• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

With gas prices on the rise...

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,264
Location
In My Coffee
Oh no, gas prices are rising...wait, gas prices typically climb this time of the year, and the economy is getting better, so, higher gas prices.

So Republicans are running on:

Contraception

Gas Prices

Obama is not a U.S. citizen.

Run with it!
 

TechnoWeenie

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2007
Messages
2,084
Location
, ,
Oh no, gas prices are rising...wait, gas prices typically climb this time of the year, and the economy is getting better, so, higher gas prices.


So Republicans are running on:

Contraception

Gas Prices

Obama is not a U.S. citizen.

Run with it!

Why is it that EVERY TIME someone posts something, your response is something snarky, and in direct contrast to what the poster is trying to convey?

Once in a while it's good to state your opinion and get it known that you disagree..

But to CONTINUOUSLY show up in EVERY thread and start throwing paint at everybody to see who complains about it is just F'in retarded.

Seriously. Knock it off.

Your post is non-productive, and the only purpose it serves is to start #%(&.
 

thebigsd

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
3,535
Location
Quarryville, PA
Why is it that EVERY TIME someone posts something, your response is something snarky, and in direct contrast to what the poster is trying to convey?

Once in a while it's good to state your opinion and get it known that you disagree..

But to CONTINUOUSLY show up in EVERY thread and start throwing paint at everybody to see who complains about it is just F'in retarded.

Seriously. Knock it off.

Your post is non-productive, and the only purpose it serves is to start #%(&.

The OP isn't exactly a shining example of non-snarkiness. (yes, I made that word up.) The OP incites dissent and discussion. Debate is what makes this forum a valuable asset. I really don't see anything particularly incendiary in Beretta's response. You may as well apply the last line of your post to yourself in this instance.


I can't believe I just defended Berettalady.......that's gotta be a first.
 
Last edited:
H

Herr Heckler Koch

Guest
Back to the topic at hand; how is the value of the US$ determined since the gold standard was abandoned?

Consider fuel prices with a fixed value dollar, say a 1957 dollar. More directly, consider the value of the US$ fixed to the cost of a barrel of oil, putting us on an 'oil standard' figuratively. That standard informs stock market prices that have risen to historical levels without a corresponding rise in other measures of value.

If you can remember back to $0.25/gallon gasoline and compare that to today's $5/gallon cost then much becomes clear. What was the DJA then and now? What was Au/$ then and now? What was .45ACP/$ then and now? What was any-commodity/$ then compared to now, water, milk, eggs, porkbellies ...?

My eight year old car regularly gets better than 50 miles per gallon and cost less than $20K in 2003.
 
Last edited:

PrayingForWar

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2007
Messages
1,701
Location
The Real World.
The OP isn't exactly a shining example of non-snarkiness. (yes, I made that word up.) The OP incites dissent and discussion. Debate is what makes this forum a valuable asset. I really don't see anything particularly incendiary in Beretta's response. You may as well apply the last line of your post to yourself in this instance.


I can't believe I just defended Berettalady.......that's gotta be a first.

I was hoping too tweek her.

Just too be clear I tend to illustrate the word snarky in some of my posts indeed. It's a trait we share and it endears her to me.

Anyway I don't visualize 4 more years of dope and chains.

The question I was raising is this:

Will the media resurrect the lie of MMGW in order to justify the messiah doing everything he can to thwart oil infrastructure, increasing production, and wasting untold billions on companies that go bankrupt producing "green" crap not enough people seem interested in? We've seen this "issue" come and go, and I wonder if the leftist zealots are getting desperate enough to trot this myth out once again too squeeze a few more dollars of campaign cash out of those people still living under rocks with their fingers in their ears chanting:

"Yes we can...."


"Yes we can...."

"Yes we can...."

:lol:

 

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,264
Location
In My Coffee
(1)Why is it that EVERY TIME someone posts something, your response is something snarky, and in direct contrast to what the poster is trying to convey?

(2)Once in a while it's good to state your opinion and get it known that you disagree..

(3)But to CONTINUOUSLY show up in EVERY thread and start throwing paint at everybody to see who complains about it is just F'in retarded.

(4)Seriously. Knock it off.

(5)Your post is non-productive, and the only purpose it serves is to start #%(&.

(1)Someone has to be here to keep you up-to-date on the Liberal pulse of America.

(2)Why would I only state my opinion once in a while? Every response on this forum is an opinion in regard to some so-called 'fact' presented.

(3)I don't throw paint, I throw glitter.

(4)I can't knock it off, it's a twisted compulsion.

(5)I don't need to start sh*t, it was started before I got here.

Someone mentioned the gold standard in this discussion, I will bite. First, I would like to thank our Republican President Nixon for taking us off the gold standard, Reagan for continuing it, Bush I, then Clinton, then Bush II.

Funny thing is, the last refinery built in the U.S. was 1976. Interesting how these two things relating to fuel prices culminated under Nixon.

How is that for constructive?
 
Last edited:

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
Two routes:

1. Continue to use oil (and natgas), it's 'cheap', plentiful, relatively clean and we have more of it than anyone. The technology is proven and improving.

2. Alternatives are not plentiful or 'cheap', the technology is not even remotely proven or improving, or readily available, or ultimately even clean and green.

In fact, if what is being reported out of China on batteries for hybrids is even close to being true, hybrid technology is likely a ecological disaster in the making. But, the disaster will happen in China, win-win for us. 'Cleaner cars' with no downside here in the US.

And anyone who believes that the economy is getting better with fuel cost increasing does not run a business that relies on the trucking industry or owns a 'fleet' of trucks to get work done.

Nitwits....that is all those economic reality deniers are, loony-lib-sock-puppet nitwits.
 

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,264
Location
In My Coffee
Two routes:

1. Continue to use oil (and natgas), it's 'cheap', plentiful, relatively clean and we have more of it than anyone. The technology is proven and improving.

2. Alternatives are not plentiful or 'cheap', the technology is not even remotely proven or improving, or readily available, or ultimately even clean and green.

In fact, if what is being reported out of China on batteries for hybrids is even close to being true, hybrid technology is likely a ecological disaster in the making. But, the disaster will happen in China, win-win for us. 'Cleaner cars' with no downside here in the US.

And anyone who believes that the economy is getting better with fuel cost increasing does not run a business that relies on the trucking industry or owns a 'fleet' of trucks to get work done.

Nitwits....that is all those economic reality deniers are, loony-lib-sock-puppet nitwits.


I stated that rising fuel costs in-part reflect a bettering economy, unfortunately. I have owned a business before, and felt the pinch at three bucks a gallon, I could only imagine the pinch four bucks a gallon takes.

As an alternative to battery powered vehicles, what do we do, Fracking? Fracking is only economically feasible with high gas prices; so, we frack, expect to pay higher prices for fuel.

High fuel prices has to do with everything but an oil shortage. I would like to see a technology that can squeeze a hundred plus miles out of a gallon of gas, I would be down with that. Especially if my 1979 GMC Suburban can be converted:banghead:
 

gunns

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 27, 2011
Messages
270
Location
Minnesota
(1)Someone has to be here to keep you up-to-date on the Liberal pulse of America.

(2)Why would I only state my opinion once in a while? Every response on this forum is an opinion in regard to some so-called 'fact' presented.

(3)I don't throw paint, I throw glitter.

(4)I can't knock it off, it's a twisted compulsion.

(5)I don't need to start sh*t, it was started before I got here.

Someone mentioned the gold standard in this discussion, I will bite. First, I would like to thank our Republican President Nixon for taking us off the gold standard, Reagan for continuing it, Bush I, then Clinton, then Bush II.

Funny thing is, the last refinery built in the U.S. was 1976. Interesting how these two things relating to fuel prices culminated under Nixon.

How is that for constructive?

Truth:

Our Govornment has been screwing us for years, left, right doesn't matter our election choices reflect our emotions and not our Constitutional rights. But thats another conversation.

Typical Liberal propaganda without checking facts. The U.S. has built 12 refineries since 1976 (http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=29&t=6). They may not be very big refineries, but they are refineries none the less.
 

PrayingForWar

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2007
Messages
1,701
Location
The Real World.
Truth:

Our Govornment has been screwing us for years, left, right doesn't matter our election choices reflect our emotions and not our Constitutional rights. But thats another conversation.

Typical Liberal propaganda without checking facts. The U.S. has built 12 refineries since 1976 (http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=29&t=6). They may not be very big refineries, but they are refineries none the less.

Plus they've expanded and upgraded older ones.

One issue regarding their capacity that often gets over looked is all of the different blends they have too produce for different fruitcake regions' environut regulations. If they just made one specific blend we would be in much better shape.
 

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,264
Location
In My Coffee
Truth:

(1)Our Govornment has been screwing us for years, left, right doesn't matter our election choices reflect our emotions and not our Constitutional rights. But thats another conversation.

Typical Liberal propaganda without checking facts. The U.S. has built 12 refineries since 1976 (http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=29&t=6). They may not be very big refineries, but they are refineries none the less.

(1) That's a damn fact. Fact #2, we perpetuate the screwing by continuing to vote along party lines.

So you throw me a link that outlines refineries that have had their capacity increased; and the link provides a couple of refineries that produce nominal capacities.

I stand corrected, we have built 12 'simple' factories since the late seventies. Have we seen a net-gain from the extra 12 refineries? Type that into your little google search engine.
 

gunns

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 27, 2011
Messages
270
Location
Minnesota
(1) That's a damn fact. Fact #2, we perpetuate the screwing by continuing to vote along party lines.

So you throw me a link that outlines refineries that have had their capacity increased; and the link provides a couple of refineries that produce nominal capacities.

I stand corrected, we have built 12 'simple' factories since the late seventies. Have we seen a net-gain from the extra 12 refineries? Type that into your little google search engine.

What are you asking? Did we gain extra fuel making capacity? The answer is yes to the expansions and yes to the new refineries. Another liberal tactic, throw out vague references. Also note we haven't built any complex refineries since 1976, due to expansion of current ones and I do remember a few being turned down due to environment concerns. Oil refineries got sucked into the Nuclear reactor debate of the 70's.
 

WOD

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2012
Messages
224
Location
Onalaska WA
Fact - Climate change happens. Always has, always will.

Has science proven without a doubt that, man has contributed excessively to climate change? No, the data is still being examined.

Has science proven without a doubt that, man has not contributed excessively to climate change? No, the data is still being examined.

Has man contributed to pollution? Yes, without a doubt.

Can we do things to alleviate or minimize our impact on the climate? I'm certain we can if we choose to.

Can we all do a few small things to help keep our air, water and soil clean? Yes, without a doubt.

Am I a leftist lib-tard for wanting a clean environment, and safe drinking water, breathable air, and preservation of forests and wildlife regions?

Do I do a few small things to minimize my impact? Yes I do... do you?

I don't care if you're a liberal, conservative, libertarian, democrat, republican, rich, poor, or imperialist, you have a right to say what you want. I just think we all can do something to make our life here better, man-made or not, we can do better.
 

SovereignAxe

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2011
Messages
791
Location
Elizabethton, TN
Look, I want Obama out of office as much as the next guy, but to say that the president has anything to do with gas prices is ridiculous.

That is, unless you expect him to go nuke China and India to curb demand for oil.
 

Daylen

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
2,223
Location
America
I've been banned from Liberal chat sessions because of my views. My Second Amendment views have got me canned as well; oh well. I make sure I am banned from both sides of the isle equally. Just doing my Patriotic Duty.

Surely liberals must be more accepting of slightly differing views...
 
Top