Matt Lauer interview with Exxon this morning

deltachi8 said:
Ignoring the world's problems and issues will only cuase further problems. History has taught us that - (isolationism after world war I). You certainly have to worry about what other countries do and think, its vital not just to the economy (trade defciet, anyone?) but to eveything else as well - opression, wrong, hunger, natural disasters.


True enough. I just think we need to spend more time solving the problems we have here than we do.
 
Indeed. The "Oops -- sorry we got everyone all upset for nothing" article gets pushed back to page six, under the article about the girl scout troup cleaning up the highway.

Pretty darned sad, since there will clearly be people who will assume the original accusations were correct because they'll never hear about the conclusion of the investigation.
 
Charles Schumer said:
A prominent critic of the industry on Capitol Hill, New York Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer, criticized the FTC report as inadequate and accused the major oil companies of setting prices "higher than what real competition would merit."

Ya know, the various "intelligence" services in the US sent in report after report saying that Sadam Husein was developing a massive chemical and biological weapons program. So we invaded Iraq.

So where are WMDs? Do you see WDMs? Show me WMDs!

Just because a government agency files one report on a subject doesn't mean it's 100% true and accurate.

Besides, look at that report more carefully - it deals with the period after hurricane Katrina, not the current round of huge, instant price increases in the month of April.

Like I said before - the price at the pump went up 20% in one month. Where are the market factors (increased demand or reduced supply) that justify that? I still haven't seen anything like a refinery being shut down, a huge new market instantly opening up, or an environmental or social cause for that huge instant jump.
 

Critics yesterday denounced a Federal Trade Commission’s finding that oil companies didn’t illegally rig gas prices after last fall’s Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

“The Bush administration is uniquely handicapped when it comes to defending the public from price gouging because it doesn’t want to embarrass its friends in Big Oil,” Rep. Edward Markey (D-Malden) said in a statement. “This administration’s high-prices-are-good-for-you energy policy depends on leaving Big Oil alone to charge whatever Big Oil has decided to charge.”

http://business.bostonherald.com/businessNews/view.bg?articleid=140390

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/50118.html

http://schumer.senate.gov/SchumerWe...leases/2006/PR123.Upstate Gas FTC.041806.html
 
WillCAD

11 refineries shut down from 2 days before Katrina to several weeks after Rita. 4 of those are still at reduced (below 70%). one is below 50%. The reports are available, they are just buried in the back of newpapers. The refineries south of New Orleans will not be up to capacity for several more months to a year. The road and pipeline systems are heavily damaged.

When the market demand stays the same, and the supply (for a short period of time) is reduced by 30% the cost of that item will go up.

Now the switch to Ethanol and that other additive have been completed. I am seeing the price come down. An average of 17 cents in 2 to 3 weeks is a large drop.

I did learn recently that most Oil refinery operators do not want to build a new refinery, they want to expand the ones they have. It is easier for them to get the permits and it is cheaper.
 
The other thing is that this week the House of Reps refused to allow drilling of the coast of Florida, California, Washington, Oregon, and Alaska. The leaders that pushed the bill where from: Florida, California, Washington, Oregon, and Alaska. They had help from the reps from: New York, Mass., Vermont, and Main.

Now that will certainly help bring down gas prices. :lmao:
 
That's why Schumer has no credibility -- he criticizes even when he doesn't have the evidence to back-up his claims. It must really grate on him that an independent agency confirms the administration's assertions that there was no evidence of price gouging.
 
I'm sorry but I hardly call this FTC report "independent". Especially when this administration has had their fingers deeply in departments as varied as the FDA, NASA, the CIA, the NOAA and even the Dept. of Agriculture..

They've pressured employees of those agencies to publish only opinions and messages that are in line with the administrations plans, procedures and policies. I would NOT put it past the Bush administration (who is aligned with big oil.. they just ARE) to pressure the FTC to say whatever they want.

J
 
I surely wouldn't call Charles Schumer independent. :lmao:

The FTC commissioners are approved by Congress, which is about as independent as you can get in a federal bureaucracy. If there was any other more independent entity out there in a position to credibly evaluate the situation, that would be great, but the FTC is the best there is and good enough.
 
bicker said:
That's why Schumer has no credibility -- he criticizes even when he doesn't have the evidence to back-up his claims. It must really grate on him that an independent agency confirms the administration's assertions that there was no evidence of price gouging.

Why is it that EVERYONE who DISAGREES with YOUR position you state has "NO CREDIBILITY"???????? As if you are the most credible person?

It IS YOU who critiicizes when YOU don't have ANY evidence to back-up your claims! Yet you continually HARP on others to do so.

Throughout this WHOLE thread you have not ONCE supported anything you wrote about, with anything other than your own misguided thoughts!!!!!

It is not only Schumer, but other Senators...BOTH DEMOCRAT & REPUBLICAN who are HIGHLY skeptical of the FTC report!

And on a personal note. I have know Charles Schumer for over 30 years. I have never met anyone in my life who is more CREDIBLE, more loyal to the people of the state of NY & the USA, Brilliant, and the MOST dedicated politician most have EVER met!!

You may not agree with Charles Schumer, but to make a claim that "he has no credibility" is like everything else you post...is total BS!
 
Calm down. Stop making things so personal.

I met Charles Schumer when I was a New Yorker. I used to respect him. He's now just an alarmist for the left-wing. The point is that the FTC is the most credible and most independent report available. The criticisms are all just political noise.
 
I thik Bicker has done a fine job backing up his points.

Chuck Schumer is as credible as any other politician in my book. I trust none of them. Politicians, in my book, are only in the business of re-election, not serving anyone. But thats just my opinion.

The point if this is a report comes out that refutes all the major hype about price gouging and its burried by the media. Agree with it or not, one side of the story is glomorous and incites peoples emotions and sells papers, the other doesn't, so it not deemed as news worthy. I think that is wrong.

Let people make up their own minds but at least give both sides of the issue equal play.
 
Since this thread was about the Exxon interview...I am no fan of the current gas pricing driving up profits for all the companies. However, at least Exxon participated in the interview, what about Chevron, Conoco-Phillips, British Petroleum, et al? Exxon may be the largest oil company, but they are certainly not the only company making these huge profits. And a single company boycott would have little impact at all, it would simply drive demand up for the other companies and Exxon would wholesale their excess product to them, making the same profit, perhaps more profit, as they could close down some of the consumer marketing division by eliminating any company owned stations that have slow sales. But most stations are independent dealers, it is the local people you would be hurting with a boycott, not Exxon.
 
DISUNC said:
And on a personal note. I have know Charles Schumer for over 30 years. I have never met anyone in my life who is more CREDIBLE, more loyal to the people of the state of NY & the USA, Brilliant, and the MOST dedicated politician most have EVER met!!

You may not agree with Charles Schumer, but to make a claim that "he has no credibility" is like everything else you post...is total BS!


I notice you live in PA. As a resident of NY State I see things a bit differently :)

There is a joke here about him -- he never met an open mike he didn't like, and make sure you don't get between him and one! :teeth: He and his counterpart are an embarassment!

Lorie
 
Don't get me started about Hillary Clinton and credibility!
 
reeeoga said:
WillCAD

11 refineries shut down from 2 days before Katrina to several weeks after Rita. 4 of those are still at reduced (below 70%). one is below 50%. The reports are available, they are just buried in the back of newpapers. The refineries south of New Orleans will not be up to capacity for several more months to a year. The road and pipeline systems are heavily damaged.

When the market demand stays the same, and the supply (for a short period of time) is reduced by 30% the cost of that item will go up.

That happened 6 months ago, and prices went up then.

In the 6 mons since, according to what you just wrote, 7 out of those 11 have returned to full capacity, while 4 are operating at reduced capacity. So the price shoiuld have spiked right after the hurricanes, while 11 refineries were out of action, and gradually gone down since, as the refineries came back on line, one at a time.

None of what you described happened in the months of March or April 2006. So again, what market conditions in the month of April caused the price at the pump to spike by 20% in one months time? What refineries shut down in April? What new market suddenly opened up in April?

I still haven't seen any evidence of any true market condition that would account for so sharp a price increase in so short a period of time. And if the price spiked without any market conditions driving it, well, I guess that sort of loosely fits the definition of gouging, doesn't it?

And I am not a conspiracy theorist who thinks that all of the big oil companies are in collusion to fix the price. But if one company raises or lowers the price at the pump, the others tend to follow along on their own so that A) They won't miss the higher profits when the price goes up, and B) They won't lose customers when the price goes down.
 
The March and April 06 spikes coorespond to teh President of Iran Making Threats against Israel. The market reacted by trying to get a supply for themselves. This causes the little guy (local station owners) to increase there prices so that they will have enought money to replace the gas they are selling. There was also several attackes on the pipelines in Iraq, and an attack in Saudi Arabia. The Saudi attack was thought to be the start of more "Insergent" attacks there. This all contributes to the cost of gas increase here.
 
reeeoga said:
The March and April 06 spikes coorespond to teh President of Iran Making Threats against Israel. The market reacted by trying to get a supply for themselves. This causes the little guy (local station owners) to increase there prices so that they will have enought money to replace the gas they are selling.

That doesn't make any sense to me, since Isreal has been threatened by the various Islamic nations surrounding it since the day it was founded. Gas prices haven't fluctuated by 20% every time there has been a threat made against Isreal over the last few years, or every time Isreal has been involved in actual combat.

reeeoga said:
There was also several attackes on the pipelines in Iraq, and an attack in Saudi Arabia. The Saudi attack was thought to be the start of more "Insergent" attacks there. This all contributes to the cost of gas increase here.

Worries about Iraqi insurgents operating in Saudi Arabia certainly could have caused oil prices to rise, but the attack you mentioned must have been isolated, since I have not heard anything about continued violence in Saudi territory. The attack you mentioned probably would have caused a price spike for a week or two, but if the violence didn't continue, the price would have plateaued and maybe even gone back down.

Iraqi oil production was cut to almost nothing in the American attack of 2003. All of the major piplines suffered damage in the war, including a bunch that were broken when American forces bombed various bridges accross the Tigris and Euprades rivers. And ever since, the oil pipelines and production facilities have been continually targeted by Iraqi insurgents. An attack or two in March or April would not have caused the price to suddenly spike by 20% in a month when Iraq is not a major producer these days anyway. It would be like an attack on a tiny local soda producer causing the price of Coke to jump world-wide.

I still don't buy the arguement that market pressures are what caused such a severe jump in price over so short a period of time.
 
Any one single instance of an attack will not bring oil prices up. Several dozen over 2 countries over several weeks will bring prices up.

The Saudi attack killed over 40 with the fighting between police and insergence fighters.

The continuing threat of Iran, with their insistance that they need Nuclear tech, and with the USA backing the Israel government in the event of an attack. And then Israel saying that It could defend itself "Iran could be whipped off the face of the map too". In that event then the Arab counties would join together and attack Israel.

During the invasion of Iraq, the Gulf Coast of the USA increased its production to offest a large percent of the lost Iraq production. That ability to increase is gone. KAtrina destroid over 130 platforms and damaged over a 1000 others. The oil refineries are there, but the cheap, easy oil is not. The oil they are refining is comming from outside the country.

The cost of a product must be looked at from start to finish. All areas that that product come from affect the cost. The Hurricanes that hit central and south america 3 years ago are still effecting the cost of Coffee. A pound of coffee was $4 4 years ago, it is now $6.50.

International forces have more of an impact on an international product than domestic forces.
 












Save Up to 30% on Rooms at Walt Disney World!

Save up to 30% on rooms at select Disney Resorts Collection hotels when you stay 5 consecutive nights or longer in late summer and early fall. Plus, enjoy other savings for shorter stays.This offer is valid for stays most nights from August 1 to October 11, 2025.
CLICK HERE







New Posts







DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest

Back
Top