"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 09:16:22 -0400, with neither quill nor qualm, "Ed
Huntress" quickly quoth:
"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 20:17:35 -0400, with neither quill nor qualm, "Ed
Huntress" quickly quoth:
"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
m...
On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 18:09:45 -0400, with neither quill nor qualm, "Ed
Huntress" quickly quoth:
Whoopee, the free market in action! g
Can you say "illegal profiteering"? I knew you could.
Pfffhhht. That sounds like something a socialist would say. Watch out,
they'll take away your libertarian card. d8-)
No, we Libertarians want the gov't out of our pockets, but we still
want businesses to be fair.
And that's one of the intellectual contradictions that leads me to scoff
at
libertarianism. You want it both ways: keep the government out of free
markets, but employ the government to correct the things you believe are
"unfair." To be a libertarian of that sort, you have to be comfortable
with
a lot of contradictions. For starters, you have to accept the fact that
To profess allegiance to any politcal party demands that you be in
contradiction with either reality or beliefs at some point in time.
So what's your point? 
It's not just parties. It's also ideologies, party-based or not.
Profiteering is not only illegal, it's
downright wrong. Google sez:
"Definitions of profiteering on the Web:
* Profiteering is a pejorative term for the act of making a profit
by methods considered unethical. Business owners may be accused of
profiteering ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Profiteering (business)
* The act of making an unreasonable profit not justified by the
corresponding assumption of risk, or by doing so unethically
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/profiteering"
Whose ethics? And, if profit making has to conform to a prescribed
correspondance between risk and reward -- and if the libertarian admits
that
free markets don't always do that, because they can lead to
profiteering --
who is to establish the "fair" relationship between risk and reward? That
comes awfully close to the thinking behind centrally controlled markets.
It
sounds a lot like socialism.
First, I thought that gas prices were set by the gov't.
Nope. They set the taxes, not the retail price.
Stations can
make a set percentage above the price they pay to the oil companies.
Where is that? Not in NJ. The market sets the price here.
Numerous articles in the newspaper over the years complaining about
collusion by the stations have fueled (sorry) that.
Loose regulation, lots of collusion. That's the free market for you.
Second, I thought profiteering was also frowned upon by societal
norms. I don't consider that socialism, per se.
The people who pay the price frown upon it. But give them a chance to screw
a local gas station, and that's just the free market at work. Right?
When they switched to the mandated 10% ethanol here, my mileage went
from 14 down to 12.3mpg. I'm hoping to do considerably better next
month on the trip to CA. The Tundra stickered at 15-19mpg. sigh
I only carry about 500 pounds of tools around with me, so it's not
like I'm loading the half tone pickup down and losing gas mileage as a
result. sigh2
That sounds gruesome to me. My Sonata gets 30 mpg highway. My Focus gets
around 33. Next time, I'm going to buy something that *really* gets good
mileage. d8-)
Can you carry 400 pounds of tools + plywood + a dozen 2"x6"x16' boards
in your Focus?
I don't have to. But you could be driving something a lot smaller that could
handle it.
I'm not suggesting that you should, only that it's clear you're paying a lot
more than you have to, both for the vehicle and for the cost to fuel it.
That's your choice.
Unfortunately, my truck is both a luxury and a
necessity. If the brakes in the Tacomas hadn't been so damned hard to
push, I might have bought one of those, with twice the fuel economy.
But they just felt -wrong-. The Tundra has 4-wheel discs and could
prolly toss beanbags out of the back of the bed with precision. 65-0
in 158 feet flat!
That's great. I hope it compensates you for the fuel cost. d8-)
--
Ed Huntress