A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto makers » Ford Mustang
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Bush's call for "more diesel"



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old May 10th 05, 04:48 PM
RichA
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 09 May 2005 15:14:39 -0700, Hank > wrote:

>Just a lurker here...
>
>In last weeks Arizona Republic newspaper here in Phoenix they ran an
>article on 20%gasoline/80% grain alchol. It is available in Tucson for
>$1.83/gallon and runs in about 80% of the vehicles on the road without
>any changes. It went on to say that it was even cheaper in the midwest
>where we have an oversupply of grain and it is produced locally.
>
>I have not seen much else on this. Too bad. That would cut back our
>reliance on foreign oil.
>
>hank

Before anyone gets too excited about this (how long have we had
stuff about corn-based alcohol for fuel thrown at us?) why not
find out what it would take to replace even 10% of the U.S. oil
usage by this method?
-Rich
Ads
  #52  
Old May 10th 05, 05:49 PM
Michael Johnson, PE
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

RichA wrote:
> On Mon, 09 May 2005 15:14:39 -0700, Hank > wrote:
>
>
>>Just a lurker here...
>>
>>In last weeks Arizona Republic newspaper here in Phoenix they ran an
>>article on 20%gasoline/80% grain alchol. It is available in Tucson for
>>$1.83/gallon and runs in about 80% of the vehicles on the road without
>>any changes. It went on to say that it was even cheaper in the midwest
>>where we have an oversupply of grain and it is produced locally.
>>
>>I have not seen much else on this. Too bad. That would cut back our
>>reliance on foreign oil.
>>
>>hank

>
> Before anyone gets too excited about this (how long have we had
> stuff about corn-based alcohol for fuel thrown at us?) why not
> find out what it would take to replace even 10% of the U.S. oil
> usage by this method?
> -Rich


I wouldn't necessarily say this route would be desirable. It we rely on
grain to make alcohol it could raise the price of numerous foods like
bread, meat etc. All we might do is spend less on gasoline and more on
food. It could also raise the price to feed poor and undeveloped
countries. If this happens then we haven't accomplished much for our
efforts.
  #53  
Old May 10th 05, 08:04 PM
Spike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I think therein lies the difference. With regard to one's home, you're
speaking of something directly and personally close to home, where
when you speak of corporations, there is a detachment there, and being
less personal is not viewed in the same light.

On Tue, 10 May 2005 01:38:32 -0400, "Michael Johnson, PE"
> wrote:

>My point was that most people will complain when someone makes a profit
>from them but think it's justified when they are on the receiving end.
>Any profit is subject to tax liabilities. The capital gains on home
>sales many times aren't taxed. I hope everyone maximizes the profit for
>whatever endeavor they persue. I know some of mine will go toward a
>GT500, if Ford actually builds it.
>
>Spike wrote:
>> Possibly you forget something about selling a home. Market value goes
>> up, a seller is not apt to sell for less than their neighbors are
>> getting for an equal home. It's also a fact that when one sells a
>> home, there are tax liabilities (or at least there were... I haven't
>> checked in a while). And you have to get enough so you can afford to
>> get into someplace else. If everyone else has jacked up their prices,
>> you're about forced to do the same. Finally, the big drop in interest
>> rates has made a major difference in home sales. Personally, I am not
>> going to complain that my $119K home 13 years ago is now valued at
>> over $320K. After all, it paid for the restoration and modifications
>> to my Mustang. : )
>>
>> On Tue, 10 May 2005 00:26:36 -0400, "Michael Johnson, PE"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Richard wrote:
>>>
>>>>"Michael Johnson, PE" > wrote in message
...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I would think about giving them incentives to develop alternative energy
>>>>>sources. Maybe tie their tax rate to importation of foreign oil too.
>>>>>We need to be much more self sufficient. The only way to drop the price
>>>>>is to increase supply.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Maybe but probably not. Don't forget that the supply side is dominated by a
>>>>cartel (OPEC). In a global economy the floor price will be the OPEC price.
>>>>Unless of course you are suggesting that there be price controls set by
>>>>government. Believe me, price controls offer short term gain for long term
>>>>pain.
>>>
>>>OPEC in and of itself is intended to be a price controlling entity. I
>>>don't support price controls either. I do support creating incentives
>>>to entice companies to develop alternative sources of energy for profit.
>>>
>>>
>>>>>I see the same huge profits in the housing industry right now in the
>>>>>Washington, DC area. There are way more buyers than homes. Funny how
>>>>>the homeowners that complain about the oil company profits don't mind
>>>>>selling their home and gouging the next buyer for a $500k profit.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>In a free market how do you equate market prices with gouging? To the best
>>>>of my knowledge no one was holding the buyer hostage or a gun to their head.
>>>>In fact the resale side of the housing market is a near perfect example of a
>>>>free market economy.
>>>
>>>The same people complaining about oil company profits will "take" a
>>>profit on the sell of their home in a minute. That kind of profit is
>>>just fine to them. I don't subscribe to the notion that one type of
>>>profit is good and another is bad. The oil companies charge what we
>>>will pay, just like a homeowner does when selling a house. No one
>>>forces you to fill your tank either. I wasn't forced to drive a gas
>>>guzzling Explorer but I do and I don't blame the oil company every time
>>>I spend $40 to fill it up when I could buy a frugal econobox that fills
>>>up on $10 that would last me two weeks until the next fill-up. For that
>>>matter you (and I) could live near a bus stop and use public
>>>transportation to get around and never buy a tank of gas for the rest of
>>>our lives. Millions upon millions do it every day in this country. A
>>>free market economy requires us to take the good with the bad. If we
>>>don't then it's really not a free market.

>>
>>
>> Hey! Spikey Likes IT!
>> 1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok
>> Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior
>> Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8"
>> w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16


Hey! Spikey Likes IT!
1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok
Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior
Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8"
w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16
  #54  
Old May 10th 05, 08:17 PM
66 6F HCS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Michael Johnson, PE" > wrote
> I wouldn't necessarily say this route would be desirable. It we rely on
> grain to make alcohol it could raise the price of numerous foods like
> bread, meat etc. All we might do is spend less on gasoline and more on
> food.


I need to go on a diet anyway.
--
Scott W.
'66 HCS Mustang 289
'68 Ranchero 500 302
'69 Mustang Sportsroof 351W
ThunderSnake #57
http://home.comcast.net/~vanguard92/


  #55  
Old May 10th 05, 10:26 PM
WindsorFox[SS]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
> My point was that most people will complain when someone makes a profit
> from them but think it's justified when they are on the receiving end.
> Any profit is subject to tax liabilities. The capital gains on home
> sales many times aren't taxed. I hope everyone maximizes the profit for
> whatever endeavor they persue. I know some of mine will go toward a
> GT500, if Ford actually builds it.
>


In Exxon's case it is not profit that I am against, it is record
profits that were reported since the rise in the price of oil.

--
What's black and looks good on a spammer?

....Gangrene.

William R. James
  #56  
Old May 10th 05, 10:54 PM
Michael Johnson, PE
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

WindsorFox[SS] wrote:
> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
>
>> My point was that most people will complain when someone makes a
>> profit from them but think it's justified when they are on the
>> receiving end. Any profit is subject to tax liabilities. The capital
>> gains on home sales many times aren't taxed. I hope everyone
>> maximizes the profit for whatever endeavor they persue. I know some
>> of mine will go toward a GT500, if Ford actually builds it.
>>

>
> In Exxon's case it is not profit that I am against, it is record
> profits that were reported since the rise in the price of oil.


They get some short term benefits in profitability but if the prices
stay high for long enough they will loose profits to other energy
providers and increased conservation. We have enjoyed basically
stagnant gas prices for the last 25 years. There is a new dynamic in
the demand for the world's energy resources that are going to increase
the price we pay for imported oil. While it will may be painful in the
short term I believe the increased prices will eventually force us to
develop cheaper and cleaner energy sources. In the end we all
(especially our children and grandchildren) will be better off for it.
  #57  
Old May 10th 05, 11:06 PM
Michael Johnson, PE
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Those corporate profits are the dividend payments for a shareholder. In
the end it results in a person's income whether it be the sell of a
house or a gallon of gas generating the profit. I find it extremely
hypocritical that a person can justify taking $500k profit from one
individual and then trash an oil company for taking a mere fraction of
that from the same individual over their entire lifetime?

Spike wrote:
> I think therein lies the difference. With regard to one's home, you're
> speaking of something directly and personally close to home, where
> when you speak of corporations, there is a detachment there, and being
> less personal is not viewed in the same light.
>
> On Tue, 10 May 2005 01:38:32 -0400, "Michael Johnson, PE"
> > wrote:
>
>
>>My point was that most people will complain when someone makes a profit

>
>>from them but think it's justified when they are on the receiving end.

>
>>Any profit is subject to tax liabilities. The capital gains on home
>>sales many times aren't taxed. I hope everyone maximizes the profit for
>>whatever endeavor they persue. I know some of mine will go toward a
>>GT500, if Ford actually builds it.
>>
>>Spike wrote:
>>
>>>Possibly you forget something about selling a home. Market value goes
>>>up, a seller is not apt to sell for less than their neighbors are
>>>getting for an equal home. It's also a fact that when one sells a
>>>home, there are tax liabilities (or at least there were... I haven't
>>>checked in a while). And you have to get enough so you can afford to
>>>get into someplace else. If everyone else has jacked up their prices,
>>>you're about forced to do the same. Finally, the big drop in interest
>>>rates has made a major difference in home sales. Personally, I am not
>>>going to complain that my $119K home 13 years ago is now valued at
>>>over $320K. After all, it paid for the restoration and modifications
>>>to my Mustang. : )
>>>
>>>On Tue, 10 May 2005 00:26:36 -0400, "Michael Johnson, PE"
> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Richard wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"Michael Johnson, PE" > wrote in message
...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>I would think about giving them incentives to develop alternative energy
>>>>>>sources. Maybe tie their tax rate to importation of foreign oil too.
>>>>>>We need to be much more self sufficient. The only way to drop the price
>>>>>>is to increase supply.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Maybe but probably not. Don't forget that the supply side is dominated by a
>>>>>cartel (OPEC). In a global economy the floor price will be the OPEC price.
>>>>>Unless of course you are suggesting that there be price controls set by
>>>>>government. Believe me, price controls offer short term gain for long term
>>>>>pain.
>>>>
>>>>OPEC in and of itself is intended to be a price controlling entity. I
>>>>don't support price controls either. I do support creating incentives
>>>>to entice companies to develop alternative sources of energy for profit.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>I see the same huge profits in the housing industry right now in the
>>>>>>Washington, DC area. There are way more buyers than homes. Funny how
>>>>>>the homeowners that complain about the oil company profits don't mind
>>>>>>selling their home and gouging the next buyer for a $500k profit.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>In a free market how do you equate market prices with gouging? To the best
>>>>>of my knowledge no one was holding the buyer hostage or a gun to their head.
>>>>>In fact the resale side of the housing market is a near perfect example of a
>>>>>free market economy.
>>>>
>>>>The same people complaining about oil company profits will "take" a
>>>>profit on the sell of their home in a minute. That kind of profit is
>>>>just fine to them. I don't subscribe to the notion that one type of
>>>>profit is good and another is bad. The oil companies charge what we
>>>>will pay, just like a homeowner does when selling a house. No one
>>>>forces you to fill your tank either. I wasn't forced to drive a gas
>>>>guzzling Explorer but I do and I don't blame the oil company every time
>>>>I spend $40 to fill it up when I could buy a frugal econobox that fills
>>>>up on $10 that would last me two weeks until the next fill-up. For that
>>>>matter you (and I) could live near a bus stop and use public
>>>>transportation to get around and never buy a tank of gas for the rest of
>>>>our lives. Millions upon millions do it every day in this country. A
>>>>free market economy requires us to take the good with the bad. If we
>>>>don't then it's really not a free market.
>>>
>>>
>>>Hey! Spikey Likes IT!
>>>1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok
>>>Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior
>>>Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8"
>>>w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16

>
>
> Hey! Spikey Likes IT!
> 1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok
> Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior
> Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8"
> w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
warman i am surprised you mix oil [email protected] Ford Mustang 5 May 8th 05 04:04 AM
Diesel vs. Gasoline - why one preferred over another?? Mark Levitski Technology 42 April 27th 05 10:52 PM
More Infor on BioDiesel North 4x4 236 June 30th 04 03:58 AM
Any word on US versions of the diesel Jeep Liberty or diesel Land Rover Discovery? Exit 4x4 36 January 20th 04 05:12 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:39 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.