2004 11:47 PM
Yeah. And Bush is at fault for everything in Iraq, He personally needs to be more in touch with the people (yeah like Kerry is), and he should have got the UN to go in to Iraq (Oh that's right he did try, but they were too busy being bribed). Oh if Gore could only be in office instead (scary thought), or even Kerry (very scary thought). (Got to stop-)
It is easy to blame one person for all of our woes, but we as a people have to take responsiblity at times also. The problems with that gasoline had been forcasted years ago, and we choose to ignore them, or more apporopriatly the green (tree huggers) people did. We have not allowed many refineries to be built, but yet we keep consuming more gas every day. Similiar to the problem California had with it's power plants, explosive growth but no new powerplants build in DECADES. It catchs up to youMy point is, this is not politics, does not matter who is in office this would be happening, maybe not as bad, maybe worse, but it would still be happening none the less.
As Jafo said, we should not complain, there are many countries that would love to pay only $2.00 per gallon.
Problem is we need less politicians that are more concerned about getting reelected so they are unwilling to make critical choices that some may not agree with. You cannot please everyone even part of the time.
Anyway, love this forum
It is easy to blame one person for all of our woes, but we as a people have to take responsiblity at times also. The problems with that gasoline had been forcasted years ago, and we choose to ignore them, or more apporopriatly the green (tree huggers) people did. We have not allowed many refineries to be built, but yet we keep consuming more gas every day. Similiar to the problem California had with it's power plants, explosive growth but no new powerplants build in DECADES. It catchs up to youMy point is, this is not politics, does not matter who is in office this would be happening, maybe not as bad, maybe worse, but it would still be happening none the less.
As Jafo said, we should not complain, there are many countries that would love to pay only $2.00 per gallon.
Problem is we need less politicians that are more concerned about getting reelected so they are unwilling to make critical choices that some may not agree with. You cannot please everyone even part of the time.
Anyway, love this forum
carolelee
Reply #5 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 12:57 AM
Reply #5 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 12:57 AM
87 cents per litre here in Sundre, Alberta and what gets me is we pull it out of the ground and refine it. We should be way cheaper but I thank our federal and provicial governments for all the taxes on it.......with no relief in sight >
DesignCaddy
Reply #6 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 1:36 AM
Reply #6 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 1:36 AM
in london, last i heard petrol was an equivalent 7$ to a gallon. we just hit 2$, while yes, it sucks, it could be worse - and will be worse. i'll be riding my bike the 5 miles to work this summer, to save myself some money and get in shape.
oil prices are not bush's fault directly. its up for grabs whether the world was any more stable before iraq, though oil was constant. the chinese are invoking an economic revolution centered around steel. the U.S. economy is also picking up, both are pinching a demand for oil. a jitter stock market because of global terrorism also contributes to prices. while bush doesn't help, its not his fault. you know me.. i'd love to smack him with a plank.. but i think he's making a good move in not releasing oil from the national stockpile, as the democrats are demanding. he said he wasn't going to use something so important just to curb prices and whether that's because his texas homeboys are all making money off of it or not, it's wise.. just gotta conserve more. skip a couple trips to the beach.
oil prices are not bush's fault directly. its up for grabs whether the world was any more stable before iraq, though oil was constant. the chinese are invoking an economic revolution centered around steel. the U.S. economy is also picking up, both are pinching a demand for oil. a jitter stock market because of global terrorism also contributes to prices. while bush doesn't help, its not his fault. you know me.. i'd love to smack him with a plank.. but i think he's making a good move in not releasing oil from the national stockpile, as the democrats are demanding. he said he wasn't going to use something so important just to curb prices and whether that's because his texas homeboys are all making money off of it or not, it's wise.. just gotta conserve more. skip a couple trips to the beach.
EventHorizon
Reply #7 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 1:57 AM
Reply #7 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 1:57 AM
Hard to find anything less than 2.15(US)/Gallon here...Its more like 2.25+ at most stations...
Essencay
Reply #8 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 2:46 AM
Reply #8 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 2:46 AM
$1.96-$1.99 here, which is as Jafo pointed out, pretty cheap considering what the rest of the world pays. Also if you look at other things, price of a car, a house, a trip to the grocery store and compare how much they've gone up in the last 10-15 years against gas prices, again it's still cheap. Though going from $20-$30 a month in my old Aspire to $25-$30 a week in my Ford F-150 hurts a little.
XX
Reply #9 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 2:48 AM
Reply #9 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 2:48 AM
2.29 here. I think I'll have to use the bus near the end of month now.
Jafo
Reply #10 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 2:50 AM
Reply #10 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 2:50 AM
At a guess...I'd say the Aussie equivalent would be about US $3.50 a gallon....and as a reminder of our 'size' we have a single ranch in Oz larger than your biggest State [Texas]....
Fuzzy Logic
Reply #11 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 2:55 AM
Reply #11 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 2:55 AM
£80.9 per litre here in the UK, and set to rise another 4-5p per litre.
At current exchange rates that's about $6.60 per gallon...
At current exchange rates that's about $6.60 per gallon...
kona0197
Reply #12 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 3:16 AM
Reply #12 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 3:16 AM
I just got a quarter of a tank off of 15 bucks. Needless to say I had to quit my job when I drive a 79 Wagon and it eats gas and i travel 44 miles a day and only work twice a week. Counter productive. lol
Evorg
Reply #13 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 3:28 AM
Reply #13 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 3:28 AM
Jafo is right.
I can remember in 1988 it use to cost me about 85 USD (after Her Majesty conversion) to fill up my 20 gallon tank in Eriswell, England.
But hey! I got a nice collection of free pint tankards, I forget if it was from BP or Esso.
And I also agree with DesignCaddy.
He makes some good points. You can''t just point the finger at Bush entirely.
I still think the best solution (for all western countries) is to start demanding that we get off the oil standard and into hybrid
fuels, fuel cells (hydrogen), renewable energies, wind mills, fusion power (if they ever decide the test reactor will be built in Japan
or France). This is what we need to throw our money at.
And one final thought,
Politically what do you think about a region that relies 100 percent on oil exports going to do, if 65 percent or 45 percent or even 30
percent of their customers no longer need their oil?
[Message Edited]
I can remember in 1988 it use to cost me about 85 USD (after Her Majesty conversion) to fill up my 20 gallon tank in Eriswell, England.
But hey! I got a nice collection of free pint tankards, I forget if it was from BP or Esso.
And I also agree with DesignCaddy.
He makes some good points. You can''t just point the finger at Bush entirely.
I still think the best solution (for all western countries) is to start demanding that we get off the oil standard and into hybrid
fuels, fuel cells (hydrogen), renewable energies, wind mills, fusion power (if they ever decide the test reactor will be built in Japan
or France). This is what we need to throw our money at.
And one final thought,
Politically what do you think about a region that relies 100 percent on oil exports going to do, if 65 percent or 45 percent or even 30
percent of their customers no longer need their oil?
[Message Edited]
kona0197
Reply #14 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 3:31 AM
Correct me if i'm wrong but that's where we put the atom back together right? And fission is where we split it right? i get them confused all the time.
Reply #14 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 3:31 AM
| fusion power (if they ever decide the test reactor will be built in Japan |
Correct me if i'm wrong but that's where we put the atom back together right? And fission is where we split it right? i get them confused all the time.
EventHorizon
Reply #15 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 3:41 AM
That'd be 'Alaska', Jafo.
Reply #15 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 3:41 AM
| and as a reminder of our 'size' we have a single ranch in Oz larger than your biggest State [Texas]. |
That'd be 'Alaska', Jafo.
EventHorizon
Reply #16 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 3:43 AM
Reply #16 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 3:43 AM
Yes kona, thats where they ''put the atom back together''...
Well, kinda like that, But Im too tired to give a lengthy explanation.
An A-bomb (Hiroshima, Nagasaki) is Fission (along with current Nuclear Powerplants), A H-bomb (which obiterated some atoll in the south pacific in the ''50s...correct me if Im wrong) is Fusion. Theres a big difference in the amount of power that comes off each.
[Message Edited]
Well, kinda like that, But Im too tired to give a lengthy explanation.
An A-bomb (Hiroshima, Nagasaki) is Fission (along with current Nuclear Powerplants), A H-bomb (which obiterated some atoll in the south pacific in the ''50s...correct me if Im wrong) is Fusion. Theres a big difference in the amount of power that comes off each.
[Message Edited]
Evorg
Reply #17 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 3:51 AM
Reply #17 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 3:51 AM
Yep Kona0197 your right, fusion is the reaction in which two atoms of hydrogen combine together, or fuse, to form an atom of helium, giving off tremendous amounts of energy.
Read more at: http://www.iter.org/
Read more at: http://www.iter.org/
Jafo
Reply #18 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 3:52 AM
Reply #18 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 3:52 AM
Oh, EH....same difference either way... [Gosh aren't the Texans miffed they aren't the biggest?]...
[Gosh aren't the Texans miffed they aren't the biggest?]...
EventHorizon
Reply #19 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 3:53 AM
Reply #19 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 3:53 AM
Size doesnt matter.
...You sure youve got a ranch down there thats bigger than Alaska?
EventHorizon digs up some quick facts... 570,374 sq miles (no idea what that is in sq km)...or 365,039,104 sq acres ...2.3x the size of Texas...
[Message Edited]
...You sure youve got a ranch down there thats bigger than Alaska?
EventHorizon digs up some quick facts... 570,374 sq miles (no idea what that is in sq km)...or 365,039,104 sq acres ...2.3x the size of Texas...
[Message Edited]
Shameless Designs
Reply #20 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 4:16 AM
Alaska has 1,447,267.5 sq. km. in land area, which is more than twice the size of Texas, at a mere 678,358.1 sq. km., and about 19% of Australia's 7,692,024 sq. km. That would be quite a ranch. Who owns it?
Reply #20 Wednesday, May 19, 2004 4:16 AM
| #20 by Admin Jafo - 5/19/2004 3:52:23 AM Oh, EH....same difference either way... [Gosh aren't the Texans miffed they aren't the biggest?]... |
Alaska has 1,447,267.5 sq. km. in land area, which is more than twice the size of Texas, at a mere 678,358.1 sq. km., and about 19% of Australia's 7,692,024 sq. km. That would be quite a ranch. Who owns it?
Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!
|
|
Page 1 of 7 | |
|
|---|
Reply #1 Tuesday, May 18, 2004 11:35 PM