why are oil prices so high, again

[fossten]

A typical remark by a right wing dingbat. :sleep:
P.S. he's making millions, DuuuuuuuuuHHHHHH yourself.

A typical remark by a left wing moonbat. Heaven forbid that you should let facts get in the way of your rhetoric.

Cite source or be discredited.

 

[TheDude]

Do you have any clue how wealthy people think? No offense, but obviously you aren't a wealthy person, otherwise you wouldn't be so ignorant on the subject.

Wealthy people aren't just out to hoard some more money, "ooh lookie here, I can make another million dollars, WHOOP-DE-DOO!!!" They're not like average folks, where another $10,000 per year would really change things. Adding another $50,000,000 to a person's net worth, when they're already worth $100,000,000, doesn't really matter to them. After the first few million, it gets old, and they tend to focus on other things, like supporting causes that they believe in, or helping specific people out. I should know, I'm on a first name basis with 5 millionaires, and two of my uncles (one uncle, one uncle-in-law) are pretty friggin' close to that mark themselves.

So millionaires are no interest in making more millions? Huh?

You sorely underestimate the power of greed.

 

[fossten]

So millionaires are no interest in making more millions? Huh?

You sorely underestimate the power of greed.

And you sorely underestimate the power of economics. Fact is that people who have their money in interest-returning investments will get richer whether they want to or not. What should they do? Put their money under their mattress because they don't want libs to think they are greedy? Should Warren Buffet close Berkshire Hathaway, which would impoverish thousands of stockholders, because he feels bad that libs might think he's greedy? He's said that he doesn't want to sell his stock because it would crash the fund. Good thing he doesn't care what libs think.

While we're at it, explain greed to me. Liberals love to paint this picture of some old, wizened, pop-eyed geezer sitting in his Rumpelstiltskin hut counting his gold pieces, muttering to himself. That's so far from the truth it's laughable. Today's rich people are looking for ways to expand their businesses so they can further benefit their employees and keep their fortunes growing for their descendants. These guys create so many jobs they should be the heroes of the economy. Instead they are bashed by liberals.

Who made liberals king of how much somebody should make? Since when is it any of their business how much a rich person should keep? I happen to know for a FACT that the richer people get, the more they do for other causes and the more they want to do. They need to get even richer in order to do those things.

I'll give you an example. Andre Agassi, one of the all-time greats in pro tennis, is going to retire this summer. He probably could have retired last year or the year before, or even 10 years before. After all, he's got enough money, right? But he was interviewed last year and he stated in the interview that he's playing because he can donate his prize money to his school and other charities that he cares about. He's not just some lib celeb trying to get your money to give to causes, he's working his a$$ off, running hills and playing in blistering heat so he can give away a few million more dollars before he calls it quits. And he's a small-timer compared to people like Bill Gates, who gave away half his fortune.

Don't let your jealousy cloud your common sense.

Oh...

Let me add a thought:

Why aren't you upset about the millions Bill Clinton is making on speeches? When will you say enough is enough? Tell that greedy old perv to shut up already!

 

[JoeyGood]

I'll give you an example. Andre Agassi, one of the all-time greats in pro tennis, is going to retire this summer. He probably could have retired last year or the year before, or even 10 years before. After all, he's got enough money, right? But he was interviewed last year and he stated in the interview that he's playing because he can donate his prize money to his school and other charities that he cares about. He's not just some lib celeb trying to get your money to give to causes, he's working his a$$ off, running hills and playing in blistering heat so he can give away a few million more dollars before he calls it quits. And he's a small-timer compared to people like Bill Gates, who gave away half his fortune.

Don't let your jealousy cloud your common sense.

Just a question and not to a wise aZZ but what are the tax benefits these guys get when giving away millions? That could be considered an incentive as to why they give it away or couldn't?

 

[TheDude]

And you sorely underestimate the power of economics. Fact is that people who have their money in interest-returning investments will get richer whether they want to or not. What should they do? Put their money under their mattress because they don't want libs to think they are greedy? Should Warren Buffet close Berkshire Hathaway, which would impoverish thousands of stockholders, because he feels bad that libs might think he's greedy? He's said that he doesn't want to sell his stock because it would crash the fund. Good thing he doesn't care what libs think.

While we're at it, explain greed to me. Liberals love to paint this picture of some old, wizened, pop-eyed geezer sitting in his Rumpelstiltskin hut counting his gold pieces, muttering to himself. That's so far from the truth it's laughable. Today's rich people are looking for ways to expand their businesses so they can further benefit their employees and keep their fortunes growing for their descendants. These guys create so many jobs they should be the heroes of the economy. Instead they are bashed by liberals.

Who made liberals king of how much somebody should make? Since when is it any of their business how much a rich person should keep? I happen to know for a FACT that the richer people get, the more they do for other causes and the more they want to do. They need to get even richer in order to do those things.

I'll give you an example. Andre Agassi, one of the all-time greats in pro tennis, is going to retire this summer. He probably could have retired last year or the year before, or even 10 years before. After all, he's got enough money, right? But he was interviewed last year and he stated in the interview that he's playing because he can donate his prize money to his school and other charities that he cares about. He's not just some lib celeb trying to get your money to give to causes, he's working his a$$ off, running hills and playing in blistering heat so he can give away a few million more dollars before he calls it quits. And he's a small-timer compared to people like Bill Gates, who gave away half his fortune.

Don't let your jealousy cloud your common sense.

Oh...

Let me add a thought:

Why aren't you upset about the millions Bill Clinton is making on speeches? When will you say enough is enough? Tell that greedy old perv to shut up already!

Knee Jerker... I said no such thing of what you accuse me. Barwick's post made it seem like millionaires have zero desire to increase their wealth, I disagree; that is all.

 

[fossten]

Just a question and not to a wise aZZ but what are the tax benefits these guys get when giving away millions? That could be considered an incentive as to why they give it away or couldn't?

I know there's a tax reduction for donations to charity, but I don't know what the caps are.

 

[Barwick]

Just a question and not to a wise aZZ but what are the tax benefits these guys get when giving away millions? That could be considered an incentive as to why they give it away or couldn't?

Um, they actually get screwed sometimes... Like here in Michigan, if I make $1,000,000 and give away $1,000,000 to charities, I still pay Michigan income tax on that $1,000,000. So I actually lost money that year.

With federal, there's deductions for giving money away. If you make $1,000,000 and give away $900,000, then you pay tax on $100,000. Basically they treat it like this: "All the money you give away, we treat it like you didn't even make it". Basically, you don't pay taxes on it, because you didn't keep it, you gave it away to charity.

 

[JC1994]

A typical remark by a left wing moonbat. Heaven forbid that you should let facts get in the way of your rhetoric.

Cite source or be discredited.

I don't argue with dyed in the wool dip sh!t republicans. you idiots will believe whatever you want. I know how it REALLY is and your banter will NEVER convince me otherwise. my source is called REALITY, now go watch FOX news.

 

[fossten]

blah blah blah...personal attacks...blah blah blah...baloney...

It doesn't take long for liberals to resort to name-calling instead of resorting to fact-checking.

 

[97silverlsc]

I'll give you an example. Andre Agassi, one of the all-time greats in pro tennis, is going to retire this summer. He probably could have retired last year or the year before, or even 10 years before. After all, he's got enough money, right? But he was interviewed last year and he stated in the interview that he's playing because he can donate his prize money to his school and other charities that he cares about. He's not just some lib celeb trying to get your money to give to causes, he's working his a$$ off, running hills and playing in blistering heat so he can give away a few million more dollars before he calls it quits. And he's a small-timer compared to people like Bill Gates, who gave away half his fortune.

Don't let your jealousy cloud your common sense.

Oh...

Let me add a thought:

Why aren't you upset about the millions Bill Clinton is making on speeches? When will you say enough is enough? Tell that greedy old perv to shut up already!

For every Bill Gates there's another rich guy who's in it for greed, plain and simple. Take a look at the track records of the Walmart family heirs for starters.

 

[decibels5]

read this

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002613836_weboilexecs09.html

 

[Barwick]

I don't argue with dyed in the wool dip sh!t republicans. you idiots will believe whatever you want. I know how it REALLY is and your banter will NEVER convince me otherwise. my source is called REALITY, now go watch FOX news.

Wow, I don't think I ever heard a liberal claim that they know how it works "in the real world"... since the real world has voted rather unfavorably on their schemes, as evidenced by: North Korea... East Germany... the now defunct USSR, Vietnam, Cuba... You get the point.

 

[Barwick]

For every Bill Gates there's another rich guy who's in it for greed, plain and simple. Take a look at the track records of the Walmart family heirs for starters.

97: No offense, but contrary to popular belief, the Wal Mart story is one of the greatest business success stories in modern times. Egalitarians and socialists despise the story, because it shows how one man with a huge dream, and the willingness to chase that dream, can change the entire world by bringing mass efficiencies to the world of retail goods. No more wasted money on two, three, four middlemen, etc, and a steadying (and sometimes declining) of the overall prices of consumer goods. Have you noticed that nobody gets things fixed anymore? It's just as cheap to go to the store and buy a new widget, than it is to take it to someone to repair it. Labor is expensive, and Sam Walton found a way to minimize it in the distribution of retail goods, thereby freeing up those laborers to do something more useful than pull a box off a warehouse shelf.

 

[fossten]

Liberals love to trot out people like Ken Lay or Dennis Kozlowski as examples of why we shouldn't have capitalism. It's absurd, because the law is there to prosecute and punish people for taking advantage of the system, but it's not even arguable that we should do away with the system because of abuses.

We all know that Phil works in a union environment, so that might explain why he is anti-capitalism. Unions are socialistic in the extreme. Nobody gets rich working in that system.

 

[decibels5]

97: No offense, but contrary to popular belief, the Wal Mart story is one of the greatest business success stories in modern times. Egalitarians and socialists despise the story, because it shows how one man with a huge dream, and the willingness to chase that dream, can change the entire world by bringing mass efficiencies to the world of retail goods. No more wasted money on two, three, four middlemen, etc, and a steadying (and sometimes declining) of the overall prices of consumer goods. Have you noticed that nobody gets things fixed anymore? It's just as cheap to go to the store and buy a new widget, than it is to take it to someone to repair it. Labor is expensive, and Sam Walton found a way to minimize it in the distribution of retail goods, thereby freeing up those laborers to do something more useful than pull a box off a warehouse shelf.

it works both ways, i watched a discussion where a small city was trying to keep wal-mart out, because they knew it would drive the small businesses out of business forcing them to work for wal-mart at 6.50 an hour. examples are meat markets, lawn mower shops, small hardware stores, small clothing stores, baby stores, grocery stores. not that there is something wrong with wal-mart, but eventually, greed will take over. let me give you another example, my great grandfather, grandfather, father, and me for a short period were in the oilfield service industry. from my understanding of history my father said there was a drilling company on every block in south texas, oklahoma, colorado, wyoming, montana, then there came the greed, if i buy this guy and this guy, i have no competition. soon there will be little or no competition for walmart, then there will be greed. kmart is out, target isnt doing so well, and many grocery stores have felt the effect of walmart. some states have realized this, and have forced walmart to pay an extra dollar per hour. for people that work there.

 

[decibels5]

http://www.laborrights.org/press/Wal-Mart/walmart_pay_0505.htm

 

[JC1994]

:lol:

 

[Barwick]

it works both ways, i watched a discussion where a small city was trying to keep wal-mart out, because they knew it would drive the small businesses out of business forcing them to work for wal-mart at 6.50 an hour. examples are meat markets, lawn mower shops, small hardware stores, small clothing stores, baby stores, grocery stores. not that there is something wrong with wal-mart, but eventually, greed will take over. let me give you another example, my great grandfather, grandfather, father, and me for a short period were in the oilfield service industry. from my understanding of history my father said there was a drilling company on every block in south texas, oklahoma, colorado, wyoming, montana, then there came the greed, if i buy this guy and this guy, i have no competition. soon there will be little or no competition for walmart, then there will be greed. kmart is out, target isnt doing so well, and many grocery stores have felt the effect of walmart. some states have realized this, and have forced walmart to pay an extra dollar per hour. for people that work there.

The Free Market will destroy even monopolies. If there's money to be made because a monopoly is gouging consumers, then SOMEONE will create the company to sell products way cheaper than the gouging monopoly, and they will thrive.

 

[decibels5]

The Free Market will destroy even monopolies. If there's money to be made because a monopoly is gouging consumers, then SOMEONE will create the company to sell products way cheaper than the gouging monopoly, and they will thrive.

hence, the title of this thread

 

[97silverlsc]

97: No offense, but contrary to popular belief, the Wal Mart story is one of the greatest business success stories in modern times. Egalitarians and socialists despise the story, because it shows how one man with a huge dream, and the willingness to chase that dream, can change the entire world by bringing mass efficiencies to the world of retail goods. No more wasted money on two, three, four middlemen, etc, and a steadying (and sometimes declining) of the overall prices of consumer goods. Have you noticed that nobody gets things fixed anymore? It's just as cheap to go to the store and buy a new widget, than it is to take it to someone to repair it. Labor is expensive, and Sam Walton found a way to minimize it in the distribution of retail goods, thereby freeing up those laborers to do something more useful than pull a box off a warehouse shelf.

I said look at the heirs, not sam. The heirs are scumbags.

 

[97silverlsc]

Liberals love to trot out people like Ken Lay or Dennis Kozlowski as examples of why we shouldn't have capitalism. It's absurd, because the law is there to prosecute and punish people for taking advantage of the system, but it's not even arguable that we should do away with the system because of abuses.

We all know that Phil works in a union environment, so that might explain why he is anti-capitalism. Unions are socialistic in the extreme. Nobody gets rich working in that system.

Just because there is no law against what a lot of corporations are doing to their employees or the rampant greed exhibited by some doesn't mean that it's morally or ethically correct. Executive compensation that has gone up by huge multiples while middle and low class wages have been stagnant or actually shown losses when inflation is figured in for example. I don't disagree with capitalism when held in proper check, but when our country is consumed by it and run by it I do have a problem with it. This country is run more and more with the best interests of the corporations in mind, not the citizens.

 

[fossten]

I don't disagree with capitalism when held in proper check, but when our country is consumed by it and run by it I do have a problem with it. This country is run more and more with the best interests of the corporations in mind, not the citizens.

"Held in proper check"????

Spoken like a true socialist.

 

[stang99x]

I don't argue with dyed in the wool dip sh!t republicans. you idiots will believe whatever you want. I know how it REALLY is and your banter will NEVER convince me otherwise. my source is called REALITY, now go watch FOX news.

You can't even be in you're 30's yet, unless you're just stupid. (or live in AL)

Perhaps you didn't notice, SUV sales are down. Hybrid sales are up.

Although I will agree with that, you must take into effect that hybrids make up like 3% or less of the market, while SUV's make up a mammoth amount of the market, so even the slightest swing would make that statement true. This is all a big cycle. Remember the 70's? That all went away and we had 75 cent a gallon gas for several years here in atlanta in the early 00's. It will cycle again and the hybrid will end up going the way of the dodo. Wait till they are out of warranty and require service. That'll be the final nail in their coffin