The Truth About Ron Paul - Part 2

Carthoris

Well-Known Member
Willyßagseed;6176426 said:
Ron Paul is partially correct, bad regulation can cause severe issues.

How are independents going to open their own stations when people like the Koch brothers already own the refineries........... your argument is void.

Stop being small minded thinking "free market" will fix shit, it won't as long as human beings are involved. Many people accuse Lefties of wanting to have a utopia, methinks Libertarians who don't think out more than a couple of moves are the ones either lying to themselves or wearing the rose coloured shades.

Yes why are monopolies and deregulation evil....... Why don't you ask the average citizen of feudal times what they thought of their Lords and Barons and the monopolies they had. You may want to be a legal cannabis smoking serf but I don't.
The fact that you really believe that you would become a serf because of a monopoly is silly. As a serf, you don't have any ability to even have competition. A monopoly might make competition harder, but there is always competition, you might not like the prices there though. Think Wal-Mart vs your local grocery store. You might consider actually reading about the great monopolies of the world and how they came to power and kept it. You will see that most regulations were a giant boon to monopolies as they hurt upstarts more than big corporations.

Do you see the irony in this that most democrats actively want more government and they work towards that - centralizing the power of the country into a smaller group of people? I would say the federal government is getting close to having a monopoly on the country as they take more and more power from the state governments and the people. How could any of you seriously bitch about monopolies then go and want to create one that can change the very laws that govern its own existence.
 

undertheice

Well-Known Member
If one has the will it is absolutely do able.
i think that's the entire thrust of his post, as well as every other post he has entered in this forum. that one shouldn't have to rely on one's own resources. that the holy state should be responsible for all of your needs and desires.
 

Carthoris

Well-Known Member
The EPA hasnt banned the Building of Refiniries. They do have a stringent application process combine that with NIMBY movements and they do not get built.

A regulated free market is good. An unregulated Free market ends up like the game of Monopoly. And we all know how shitty that is when 1 guy ends up owning everything on the board

Myths and Facts about Oil Refineries in the United States




Myths and Facts about Oil Refineries in the United States
The Bush administration and some members of Congress blame environmental rules for causing strains on refining capacity, prompting shortages and driving up prices. But in reality, it is uncompetitive actions by a handful of companies with large control over our nation’s gas markets that is directly causing these high prices.
Myth 1: Oil refineries are not being built in the U.S. because environmental regulations, particularly the Clean Air Act, are so bureaucratic and burdensome that refiners cannot get permits.
Fact: Environmental regulations are not preventing new refineries from being built in the U.S. From 1975 to 2000, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) received only one permit request for a new refinery. And in March, EPA approved Arizona Clean Fuels’ application for an air permit for a proposed refinery in Arizona. In addition, oil companies are regularly applying for – and receiving – permits to modify and expand their existing refineries.[1]
Myth 2: The U.S. oil refinery market is competitive.
Fact: Actually, industry consolidation is limiting competition in oil refining sector. The largest five oil refiners in the United States (ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips, BP, Valero and Royal Dutch Shell) now control over half (56.3%) of domestic oil refinery capacity; the top ten refiners control 83%. Only ten years ago, these top five oil companies only controlled about one-third (34.5%) of domestic refinery capacity; the top ten controlled 55.6%. This dramatic increase in the control of just the top five companies makes it easier for oil companies to manipulate gasoline supplies by intentionally withholding supplies in order to drive up prices. Indeed, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) concluded in March 2001 that oil companies had intentionally withheld supplies of gasoline from the market as a tactic to drive up prices—all as a “profit-maximizing strategy.” A May 2004 U.S. Governmental Accountability Office (GAO) report also found that mergers in the oil industry directly led to higher prices—and this report did not even include the large mergers after the year 2000, such as ChevronTexaco and ConocoPhillips. Yet, just one week after Hurricane Katrina, the FTC approved yet another merger of refinery giants—Valero Energy and Premcor—giving Valero 13% of the national market share. These actions, while costing consumers billions of dollars in overcharges, have not been challenged by the U.S. government.
Myth 3: The United States has maxed out its oil refining capability.
Fact: Oil companies have exploited their strong market position to intentionally restrict refining capacity by driving smaller, independent refiners out of business. A congressional investigation uncovered internal memos written by the major oil companies operating in the U.S. discussing their successful strategies to maximize profits by forcing independent refineries out of business, resulting in tighter refinery capacity. From 1995-2002, 97% of the more than 920,000 barrels of oil per day of capacity that have been shut down were owned and operated by smaller, independent refiners. Were this capacity to be in operation today, refiners could use it to better meet today’s reformulated gasoline blend needs.
Profit margins for oil refiners have been at record highs. In 1999, for every gallon of gasoline refined from crude oil, U.S. oil refiners made a profit of 22.8 cents. By 2004, the profits jumped 80% to 40.8 cents per gallon of gasoline refined. Between 2001 and mid-2005, the combined profits for the biggest five refiners was $228 billion.
Gutting environmental laws for oil refinery siting will not solve the high gas prices.
So what should be done?

  • Improve regulations over the over-concentrated oil industry
The most effective way to protect consumers is to restore competitive markets. Congress should limit the financial incentives oil companies have to keep gasoline supplies artificially tight by mandating minimum storage of gasoline, reevaluating recent mergers, investigating anticompetitive practices, and re-regulating oil trading.

  • Adopt tougher fuel economy standards
In 2004, the EPA found that the average fuel economy of 2004 vehicles is 20.8 miles per gallon (mpg), compared to 22.1 mpg in 1987—a six percent decline. This decline is attributable to the fact that fuel economy standards have not been meaningfully increased since the 1980s, while sales of fuel inefficient SUVs and pickups have exploded: in 1987, 28% of new vehicles sold were light trucks, compared to 48% in 2004. Billions of gallons of oil could be saved if significant fuel economy increases were mandated. Improving fuel economy standards for passenger vehicles from 27.5 to 40 mpg, and for light trucks (including SUVs and vans) from 20.7 to 27.5 mpg by 2015 would reduce our gasoline consumption by one-third. Dramatic reductions in consumption will not only reduce strain on America’s refinery output, but also on Americans’ pocketbooks.
Myth 1: They don't bother asking for a permit they know will never make them money or that they will never get. It is like my applying for a billion dollar loan. I know I ain't getting it, why bother?

Myth 2: So what you are saying is 10 companies have a monopoly on the same exact product?

Myth 3: You say the profit is 41 cents vs 23 cents before. The state and federal charge you 26-68 cents per gallon depending on state for an average of about 49 cents per gallon. That's not counting local governments which can and do add a tax in many states. Who deserves to profit more? The people making the gas or the people who don't do anything in regards to it? How much does a refinery cost? How long does it take to pay for it at 40 cents a gallon? You are talking billions of dollars to build a refinery. Even Exxon Mobile would have to pump out 5-10% of its profits for an entire year to open another refinery. When you consider that more gas would mean lower profits and the fact that you can buy one cheaper than build one - where would the rationale be for building one? They haven't build one since 76, that's 35 years ago. I bet they aren't bothering because they don't expect oil production to keep up with usage after this decade. It is hard to justify 10 billion dollars being spent to shore up refinery potential when there probably won't be enough oil being pumped out of the ground to use all the production we have now in 10 years. Oh, did you forget it would be 10-15 years before a refinery could even be finished and by that time it will be useless? It is no surprise they aren't standing in line to throw away billions of dollars.

I also like how it goes on to say taking away choices from consumers and driving up vehicles prices are good for the consumer. Bravo bravo.
 

Carthoris

Well-Known Member
i just want to know what has happened in the last 4 years that makes any of this any different then the past.

not one person has brought any new points to this dead argument. on either side.

ron paul will NEVER be president.


you'd all be better off using your energy knitting. in the end, at least you'd have a pair of slippers to wear. ;)
Who asked you?
 

budlover13

King Tut
i just want to know what has happened in the last 4 years that makes any of this any different then the past.

not one person has brought any new points to this dead argument. on either side.

ron paul will NEVER be president.


you'd all be better off using your energy knitting. in the end, at least you'd have a pair of slippers to wear. ;)

That's brainwashing right there man. Keep being a pawn bro.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Who asked you?
That's brainwashing right there man. Keep being a pawn bro.
you have blasphemed at the altar of paul, and you must now repent!

seriously though, anyone can feel free to witness the same hysteria back in 2008, just go back in the archives.

that 2008 revolution netted about 40,000 votes, 0.00032% of the total votes.

considering he raised about $28 million for his campaign, that works out to about $700 per vote. :shock:

hell, ron paul can get my vote this time around if he sends me $700. :lol: not like he'd win anyway.
 

tryingtogrow89

Well-Known Member
Im rather happy to see the only 2012 campaign signs going up around the two states around me are "Ron Paul 2012" one of those states are democrat also.
 

dukeanthony

New Member
you have blasphemed at the altar of paul, and you must now repent!

seriously though, anyone can feel free to witness the same hysteria back in 2008, just go back in the archives.

that 2008 revolution netted about 40,000 votes, 0.00032% of the total votes.

considering he raised about $28 million for his campaign, that works out to about $700 per vote. :shock:

hell, ron paul can get my vote this time around if he sends me $700. :lol: not like he'd win anyway.
YOu know how much he spent in iowas to get the votes he got?
The Iowa Straw poll you have to pay to vote in it. And its allowed for candidates to pay the fee in return for a vote

Ron Paul gave out fewer Iowa Straw Poll tickets than Michele Bachmann

By Alex Pappas--The Daily Caller | The Daily Caller – Sat, Aug 13, 2011


AMES, Iowa — It appears that while Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann beat Texas Rep. Ron Paul by 152 votes in the Iowa Straw Poll on Saturday, she gave away far more admission tickets than he did.
Paul’s campaign gave out 4,750 tickets to straw poll voters, his campaign chairman, Jesse Benton, told The Daily Caller.
Alice Stewart, a spokeswoman for Bachmann, wouldn’t disclose the number of tickets her campaign distributed. But Ben Smith of Politico reported that Bachmann’s campaign gave away 6,000 tickets.
That would mean Paul gave out about 1,250 fewer tickets than Bachmann. She won the poll with 4,823 votes, followed by Paul at 4,671. (BACHMANNIA: Michele Bachmann edges out Ron Paul for victory in Iowa Straw Poll)
Candidates traditionally give away $30 tickets to supporters they hope will vote for them in the straw poll.
 

budlover13

King Tut
you have blasphemed at the altar of paul, and you must now repent!

seriously though, anyone can feel free to witness the same hysteria back in 2008, just go back in the archives.

that 2008 revolution netted about 40,000 votes, 0.00032% of the total votes.

considering he raised about $28 million for his campaign, that works out to about $700 per vote. :shock:

hell, ron paul can get my vote this time around if he sends me $700. :lol: not like he'd win anyway.
Will you if i send you $700? ;)
 

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
YOu know how much he spent in iowas to get the votes he got?
The Iowa Straw poll you have to pay to vote in it. And its allowed for candidates to pay the fee in return for a vote

Ron Paul gave out fewer Iowa Straw Poll tickets than Michele Bachmann

By Alex Pappas--The Daily Caller | The Daily Caller – Sat, Aug 13, 2011


AMES, Iowa — It appears that while Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann beat Texas Rep. Ron Paul by 152 votes in the Iowa Straw Poll on Saturday, she gave away far more admission tickets than he did.
Paul’s campaign gave out 4,750 tickets to straw poll voters, his campaign chairman, Jesse Benton, told The Daily Caller.
Alice Stewart, a spokeswoman for Bachmann, wouldn’t disclose the number of tickets her campaign distributed. But Ben Smith of Politico reported that Bachmann’s campaign gave away 6,000 tickets.
That would mean Paul gave out about 1,250 fewer tickets than Bachmann. She won the poll with 4,823 votes, followed by Paul at 4,671. (BACHMANNIA: Michele Bachmann edges out Ron Paul for victory in Iowa Straw Poll)
Candidates traditionally give away $30 tickets to supporters they hope will vote for them in the straw poll.

Just because you buy the persons ticket in no way ensures that they will vote for you.
 

WillyBagseed

Active Member
The fact that you really believe that you would become a serf because of a monopoly is silly. As a serf, you don't have any ability to even have competition. A monopoly might make competition harder, but there is always competition, you might not like the prices there though. Think Wal-Mart vs your local grocery store. You might consider actually reading about the great monopolies of the world and how they came to power and kept it. You will see that most regulations were a giant boon to monopolies as they hurt upstarts more than big corporations.

Do you see the irony in this that most democrats actively want more government and they work towards that - centralizing the power of the country into a smaller group of people? I would say the federal government is getting close to having a monopoly on the country as they take more and more power from the state governments and the people. How could any of you seriously bitch about monopolies then go and want to create one that can change the very laws that govern its own existence.
I am not a democrat and never never have said the regulations now in place are good. All I have ever stated is total deregulation would be worse. If you actually believe everybody is going to behave and the "free market" (no such thing) will fix everything I have some old koolaid from jonestown I could part with for free.

I am to old to become a serf, it won't happen overnight with total deregulation but it will happen.
 

budlover13

King Tut
Willyßagseed;6179041 said:
I am not a democrat and never never have said the regulations now in place are good. All I have ever stated is total deregulation would be worse. If you actually believe everybody is going to behave and the "free market" (no such thing) will fix everything I have some old koolaid from jonestown I could part with for free.

I am to old to become a serf, it won't happen overnight with total deregulation but it will happen.
So you have no faith in your fellow man nor your ability to care for you and yours? Not trying to be provocative at all but i don't understand your position without the afore-mentioned assumptions.
 
Top