Fuck you gas prices.

rival.

Seriously, FU.


Dirt bags!

Rygar

They probably won't drop until it hits $200/barrel for oil and everyone stops driving.

RockinInCanada

Rygar wrote:

They probably won't drop until it hits $200/barrel for oil and everyone stops driving.

Rygar expect $1.50/litre prices by the summer...no lie buddy.

GreenTeaDisease

see a moving train. there's a thread about this there.

I haven't bought gas in months, I'm glad the prices are high. my hope is that at some tipping point price the price elasticity of gasoline demand will change and people will reevaluate the choices they made in their lifestyles that made them so dependent on it.

Stone Is God

Rygar wrote:

They probably won't drop until it hits $200/barrel for oil and everyone stops driving.

I read an article on this yesterday saying that $180 was possible. The guy made a good point saying that he didn't think it would get that high because it would send the world into global recession.

Rygar

Rockin'InCanada wrote:

Rygar expect $1.50/litre prices by the summer...no lie buddy.

I expect higher.
It was $1.29 Friday morning.

Rygar

Stone Is God wrote:

I read an article on this yesterday saying that $180 was possible. The guy made a good point saying that he didn't think it would get that high because it would send the world into global recession.

I read something similar I believe.

Rygar

GreenTeaDisease wrote:

see a moving train. there's a thread about this there.

I haven't bought gas in months, I'm glad the prices are high. my hope is that at some tipping point price the price elasticity of gasoline demand will change and people will reevaluate the choices they made in their lifestyles that made them so dependent on it.

What sort of lifestyle choices are you talking about?

RockinInCanada

Rygar wrote:

I expect higher.
It was $1.29 Friday morning.

Maybe, gas prices get higher in the summer and it is because of government environmental restricitons (which are not a bad thing do not get me wrong) which makes gas producers add more expensive additives to their products to "help" with emissions (because of the higher ambient temperatures in the spring/summer)....yeah it was $1.24 in Calgary a couple weekends ago when I was down there.

GreenTeaDisease

Rygar wrote:

What sort of lifestyle choices are you talking about?

the high demand for large houses, big box stores, fancy cars, seclusion, etc that have lead to the development of the autocentric suburban design that the majority of americans live in.

CServant

GreenTeaDisease wrote:

see a moving train. there's a thread about this there.

I haven't bought gas in months, I'm glad the prices are high. my hope is that at some tipping point price the price elasticity of gasoline demand will change and people will reevaluate the choices they made in their lifestyles that made them so dependent on it.

It's more likely the crime rate will rise before people give up their vehicles. People here are siphoning gas by drilling directly into the tank and causing damage to the owners vehicle. $3.39/gallon here and rising!

RockinInCanada

GreenTeaDisease wrote:

see a moving train. there's a thread about this there.

I haven't bought gas in months, I'm glad the prices are high. my hope is that at some tipping point price the price elasticity of gasoline demand will change and people will reevaluate the choices they made in their lifestyles that made them so dependent on it.

Yeah but how many people require vehciles as their only methods of transportation. It is impractical for a large portion of the populace.

Hell I would love to take public transportation where I am but it is impossible.

Therefore no the prices will not change peoples minds (excluding maybe those in large urban centers that are close to PT or their work) as driving will be the only viable option as much as I hate to say it.

Should add that I live in small community where there is no PT.

rival.

CServant wrote:

It's more likely the crime rate will rise before people give up their vehicles. People here are siphoning gas by drilling directly into the tank and causing damage to the owners vehicle. $3.39/gallon here and rising!

$3.49 in NJ. record high.

GreenTeaDisease

Rockin'InCanada wrote:

Yeah but how many people require vehciles as their only methods of transportation. It is impractical for a large portion of the populace.

Hell I would love to take public transportation where I am but it is impossible.

Therefore no the prices will not change peoples minds (excluding maybe those in large urban centers that are close to PT or their work) as driving will be the only viable option as much as I hate to say it.

Should add that I live in small community where there is no PT.

it's all about lifestyle choices that americans have been making going back to the 1940s. those need to change, they are not sustainable. on a more current, individual basis, we all have budget constraints, we make choices within them. a lot of people choose to be dependent on their cars and they don't even realize they've made that choice somewhere along the line. but the fact is (and I don't think this really applies to people in poverty) if you're dependent on your car, you made that decision, knowing that oil is a scarce resource that as a high environmental cost associated with it. you can't really complain that it's closer to the price it should be at. personally I *choose* to live in a city. am I paying for that? hell yeah I am. but I chose the trade off of paying more for rent to live more sustainably. everyone makes these trade offs. If you choose the cheaper house in the suburbs over not needing a car, you have to pay for that trade off, you can't have something for nothing. with cheap oil, you were getting something for nothing.

cheap oil has done a LOT of damage. it's about time it's more costly.

Rygar

GreenTeaDisease wrote:

it's all about lifestyle choices that americans have been making going back to the 1940s. those need to change, they are not sustainable. on a more current, individual basis, we all have budget constraints, we make choices within them. a lot of people choose to be dependent on their cars and they don't even realize they've made that choice somewhere along the line. but the fact is (and I don't think this really applies to people in poverty) if you're dependent on your car, you made that decision, knowing that oil is a scarce resource that as a high environmental cost associated with it. you can't really complain that it's closer to the price it should be at. personally I *choose* to live in a city. am I paying for that? hell yeah I am. but I chose the trade off of paying more for rent to live more sustainably. everyone makes these trade offs. If you choose the cheaper house in the suburbs over not needing a car, you have to pay for that trade off, you can't have something for nothing. with cheap oil, you were getting something for nothing.

cheap oil has done a LOT of damage. it's about time it's more costly.

So if you pay more in rent then what you'd pay for in gas, it's ok that way?
Why don't you talk about the inefficiency of every vehicle's energy use on the road today?

bryn_cmbs

CServant wrote:

It's more likely the crime rate will rise before people give up their vehicles. People here are siphoning gas by drilling directly into the tank and causing damage to the owners vehicle. $3.39/gallon here and rising!

$3.59/gallon here.

upina2001

singularity wrote:

$3.49 in NJ. record high.

HUH!??! $3.66 regular unleaded in Indiana

GreenTeaDisease

Rygar wrote:

So if you pay more in rent then what you'd pay for in gas, it's ok that way?
Why don't you talk about the inefficiency of every vehicle's energy use on the road today?

I don't quite understand the questions.

I'm pretty sure I'm paying a lot more in rent than I'd be paying in gas in the suburbs, even now. but I don't get why that's important.

and I'm not saying that the vehicles on the road are efficient. no way in hell would I say that. but if the country were designed differently and/or people made significant life style changes, it wouldn't be AS big of a deal. But honestly, until we get hydrogen fuel cell cars (which don't believe the ads, they're a long way off) only small advancements will be made (and even if we do have fuel cells collecting hydrogen may cause more energy inefficiency to begins with).

there's a city being built in Abu Dahbi that will be a 100% carless city (not to mention completely "green" otherwise"). This is in a place where it is so hot it is almost impossible to go outside. if they can do that there...AND they're closer to the oil!

Rygar

GreenTeaDisease wrote:

I don't quite understand the questions.

I'm pretty sure I'm paying a lot more in rent than I'd be paying in gas in the suburbs, even now. but I don't get why that's important.

and I'm not saying that the vehicles on the road are efficient. no way in hell would I say that. but if the country were designed differently and/or people made significant life style changes, it wouldn't be AS big of a deal. But honestly, until we get hydrogen fuel cell cars (which don't believe the ads, they're a long way off) only small advancements will be made (and even if we do have fuel cells collecting hydrogen may cause more energy inefficiency to begins with).

there's a city being built in Abu Dahbi that will be a 100% carless city (not to mention completely "green" otherwise"). This is in a place where it is so hot it is almost impossible to go outside. if they can do that there...AND they're closer to the oil!

You expect everyone to want to live in the city?

lephty

i said fuck you to gas prices yesterday. i did the math and its now nearly $100/month cheaper for me to commute to work by train. so i bought my monthly train pass!

i was driving about 100miles/day in my 30m/gallon car (civic) which is about $11/day i think.

i am lucky i live less than 5 miles from a train station and my job is less than a mile away from its train station.

look for alternatives people. you might be saving money and helping the environment at the same time~

rearviewmiror

No I think she is just making an excellent point. If you want to live in an inefficient environment you must pay for it.

Rygar

rearviewmiror wrote:

No I think she is just making an excellent point. If you want to live in an inefficient environment you must pay for it.

Now we get into the idea of inefficient environment vs shitty environment.

GreenTeaDisease

Rygar wrote:

You expect everyone to want to live in the city?

no.

I'm saying it's a choice.

and overtime, those choices have built up and built up and made things the "norm" and people don't even realize they're making choices anymore. everything is designed around those choices-everything is designed around cars-houses, highways, shopping, hospitals, schools and it doesn't have to be like that. some people *could* probably live in a city and not care, but they are just engrained from birth that it's not an option, they don't even think about it. people who own big box stores and city planners...everyone has made choices. hell voters can demand bike paths in small towns, or at least CROSSWALKS and SIDEWALKS. city/town officials can change absurd zoning laws to make it possible for a business person to open a grocery *in* a neighborhood instead of out on a highway. If people didn't demand subdivisions, developers wouldn't build them and children would be able to walk to school!

but beyond all this, is the simple fact that, if you, personally, do not want to live in an urban area for whatever reason, if you for some reason like the autocentric nature of how we live, then you have to pay for it, and not just the personal costs but the social costs too. those aren't getting paid for now with the higher prices (we'd need a tax for that) but if it *deters* someone from driving, it's a social cost offset. that's all I'm saying- you don't get something for nothing and up until now everyone who drives (hell, including myself, I drive sometimes) has been getting something for nothing.

Rygar

GreenTeaDisease wrote:

you don't get something for nothing and up until now everyone who drives (hell, including myself, I drive sometimes) has been getting something for nothing.

So do you consider price gouging, manipulation, and monopolizing (all of these in reference to government and oil companies) in that reasoning?

GreenTeaDisease

Rygar wrote:

So do you consider price gouging, manipulation, and monopolizing (all of these in reference to government and oil companies) in that reasoning?

first off, you don't know for sure what all the factors of the higher prices are- they are not all malicious intent imo. they can't be. where is there an oil monopoly anyway??? last time I checked it was at best an oligopoly.

I don't think the government is getting any revenue from it, but if they are great, that's paying for the social cost of the environmental damage. the government is *us* dude. it's like our public bank account.

but to answer your question, yes it is in that reasoning. that's a distribution issue, not a price/cost issue. it doesn't matter who is getting the money or where it's going- I mean there are better directions it could be going, no doubt about that-but for the time being what matters is the price is closer to right. and I repeat, if you choose to drive and depend on these oil companies, then you can't complain.

rival.

upina2001 wrote:

HUH!??! $3.66 regular unleaded in Indiana

record high in NJ that is!

Rygar

GreenTeaDisease wrote:

first off, you don't know for sure what all the factors of the higher prices are- they are not all malicious intent imo. they can't be. where is there an oil monopoly anyway??? last time I checked it was at best an oligopoly.

I don't think the government is getting any revenue from it, but if they are great, that's paying for the social cost of the environmental damage. the government is *us* dude. it's like our public bank account.

but to answer your question, yes it is in that reasoning. that's a distribution issue, not a price/cost issue. it doesn't matter who is getting the money or where it's going- I mean there are better directions it could be going, no doubt about that-but for the time being what matters is the price is closer to right.

Gas prices here are ~35% government tax. And *we* are not the government.

1STmammal2wearPants

Just paid a cool 44 bucks to fill up my tank yesterday.

Can't wait to move to NYC, get a job there, and ride the subway every day.

Fighting Hellfish

I've seen it as high as $3.90 in Northport, NY for regular, self serve. If you shop around, you could get it for $3.65

GreenTeaDisease

Rygar wrote:

Gas prices here are ~35% government tax. And *we* are not the government.

yes we are...the government provides services and public goods that everyone benefits from but no one would pay for if we weren't taxed. you and I may disagree with the distribution of how that money is used, which is why people vote, but in the end it's still our money, which is also why people vote...

Rygar

GreenTeaDisease wrote:

yes we are...the government provides services and public goods that everyone benefits from but no one would pay for if we weren't taxed. you and I may disagree with the distribution of how that money is used, which is why people vote, but in the end it's still our money, which is also why people vote...

So you have 100% trust in the government?
Lemme know if they ask you to vote when they want a raise.