Hi Guys and Gals,
I have been made aware of some things suspected in the back of my mind.
Check these out investigate and make your own decisions,
Tom
http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/spyring.html
http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/317...ar_Stearns.asp

"Tom Bunetta" wrote
Hi Guys and Gals,
I have been made aware of some things suspected in the back of my mind.
Check these out investigate and make your own decisions,
Tom
http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/spyring.html
http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/317...ar_Stearns.asp

Old news that just proves a few sheep are finally looking up, but much too
late.

Your freedom and sovereignty has been bartered to the highest global
corporate bidder by your politicians. As of this week in NOLA, this country,
once cherished and fought for, is history, and there is not a damn thing you
can do about it.

Besides, who gives a rat's ass as long as you can watch American Idol, right
after the network evening news.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 3/27/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 07:01:58 -0500, "Swingman" wrote:

snipped

Besides, who gives a rat's ass as long as you can watch American Idol, right
after the network evening news.


News? I don't think I've seen actual news on television since the
dawn of CNN.

I closed a plant in a small town, which is unfortunately bound to be
"news". One of the most shocking things about this was observing the"
news" articles that were written or broadcast about that event. Other
than a couple of prepared press releases, I offered no interviews or
additional information. Unbelievable what was "made up" to fit the
agenda targeted opinion that was published or reported as "news".

You sir, are not smart enough to be given the facts and formulate your
own opinion regarding same. But not to worry, someone will do it for
you.

Frank

"Frank Boettcher" wrote
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 07:01:58 -0500, "Swingman" wrote:

snipped

Besides, who gives a rat's ass as long as you can watch American Idol,
right
after the network evening news.


News? I don't think I've seen actual news on television since the
dawn of CNN.

Can you spell "facetious"? g


(I know you can, but I'm not so sure about _many_ others)

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 3/27/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

"Swingman" wrote in message
...
http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/317...ar_Stearns.asp

Old news that just proves a few sheep are finally looking up, but much too
late.

Your freedom and sovereignty has been bartered to the highest global
corporate bidder by your politicians. As of this week in NOLA, this
country,
once cherished and fought for, is history, and there is not a damn thing
you
can do about it.

Besides, who gives a rat's ass as long as you can watch American Idol,
right
after the network evening news.


Take in mind also the further proof that politicians and big business are in
bed together.

My son was looking at the Exxon annual report, public information, between
2003 and 2007 Exxon's sales have almost doubled. No doubt, the gasoline
prices have almost doubled. The gross profit however has almost tippled.
So when they say the prices of oil has gone up they also mean that their
mark up on those prices have increased by an additional 50% over the last 4
years also. Congress investigates to appease the public and we hear nothing
except that there was no law broken. What Congress does not tell us is
really why the price of gasoline is going up. They don't want to look for
a solution, like getting rid of the law that prohibits new refineries from
being built. They don't want to show how the oil company mergers have wiped
out half of their competition. Then take into consideration that the oil
companies don't participate in price fixing. HA! For price fixing they
would all have to get together to agree on a price. That would be illegal.
Let the ignorant media do that dirty work for us. One of the oil companies
will indicate to a reporter that oil prices have gone up and gasoline prices
are going to go up in a few weeks. The reporter on national TV reports this
information for all to see including all the other oil companies. The news
report is the trigger for all the other oil companies to raise their prices
and oddly all on the same day.
Do you remember in the not so distant past when the news rarely mentioned
anything about gasoline prices and those prices were more stable? I agree
that the rising price of oil is part of the problem but the rising price of
oil does not cause gross profits to increase an additional 50% in 4 years.

And then this morning there was the Expert from Consumer Reports indicating
that is a waste of money to put premium fuel in a car that only requires
regular fuel. That was true before there were computers, knock sensors and
fuel injection in the modern car. I assure you my son and I both get about
10% better gas mileage by using premium fuel over regular.
Simply put, higher octane fuels help to decrease the chance of engine knock.
The computer can control engine knock/ping by listening through the engine
knock sensor. If the computer hears a knock it retards the ignition timing
electronically. Retarding the timing gets rid of the knock and decreases
power and fuel economy. If the computer detects no knock it will advance
the ignition timing until knocking is detected. Advancing ignition timing
increases performance and in turn fuel economy. Remember, higher octane
fuel is less likely to create engine knock than regular fuel.
Premium fuel is a benefit if the mileage increase percentage is more than
the price difference percentage. As fuel prices increase the percentage of
price difference between premium and regular fuel tends to be less. Many
years ago premium was commonly 50% more expensive than regular. Today it is
about 8% more expensive.

Rant off. ;~)

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 08:22:59 -0500, "Swingman" wrote:


"Frank Boettcher" wrote
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 07:01:58 -0500, "Swingman" wrote:

snipped

Besides, who gives a rat's ass as long as you can watch American Idol,
right
after the network evening news.


News? I don't think I've seen actual news on television since the
dawn of CNN.

Can you spell "facetious"? g

Not without a working spell checker I can't. Alas, the long term
result of relying on same. Do know what it means though.


(I know you can, but I'm not so sure about _many_ others)

Probably should have added a grin to the last statement in my post,
but experience tells me the regular posters and identified lurkers
seem to have their wits about them.

Frank

On Apr 23, 11:25 am, "Leon" wrote:

...

... Then take into consideration that the oil
companies don't participate in price fixing. HA! For price fixing they
would all have to get together to agree on a price. That would be illegal.
Let the ignorant media do that dirty work for us. One of the oil companies
will indicate to a reporter that oil prices have gone up and gasoline prices
are going to go up in a few weeks. The reporter on national TV reports this
information for all to see including all the other oil companies. The news
report is the trigger for all the other oil companies to raise their prices
and oddly all on the same day.
...

The price fixing is on the other end of the pipeline,
and competitive pricing is further squelched by the
throttling effect of limited refinery capacity. Excess
capacity is excess overhead.

Suppose when the price of petroleum goes up one company
decides to hold the line at it's stations and take the reduced
margin. In a free market, consumers would be attracted by
the lower prices and the company that held the line would
increase its market share thus raising its net profit, albeit
on a lower margin.

Problem is, that company cannot increase its supply to
keep up with that increased demand. First of all, most
companies are already operating their refineries at
peak capacity. Also petroleum, like wood, is a natural
product with considerable variation in its properties
dependent on the source. If a refinery begins receiving
feed from a different oil field it will have to retool to
handle those differences.

Aside from those problems, petroleum is delivered on long-term
contracts. Their suppliers, like everyone else's, are already
pumping their quota and are not allowed to pump more.
Other suppliers are already pumping their quota and under
contract to deliver to other companies and so cannot (or
will not) sell to the company with the lower prices.

So instead of capturing a larger market share, a company
that undercuts it's competition would run short on product,
soon losing at least as much market share as they initially
gained.

Not all petroleum comes from OPEC nations, But enough
does that they control the price on the world market.

--

FF

On Apr 23, 8:22 am, "Swingman" wrote:

News? I don't think I've seen actual news on television since the
dawn of CNN.

Can you spell "facetious"? g

(I know you can, but I'm not so sure about _many_ others)

Well, I'll admit I have trouble with it. I though when you were
talking about television news it was spelled "fictitious". No?

Robert

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 10:25:39 -0500, "Leon"
wrote:

Many years ago premium was commonly 50% more expensive
than regular. Today it is about 8% more expensive.

I don't know what "many years ago" is to you, but it takes me back to
my yout of the '50s, when regular was commonly 22¢ a gallon or
thereabouts. We were never premium users, so I can't say with
certainty that it wasn't 11¢ higher but I'd be very surprised if it
was. When I was doing my commuting during the '60s regular was still
relatively low, ranging from 28¢ to 34¢, but I am fairly certain
premium (or any gas) was not over 40¢ then.

I remember well the gas lines of the '70s and when the price started
creeping toward $1, but premium was never $1.50 until much later. Even
closer to now as we've gone past $1.50, $2.00, $2.50, and $3.00 I
don't ever remember seeing premium at half again as much.

It would be my assessment that the 8% you quoted to 10 or even 15% is
actually closer to the historical record. I can't imagine it was ever
"commonly 50% more expensive." That doesn't jibe with my memory.

Of course even when Sunoco had pumps with about six or more selections
of grade (remember 260?) I'll bet there wasn't as much as a 50%
premium from lowest to highest grade.


--
LRod

Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite

Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999

http://www.woodbutcher.net
http://www.normstools.com

Proud participant of rec.woodworking since February, 1997

email addy de-spam-ified due to 1,000 spams per month.
If you can't figure out how to use it, I probably wouldn't
care to correspond with you anyway.

On Apr 23, 6:30*pm, LRod wrote:

It would be my assessment that the 8% you quoted to 10 or even 15% is
actually closer to the historical record. I can't imagine it was ever
"commonly 50% more expensive." That doesn't jibe with my memory.

Never happened. 5-10% max.

Of course even when Sunoco had pumps with about six or more selections
of grade (remember 260?) I'll bet there wasn't as much as a 50%
premium from lowest to highest grade.


I remember Sunoco 280. It was about 20% higher than 'regular leaded.'
I live in a Sunoco town. We have a refinery right here.
It might be purely a 'mind' thing, but I feel like there's always a
little more power after I get Sun Oil gasoline.
Sunoco treats their employees a little better than the others.

r

"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in message
...

Not all petroleum comes from OPEC nations, But enough
does that they control the price on the world market.

Which means that our patriotic American Oil companies are selling us
their domestically produced crude for the same price the Saudis are selling
us theirs?
Which, if true, I suppose is where Exxon-Mobil makes a good chunk of their
$49 billion profit?

Whoever said there is no honor among thieves was right.

Dave in Houston

"LRod" wrote:

I don't know what "many years ago" is to you, but it takes me back
to
my yout of the '50s, when regular was commonly 22¢ a gallon or
thereabouts.

Along about that time gas wars were common in Detroit.

Would hear stories about $0.16-$0.18 sometimers as low as $0.15/gal
from people who had just been to Detroit.

Of course, to put things in perspective, minimum wage was $050/hr for
part time help and had gotten all the way to $1.00/hr for a 40 hour
week by thye time I graduated from hiogh school.

Still remember going to the Amoco station and filling up my motorcycle
(less than 2 gal) with their super Hi-Test for $0.50 which lasted ALL
week.

"Dave in Houston" wrote in message
t...

"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in message
...

Not all petroleum comes from OPEC nations, But enough
does that they control the price on the world market.

Which means that our patriotic American Oil companies are selling us
their domestically produced crude for the same price the Saudis are
selling us theirs?
Which, if true, I suppose is where Exxon-Mobil makes a good chunk of their
$49 billion profit?

Whoever said there is no honor among thieves was right.

Dave in Houston


Some people believe that they have to charge world market prices.

"LRod" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 10:25:39 -0500, "Leon"
wrote:

Many years ago premium was commonly 50% more expensive
than regular. Today it is about 8% more expensive.

I don't know what "many years ago" is to you, but it takes me back to
my yout of the '50s, when regular was commonly 22¢ a gallon or
thereabouts. We were never premium users, so I can't say with
certainty that it wasn't 11¢ higher but I'd be very surprised if it
was. When I was doing my commuting during the '60s regular was still
relatively low, ranging from 28¢ to 34¢, but I am fairly certain
premium (or any gas) was not over 40¢ then.

When I was 19 and still living in Corpus Christi I vividly recall paying
19.9 for regular and premium was 29.9 at the local Shamrock station. I was
able to enjoy that one time. Normmally the gas in the early 70's was 22-25
for reg and 32-35 for premium.



I remember well the gas lines of the '70s and when the price started
creeping toward $1, but premium was never $1.50 until much later. Even
closer to now as we've gone past $1.50, $2.00, $2.50, and $3.00 I
don't ever remember seeing premium at half again as much.


See above, I never could understand how some could afford to pay 35 cents
for premium. Keep in mind that Corpus Christi had and has lots of
refineries.



It would be my assessment that the 8% you quoted to 10 or even 15% is
actually closer to the historical record. I can't imagine it was ever
"commonly 50% more expensive." That doesn't jibe with my memory.

Sorry you can't temember but it was.... I was in the automotive business
even then going to school and working part time, I kept a close eye on all
those prices. Pennziol 30W was 32 cents per quart, Havoline was 28 cents
per quart. Uniflow 10-40 was 34 cents.



Of course even when Sunoco had pumps with about six or more selections
of grade (remember 260?) I'll bet there wasn't as much as a 50%
premium from lowest to highest grade.

"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message
news:tSPPj.3485$nb4.892@trnddc08...

"LRod" wrote:

I don't know what "many years ago" is to you, but it takes me back to
my yout of the '50s, when regular was commonly 22¢ a gallon or
thereabouts.

Along about that time gas wars were common in Detroit.

Would hear stories about $0.16-$0.18 sometimers as low as $0.15/gal from
people who had just been to Detroit.

Of course, to put things in perspective, minimum wage was $050/hr for part
time help and had gotten all the way to $1.00/hr for a 40 hour week by
thye time I graduated from hiogh school.

Still remember going to the Amoco station and filling up my motorcycle
(less than 2 gal) with their super Hi-Test for $0.50 which lasted ALL
week.


I remember the gas wars also, those were good wars. The cheapest I ever
paid was 19.9 and I was making minimum at 1.65 in 1972.

Dave in Houston wrote:
"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in message
...

Not all petroleum comes from OPEC nations, But enough
does that they control the price on the world market.

Which means that our patriotic American Oil companies are selling us
their domestically produced crude for the same price the Saudis are selling
us theirs?
Which, if true, I suppose is where Exxon-Mobil makes a good chunk of their
$49 billion profit?

Actually, $40 billion on $400 billion total revenue - or 10 cents on the
dollar. The also paid $30 billion in income tax.

Whoever said there is no honor among thieves was right.

Check out MicroSoft. $51 billion total revenue with $14 billion profit
- or 27 cents on the dollar! They did pay $6 billion in income tax.
With that big of margin, I wonder why they charge so much since they
have over 90% of their market? Oh, that's right, they're in business to
make money for their investors, which includes my IRA funds.

I'm happy I invested in Exxon-Mobil - took the sting out of the current
market downturn.


Dave in Houston

Swing,
I guess that one slipped by me NOLA? A search gave mostly New Orleans hits.
Fill me in (a guess: erasing borders with Mexico and Canada?)
Tom


Your freedom and sovereignty has been bartered to the highest global
corporate bidder by your politicians. As of this week in NOLA, this
country,
once cherished and fought for, is history, and there is not a damn thing
you
can do about it.

Besides, who gives a rat's ass as long as you can watch American Idol,
right
after the network evening news.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 3/27/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

"Leon" wrote in message
Some people believe that they have to charge world market prices.

Of course they do. If it's not stockholders demanding that world market
prices be met, then some rich conglomerate would buy all the gas at the
lower price and immediately bump it up to world market prices making an
immediate, immense profit.

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 20:44:43 -0500, "Tom Bunetta"
wrote:

Swing,
I guess that one slipped by me NOLA? A search gave mostly New Orleans hits.

Bingo. Swingman's a coon ass of the first order.

--
LRod

Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite

Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999

http://www.woodbutcher.net
http://www.normstools.com

Proud participant of rec.woodworking since February, 1997

email addy de-spam-ified due to 1,000 spams per month.
If you can't figure out how to use it, I probably wouldn't
care to correspond with you anyway.

"Lew Hodgett" wrote in news:tSPPj.3485$nb4.892
@trnddc08:


"LRod" wrote:

I don't know what "many years ago" is to you, but it takes me back
to
my yout of the '50s, when regular was commonly 22¢ a gallon or
thereabouts.

Along about that time gas wars were common in Detroit.

Would hear stories about $0.16-$0.18 sometimers as low as $0.15/gal
from people who had just been to Detroit.

Of course, to put things in perspective, minimum wage was $050/hr for
part time help and had gotten all the way to $1.00/hr for a 40 hour
week by thye time I graduated from hiogh school.

Still remember going to the Amoco station and filling up my motorcycle
(less than 2 gal) with their super Hi-Test for $0.50 which lasted ALL
week.



The least I ever paid for gas in the USA was $.119. This was in 1957 at
many stations along 'gasoline alley (Columbus Ave.)' in Springfield Mass.
during the gas wars. Had a '41 Ford coupe with a '48 Merc 59AB block.
Triple Fenton manifold mounting Stromberg 98s (or was it 97s?). Had a three
quarter cam and Edelbrock 10:1 heads. Headers and the loudest glass packs
in the state. I could beat most showroom Chevy's, but vettes were a
problem. I loved the flatheads, but I knew the era was over.

Leon wrote:

I remember the gas wars also, those were good wars. The cheapest I ever
paid was 19.9 and I was making minimum at 1.65 in 1972.


Picturing the movie "Dazed and Confused"... G

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 17:30:36 -0700, Doug Winterburn
wrote:

Dave in Houston wrote:
"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in message
...

Not all petroleum comes from OPEC nations, But enough
does that they control the price on the world market.

Which means that our patriotic American Oil companies are selling us
their domestically produced crude for the same price the Saudis are selling
us theirs?
Which, if true, I suppose is where Exxon-Mobil makes a good chunk of their
$49 billion profit?

Actually, $40 billion on $400 billion total revenue - or 10 cents on the
dollar. The also paid $30 billion in income tax.


I seriously doubt Exxon is paying $30B income tax on $40B net.

Renata



Whoever said there is no honor among thieves was right.

Check out MicroSoft. $51 billion total revenue with $14 billion profit
- or 27 cents on the dollar! They did pay $6 billion in income tax.
With that big of margin, I wonder why they charge so much since they
have over 90% of their market? Oh, that's right, they're in business to
make money for their investors, which includes my IRA funds.

I'm happy I invested in Exxon-Mobil - took the sting out of the current
market downturn.


Dave in Houston

Renata wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 17:30:36 -0700, Doug Winterburn
wrote:

Dave in Houston wrote:
"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in message
...

Not all petroleum comes from OPEC nations, But enough
does that they control the price on the world market.
Which means that our patriotic American Oil companies are selling us
their domestically produced crude for the same price the Saudis are selling
us theirs?
Which, if true, I suppose is where Exxon-Mobil makes a good chunk of their
$49 billion profit?
Actually, $40 billion on $400 billion total revenue - or 10 cents on the
dollar. The also paid $30 billion in income tax.

I seriously doubt Exxon is paying $30B income tax on $40B net.

Renata


I didn't say net. They paid $30 billion on $72 billion gross. Their net
income was $40 billion.

On Apr 23, 6:30 pm, LRod wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 10:25:39 -0500, "Leon"

wrote:
Many years ago premium was commonly 50% more expensive
than regular. Today it is about 8% more expensive.

I don't know what "many years ago" is to you, but it takes me back to
my yout of the '50s, when regular was commonly 22¢ a gallon or
thereabouts. We were never premium users, so I can't say with
certainty that it wasn't 11¢ higher but I'd be very surprised if it
was. When I was doing my commuting during the '60s regular was still
relatively low, ranging from 28¢ to 34¢, but I am fairly certain
premium (or any gas) was not over 40¢ then.

I remember well the gas lines of the '70s and when the price started
creeping toward $1, but premium was never $1.50 until much later. Even
closer to now as we've gone past $1.50, $2.00, $2.50, and $3.00 I
don't ever remember seeing premium at half again as much.

It would be my assessment that the 8% you quoted to 10 or even 15% is
actually closer to the historical record. I can't imagine it was ever
"commonly 50% more expensive." That doesn't jibe with my memory.

Of course even when Sunoco had pumps with about six or more selections
of grade (remember 260?) I'll bet there wasn't as much as a 50%
premium from lowest to highest grade.


Oh, my. In '54, '55, I worked in a service station/garage. We were in
Westchester County, NY, a high end place if one every existed, so we
got 28.9 cents per gallon for regular, 32.9 for extra (Esso), and,
when Esso Golden Extra (AKA avgas) came out, it was 38.9. The only
people buying the Golden were Mercedes drivers and guys like me
running stock U.S. iron with 10.5-1 compression ratios. Oddly enough,
last year, after a lapse of 38 years, the guy whose father I worked
for (Gene and I went to HS together until he bailed out to become a
machinist and motorcycle racer) got in touch, and we got together.
He's out in Santa Barbara now, another high end joint, but he's not
any different (grayer and a few pounds heavier) than he was at 15,
when we got locked up in Briarcliff Manor.

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 19:18:55 -0500, Leon wrote:

I remember the gas wars also, those were good wars. The cheapest I ever
paid was 19.9 and I was making minimum at 1.65 in 1972.

In the mid '50s I was making the munificent sum of $48 a week - $54 if I
worked night shift. I don't think the gas prices were much different from
the '70s then, but the octane sure was better than today :-).

Often times I'd make midnight rounds of the gas stations with a couple of
buddies and drain the hoses into our motorcycle gas tanks. Sometimes
getting enough gas to run 100 miles. For free!

On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 08:52:49 -0700 (PDT), Charlie Self
wrote:


Oh, my. In '54, '55, I worked in a service station/garage. We were in
Westchester County, NY, a high end place if one every existed, so we
got 28.9 cents per gallon for regular, 32.9 for extra (Esso), and,
when Esso Golden Extra (AKA avgas) came out, it was 38.9.

28.9/32.9 is exactly the sort of differential I recall, and 38.9 for
avgas (whether it's marketd as auto fuel or not) would be about right,
too.

Of course in those days it would have been one of four grades of
avgas, and for that price, it was almost assuredly 80/87 (red). I'm
sure it wouldn't have been 115/145 (green or purple? I've forgotten).

I remember making a drive from Jacksonville down to Hollywood in 1969
or '70 and stopping in Vero Beach for gas. There had been some kind of
spike (probably interstate premium) and they wanted something like 38¢
a gallon when I'd been paying more like 31¢. I pitched a fit pointing
out I could get 80/87 at the nearby airport (and had just a week or so
before) for 41¢. They were unmoved.


--
LRod

Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite

Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999

http://www.woodbutcher.net
http://www.normstools.com

Proud participant of rec.woodworking since February, 1997

email addy de-spam-ified due to 1,000 spams per month.
If you can't figure out how to use it, I probably wouldn't
care to correspond with you anyway.

The internet is still free, but not for long under the FALSE guise of
National Security...
Spread the word far and wide! Many won't believe but a few literate people
WILL and if we can reach enough, soon enough, perhaps we can avoid what is
beginning to seem inevitable.
Tom
http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/NWO..._Relations.htm


"Tom Bunetta" wrote in message
. ..
Hi Guys and Gals,
I have been made aware of some things suspected in the back of my mind.
Check these out investigate and make your own decisions,
Tom
http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/spyring.html
http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/317...ar_Stearns.asp

On Apr 23, 7:43 pm, "Dave in Houston" wrote:
"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in ...

Not all petroleum comes from OPEC nations, But enough
does that they control the price on the world market.

Which means that our patriotic American Oil companies are selling us
their domestically produced crude for the same price the Saudis are selling
us theirs?
Which, if true, I suppose is where Exxon-Mobil makes a good chunk of their
$49 billion profit?

Whoever said there is no honor among thieves was right.

Dave in Houston

"Larry Blanchard" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 19:18:55 -0500, Leon wrote:

I remember the gas wars also, those were good wars. The cheapest I ever
paid was 19.9 and I was making minimum at 1.65 in 1972.

In the mid '50s I was making the munificent sum of $48 a week - $54 if I
worked night shift. I don't think the gas prices were much different from
the '70s then, but the octane sure was better than today :-).

You got that right. My 72 Chevrolet Vega, what a POS, required a minimum
of 92 octaine fuel. Regular was normally 95, IIRC the 92 was only available
in unleaded. Premium was way up there.

Around that time I was driving a 1965 GTO would only run on Sunco 260 at .31
or it would ping and knock something terrible now it is more than ten times
that amount for the 85 octane crap they allow to be sold in New Mexico.
First worked in an Exxon station Regular was .27 with Green Stamps and often
glasses of other crazy stuff thrown in.

--
Mike
Watch for the bounce.
If ya didn't see it, ya didn't feel it.
If ya see it, it didn't go off.
Old Air Force Munitions Saying
IYAAYAS
"Leon" wrote in message
...

"Larry Blanchard" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 19:18:55 -0500, Leon wrote:

I remember the gas wars also, those were good wars. The cheapest I ever
paid was 19.9 and I was making minimum at 1.65 in 1972.

In the mid '50s I was making the munificent sum of $48 a week - $54 if I
worked night shift. I don't think the gas prices were much different
from
the '70s then, but the octane sure was better than today :-).

You got that right. My 72 Chevrolet Vega, what a POS, required a minimum
of 92 octaine fuel. Regular was normally 95, IIRC the 92 was only
available in unleaded. Premium was way up there.

On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 20:08:32 -0600, "asmurff"
wrote:

Around that time I was driving a 1965 GTO would only run on Sunco 260 at .31
or it would ping and knock something terrible now it is more than ten times
that amount for the 85 octane crap they allow to be sold in New Mexico.
First worked in an Exxon station Regular was .27 with Green Stamps and often
glasses of other crazy stuff thrown in.

Howdy,

Factoring in inflation, the current price is roughly the
same...

All the best,
--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."

On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 07:44:06 -0700, Doug Winterburn
wrote:

Renata wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 17:30:36 -0700, Doug Winterburn
wrote:

Dave in Houston wrote:
"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in message
...

Not all petroleum comes from OPEC nations, But enough
does that they control the price on the world market.
Which means that our patriotic American Oil companies are selling us
their domestically produced crude for the same price the Saudis are selling
us theirs?
Which, if true, I suppose is where Exxon-Mobil makes a good chunk of their
$49 billion profit?
Actually, $40 billion on $400 billion total revenue - or 10 cents on the
dollar. The also paid $30 billion in income tax.

I seriously doubt Exxon is paying $30B income tax on $40B net.

Renata


I didn't say net. They paid $30 billion on $72 billion gross. Their net
income was $40 billion.

But this seems to indicate that their accountants are so bad that they
paid 3/4 of their profit over to income taxes? Even 30B on 72B gross
is way high. Corporate taxes these are nowhere near 42% these days.

Something smells funny here. I see the numbers, I just want to know
the "rest of the story".

Renata

On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 07:29:07 -0400, Renata
wrote:

On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 07:44:06 -0700, Doug Winterburn
wrote:

Renata wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 17:30:36 -0700, Doug Winterburn
wrote:

Dave in Houston wrote:
"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in message
...

Not all petroleum comes from OPEC nations, But enough
does that they control the price on the world market.
Which means that our patriotic American Oil companies are selling us
their domestically produced crude for the same price the Saudis are selling
us theirs?
Which, if true, I suppose is where Exxon-Mobil makes a good chunk of their
$49 billion profit?
Actually, $40 billion on $400 billion total revenue - or 10 cents on the
dollar. The also paid $30 billion in income tax.

I seriously doubt Exxon is paying $30B income tax on $40B net.

Renata


I didn't say net. They paid $30 billion on $72 billion gross. Their net
income was $40 billion.

But this seems to indicate that their accountants are so bad that they
paid 3/4 of their profit over to income taxes? Even 30B on 72B gross
is way high. Corporate taxes these are nowhere near 42% these days.

Something smells funny here. I see the numbers, I just want to know
the "rest of the story".

Renata


Corporate Income Tax Rates--2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002,
2000

Taxable income over Not over Tax rate

$ 0 $ 50,000 15%
50,000 75,000 25%
75,000 100,000 34%
100,000 335,000 39%
335,000 10,000,000 34%
10,000,000 15,000,000 35%
15,000,000 18,333,333 38%
18,333,333 .......... 35%



Plus applicable state, plus any capital gains which are not favored on
the corporate level.

On Apr 25, 9:00*am, Frank Boettcher wrote:
On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 07:29:07 -0400, Renata
wrote:



On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 07:44:06 -0700, Doug Winterburn
wrote:

Renata wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 17:30:36 -0700, Doug Winterburn
wrote:

Dave in Houston wrote:
"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in message
...

Not all petroleum comes from OPEC nations, *But enough
does that they control the price on the world market.
* * Which means that our patriotic American Oil companies are selling us
their domestically produced crude for the same price the Saudis are selling
us theirs?
Which, if true, I suppose is where Exxon-Mobil makes a good chunk of their
$49 billion profit?
Actually, $40 billion on $400 billion total revenue - or 10 cents on the
dollar. *The also paid $30 billion in income tax.

I seriously doubt Exxon is paying *$30B income tax on $40B net.

Renata

I didn't say net. They paid $30 billion on $72 billion gross. *Their net
income was $40 billion.

But this seems to indicate that their accountants are so bad that they
paid 3/4 of their profit over to income taxes? *Even 30B on 72B gross
is way high. *Corporate taxes these are nowhere near 42% these days. *

Something smells funny here. *I see the numbers, I just want to know
the "rest of the story".

Renata

Corporate Income Tax Rates--2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002,
2000

* * * *Taxable income over * * Not over * * *Tax rate

* * * * * $ * * * * 0 * * * *$ * *50,000 * * * *15%
* * * * * * * *50,000 * * * * * * 75,000 * * * *25%
* * * * * * * *75,000 * * * * * *100,000 * * * *34%
* * * * * * * 100,000 * * * * * *335,000 * * * *39%
* * * * * * * 335,000 * * * * 10,000,000 * * * *34%
* * * * * *10,000,000 * * * * 15,000,000 * * * *35%
* * * * * *15,000,000 * * * * 18,333,333 * * * *38%
* * * * * *18,333,333 * * * * .......... * * * *35%

Plus applicable state, plus any capital gains which are not favored on
the corporate level.

You would want to get over 336,000, eh?

On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 06:15:56 -0700 (PDT), Robatoy
wrote:

On Apr 25, 9:00*am, Frank Boettcher wrote:
On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 07:29:07 -0400, Renata
wrote:



On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 07:44:06 -0700, Doug Winterburn
wrote:

Renata wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 17:30:36 -0700, Doug Winterburn
wrote:

Dave in Houston wrote:
"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in message
...

Not all petroleum comes from OPEC nations, *But enough
does that they control the price on the world market.
* * Which means that our patriotic American Oil companies are selling us
their domestically produced crude for the same price the Saudis are selling
us theirs?
Which, if true, I suppose is where Exxon-Mobil makes a good chunk of their
$49 billion profit?
Actually, $40 billion on $400 billion total revenue - or 10 cents on the
dollar. *The also paid $30 billion in income tax.

I seriously doubt Exxon is paying *$30B income tax on $40B net.

Renata

I didn't say net. They paid $30 billion on $72 billion gross. *Their net
income was $40 billion.

But this seems to indicate that their accountants are so bad that they
paid 3/4 of their profit over to income taxes? *Even 30B on 72B gross
is way high. *Corporate taxes these are nowhere near 42% these days. *

Something smells funny here. *I see the numbers, I just want to know
the "rest of the story".

Renata

Corporate Income Tax Rates--2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002,
2000

* * * *Taxable income over * * Not over * * *Tax rate

* * * * * $ * * * * 0 * * * *$ * *50,000 * * * *15%
* * * * * * * *50,000 * * * * * * 75,000 * * * *25%
* * * * * * * *75,000 * * * * * *100,000 * * * *34%
* * * * * * * 100,000 * * * * * *335,000 * * * *39%
* * * * * * * 335,000 * * * * 10,000,000 * * * *34%
* * * * * *10,000,000 * * * * 15,000,000 * * * *35%
* * * * * *15,000,000 * * * * 18,333,333 * * * *38%
* * * * * *18,333,333 * * * * .......... * * * *35%

Plus applicable state, plus any capital gains which are not favored on
the corporate level.

You would want to get over 336,000, eh?


Looks strange, but the system is set up to create "effective" tax
rates. For instance, when you hit $335K the system maintains an
effective tax rate, essentially a flat tax of 34% on all income to
that point and up to $10MIL. From there, gradually goes up until you
reach the top amount where the intent is for the effective tax, that
is the tax on 100% of the income to be 35%

Frank


Frank

Renata wrote:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 07:44:06 -0700, Doug Winterburn
wrote:

Renata wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 17:30:36 -0700, Doug Winterburn
wrote:

Dave in Houston wrote:
"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in message
...

Not all petroleum comes from OPEC nations, But enough
does that they control the price on the world market.
Which means that our patriotic American Oil companies are selling us
their domestically produced crude for the same price the Saudis are selling
us theirs?
Which, if true, I suppose is where Exxon-Mobil makes a good chunk of their
$49 billion profit?
Actually, $40 billion on $400 billion total revenue - or 10 cents on the
dollar. The also paid $30 billion in income tax.
I seriously doubt Exxon is paying $30B income tax on $40B net.

Renata


I didn't say net. They paid $30 billion on $72 billion gross. Their net
income was $40 billion.

But this seems to indicate that their accountants are so bad that they
paid 3/4 of their profit over to income taxes? Even 30B on 72B gross
is way high. Corporate taxes these are nowhere near 42% these days.

Something smells funny here. I see the numbers, I just want to know
the "rest of the story".

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=XOM&annual

Renata wrote in
:

On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 07:44:06 -0700, Doug Winterburn
wrote:

Renata wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 17:30:36 -0700, Doug Winterburn
wrote:

Dave in Houston wrote:
"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in message
.
com...

Not all petroleum comes from OPEC nations, But enough
does that they control the price on the world market.
Which means that our patriotic American Oil companies are
selling us
their domestically produced crude for the same price the Saudis
are selling us theirs?
Which, if true, I suppose is where Exxon-Mobil makes a good chunk
of their $49 billion profit?
Actually, $40 billion on $400 billion total revenue - or 10 cents
on the dollar. The also paid $30 billion in income tax.

I seriously doubt Exxon is paying $30B income tax on $40B net.

Renata


I didn't say net. They paid $30 billion on $72 billion gross. Their
net income was $40 billion.

But this seems to indicate that their accountants are so bad that they
paid 3/4 of their profit over to income taxes? Even 30B on 72B gross
is way high. Corporate taxes these are nowhere near 42% these days.

Something smells funny here. I see the numbers, I just want to know
the "rest of the story".

Renata

You might want to check your numbers. $30 billion is 75% (OK 3/4) of $72
billion? Try again. We live in a ' Capitalist Society'. Making a profit is
what all of us that wish to remain in business try to do. I think we should
stop subsidies to oil companies. They no longer drill nor do they build
refineries. Perhaps a windfall profits tax would be proper. Any profit over
5% roi should be subject to an 80% tax. There goes most of my income for
the year (past years).

"Hank" wrote in message
.. .

I think we should
stop subsidies to oil companies. They no longer drill nor do they build
refineries. Perhaps a windfall profits tax would be proper. Any profit
over
5% roi should be subject to an 80% tax. There goes most of my income for
the year (past years).


So you blame oil companies for not drilling or building refineries?

Leon wrote:


"Hank" wrote in message
.. .

I think we should
stop subsidies to oil companies. They no longer drill nor do they build
refineries. Perhaps a windfall profits tax would be proper. Any profit
over
5% roi should be subject to an 80% tax. There goes most of my income for
the year (past years).


So you blame oil companies for not drilling or building refineries?

From ANWR to the North Dakota oil fields, there is sufficient oil to let
us tell the OPECers to go pound sand. But ... we might inconvenience some
caribou (even though the plan is to use only 2000 acres out of several
million), or we might endanger some previously unknown "endangered" microbe
or left-handed kangaroo rat. We have gas prices going up now because of
the required cafe blends for each specific city that requires refinery
shutdown and reconfiguration every year. Only when people get angry enough
at the shenanigans going on to thwart production and distribution is this
problem going to get solved. Instead, right now we have self-righteous
earth-worshipping luddites preventing progress and trying to force people
to buy indulgences to atone for peoples' environmental sins. Neither of
which is going to solve the needs and will only exacerbate the problem. It
will, however have the effect of providing lots of money and power to the
people espousing these policies (who, will of course not alter their
lifestyle -- that is for the "little people") and lower the quality of life
and remove freedoms from the rest of us. Until and unless people wake up
to this sham, I'm afraid we're in for a lot more of the same.


--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

On Apr 26, 1:34 pm, Mark & Juanita wrote:
Leon wrote:

"Hank" wrote in message
. ..

I think we should
stop subsidies to oil companies. They no longer drill nor do they build
refineries. Perhaps a windfall profits tax would be proper. Any profit
over
5% roi should be subject to an 80% tax. There goes most of my income for
the year (past years).

So you blame oil companies for not drilling or building refineries?

From ANWR to the North Dakota oil fields, there is sufficient oil to let
us tell the OPECers to go pound sand.

OTOH, if we burn everybody else's oil up first, we would control the
world supply...

--

FF