New way to protest high gas prices

[GaryKelly]

Let's not forget our very own petrol protests back in 2000. Non-violent, nearly crippled the country. Not that it ultimately did much good, except perhaps to let Blair know that 'one wronged man can move a people, and a wronged people can move the world...'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_fuel_protest

Since then, of course, the price at the pumps has shot through the levels which triggered the protests 5 years ago.

[PJ]

I think a lot of people are missing the point here. Supply isn't the problem. Most oil companies are recording record profits - check their SEC filings if you don't believe me.

No one company is going to allow itself to go broke. It'll lower its prices. The point is to target one large company and force it to decide between bankruptcy and lowering its prices. Once it lowers its prices, the boycott finishes and everyone will start buying its gas. The other companies will then have to follow suit.

[bradhurley]

Personally, I'm all for higher gas prices. The world would be a better and cleaner place if gas were $10 or $20 a gallon, although obviously it would be better for the economy, taxi drivers, and low-income folks if the price increase were gradual to give people time to switch to new technologies.

The price of gas has been artificially low for decades anyway. It has never reflected the significant external costs associated with it, such as the costs of pollution and other environmental damage, or the cost of wars fought over oil. We pay for those things out of our income taxes and thus we have no incentive to use less oil.

[s1m0n]

I think a lot of people are missing the point here. Supply isn't the problem. Most oil companies are recording record profits - check their SEC filings if you don't believe me.

Supply is *exactly* the problem.

If more people want your product than you can produce product, you have to ration it out. In a market economy, rationing is accomplished by increasing price to choke off demand until you manage to exactly align the number of willing buyers with the amount of product available.

If, like the oil companites, you happen to be own some of whatever's in short supply, you make windfall profits when this occurs. You still can't sell for less than the market price, because the moment you do, you'll have two (or more) buyers for every barrel of oil. This will cause problems--which one do you sell to?

SO if the oil companies decide to sell gas for less than the market price, they'll have two buyers for every gallon of gas they have to sell. In a lot of places, that'll lead to shortages or riots at the pumps.

Do you wanna live in a world like the soviet union, in which you have to line up for an hour on tuesday mornings at 11 to buy gas; they don't announce it in advance; and if you miss it, there won't be another chance to buy for week or more? Unless you're connected, of course. Then you can always get gas.

[Tyler]

I think a lot of people are missing the point here. Supply isn't the problem.

No you're right, demand is the problem, and demand is unnavoidably linked to the supply, however much profit is being made in the middle.

No one company is going to allow itself to go broke. It'll lower its prices.

true that a company may not allow itself to go broke, the may turn to a buyout by a company you're not boycotting, hence a return to the original problem. A selective boycott will not neccesarily end one company, but it will not lower the universal end-user cost of gas.

The point is to target one large company and force it to decide between bankruptcy and lowering its prices.

meanwhile, the other companies can see what's going on and elevate their prices in accordance because guess what....you've just magically inreased the demand for their gasoline!

Once it lowers its prices, the boycott finishes and everyone will start buying its gas. The other companies will then have to follow suit.

Once the boycott ends, providing you could successfully induce them to lower their individual price, there's no guarantee they wont re-raise their prices after the fact...If your boycott is not successful, you have cost the industy more money than if you were to simply reduce your consumption, and guess what...price increase on the end-user level.
On top of that, if you goof up your protest effort and you fail, you ruin any credibility that the notion had in the first place, thus reducing future chances of success.
Remember that while your non-boycotted gas companies are in competition with the one that you (giving you the broad benefit of the doubt) have boycotted and theoretically lowered their prices, the one you have lowered is in competition with the rest of them too; this means you might, in the best case scenario, (again, going out on a very thin limb here) experience a very brief downward flux in prices, but as demand for the cheaper gas increaces, price will also increase as their stations start to run out of thier gas....gas is not refined overnight, but demand will spike so much in this type of situation that the cheaper stations will inevitably sell out of their product and force consumers away in their constant need for more gas.

Your intentions are well placed, but you need to be better informed about the way that capitalist economies and free enterprise works before you start into any such endeavour...You are looking at this situation from the premise that the consumer is in control; you are absolutely correct!!!! the consumer does control the market, because the consumer controlls the overall demand for the end product...
Such a boycott could only be successful if it is universal in nature. Do we have the technology yet to go cold-turkey from gasoline? No, not yet, but we do have the ability to reduce our overall consumption, and that's where our control lies.
again, the only way for the end-user to control the price of any good is to reduce the overal, universal demand for the good. In terms of petrolium, this means using less gasoline. Do we have the technology to do this? Yes. Unfortunatly the north american mentality of "bigger is better is more" and thinking they can get something for nothing spoils the average consumer into apathy and allows them to think "Well, if it's just me driving my big gass guzzler around, it wont make much difference."
Use less gas...
do you know why?
There is an agent that they put in gasoline to cause it's effectiveness to decay; they do this to discourage the consumer from stockpiling....
they have to sell this gas or it will go bad on them...a boycott of one company, however successful it may seem on the outside, will not stop the boycotted company from selling it's gasoline to its competitors...a universal reduction in consumption would mean these companies could not sell their gasoline back and forth on a profit, they would need the end-user consumer to buy their gas, and that would cause a universal price reduction.
If the end-user consumer were to make a permanent reduction in their consumption, this would be a permanent price decrease that would stabilize over time.

[anniemcu]

I haven't heard of anything like that here.

For my own amusement this weekend I worked out the British gas/petrol prices in terms of US dollars per gallon. It came out to $6.57. Makes $3 sound cheap..

The issue isn't the absolute cost, it's the cost relative to a) what one would normally expect to pay and b) as a proportion of income.

True. The real issue here is not that the price shouldn't be higher than it has been (it should, I think), but the time frame in which it is rising. It is increasing at an alarming rate.

I suspect Europeans have both higher absolute incomes and typically budget more of it for gas. So when a price surge hits, it hits both sides of the atlantic about the same. Of course this is just speculation.

I don't think so. They have paid much higher prices for their gas all along. I don't think the price is rising there at the same rate it is here though.

[TomB]

I suspect Europeans have both higher absolute incomes and typically budget more of it for gas. So when a price surge hits, it hits both sides of the atlantic about the same. Of course this is just speculation.

Speculation indeed. I've never understood where the "Europeans are richer and so make provisions to budget for it" notions come from. The same kind of fallacy popped up in another thread about petrol prices.

Umm, if you are talking about the "discussion" that you and I had recently, I never suggested that Europeans are richer and make provisions in their budget for it. I agree with you that would indeed be a fallacy.

As to what our discussion was, I suggest we leave it be.

All the Best, Tom

[Wormdiet]

Hi Wormdiet

The per capta GDP of the UK is roughly $30k, that of the US is roughly $40k. We get it in the neck both ways, higher prices and lower wages.

David

I stand corrected. thanks to you and GK for stting me straight.

Well I guess I am just going to shut up about high gas prices then.

[Daniel_Bingamon]

If you want gas prices to come down, switch your SUV to a compact or take the bus.

Today I was at the Gas station, every vehicle there was vans, suv's, trucks. My 4-cylinder Subaru Front Wheel Drive Impreza was the only car there. For once, I was glad that I have a small car.

[jkrazy52]

If you want gas prices to come down, switch your SUV to a compact or take the bus.

Today I was at the Gas station, every vehicle there was vans, suv's, trucks. My 4-cylinder Subaru Front Wheel Drive Impreza was the only car there. For once, I was glad that I have a small car.

It's nice to say get a compact or take a bus. It's not possible for a lot of people. Pickups are used for work vehicles and/or farm vehicles. Vans are used for transporting more people than can ride in a Mini. Buses don't come within 20 miles of my house. In my area, privately owned SUV's & 4WD trucks have been called into emergency use to transport medical personnel and help with rescues during floods, blizzards, etc.

Not everyone drives the larger vehicles for a status symbol. Not arguing -- there is a problem -- just stating that there is no simple, easy solution, no easy place to cast blame.

[Will O'B]

My wife said yesterday on her way to work that prices at the local "gas 'n go cheapo joint" was $2.89. On her way home 12 hours later it was $3.39. A jump of 50 cents a gallon. I do believe they're getting ready for the big Labor Day Weekend.

Will O'ban

[PJ]

In Quebec yesterday morning, the price was $1.10 per litre. In the afternoon it was $1.34. An increase of approx. 20%.

[Tyler]

If you want gas prices to come down, switch your SUV to a compact or take the bus.

Today I was at the Gas station, every vehicle there was vans, suv's, trucks. My 4-cylinder Subaru Front Wheel Drive Impreza was the only car there. For once, I was glad that I have a small car.

It's nice to say get a compact or take a bus. It's not possible for a lot of people. Pickups are used for work vehicles and/or farm vehicles. Vans are used for transporting more people than can ride in a Mini. Buses don't come within 20 miles of my house. In my area, privately owned SUV's & 4WD trucks have been called into emergency use to transport medical personnel and help with rescues during floods, blizzards, etc.

Not everyone drives the larger vehicles for a status symbol. Not arguing -- there is a problem -- just stating that there is no simple, easy solution, no easy place to cast blame.

The people you're referring to probably make up less than %5 of the total problem population....
go into any big city in the west and you'll see what we're talking about...
You'll see soccer moms, men with little anatomies, tough-guy wanna-bes, overly image conscious teenagers, all driving their big-ass pickup trucks and SUVs for whatever reason they have...occasionally you'd see a contractor's vehicle...that's obviously understandable, but for the greatest part their trucks and SUVs serve no other purpose than to be status symbols or ego boosters ( I mean really, what purpose does an H2 serve? None, it's a neutered Silverado that gets six miles to the gallon, but come to Utah and you cant go ten minuets without seeing one.)
The population that truly needs their large size trucks and SUVs to get around as daily drivers is so miniscule compared to the total population of truck/SUV owners as to make their sway on the issue nonexistant. If people who don't need their gas wasters gave them up, the people who truly need them could still use them with very little influence on the market at all.

[Will O'B]

Personally, I'm all for higher gas prices. The world would be a better and cleaner place if gas were $10 or $20 a gallon, although obviously it would be better for the economy, taxi drivers, and low-income folks if the price increase were gradual to give people time to switch to new technologies.

I'm certainly no ecconomist, but here's my take:
Then the price of bread, eggs & milk would also skyrocket if these items are going to get to the grocery stores. Then the labor force will start demanding more money so they can continue feeding their families. Then the companies the labor force work for will have to increase the cost of their goods and services so they can make the same profits while paying their employees more. Then Mobil/Exxon realizes that they are one of those companies that have to pay their employees more, so they, too, increase the cost of their product. Then the price of bread, eggs & milk will go up if these items are to continue getting to the grocery store. Then the labor force . . . -- "There's a hole in the bucket,
dear Liza."

Overly simplistic I know. But, like I said, I'm no ecconomist.

Will O'b

[Tony]

.






No need to boycott high gas prices when no gas is available.