Brentanna:
Nice when we have the oil, but we still get fleeced everytime the US does something stupid, or anytime there is a big storm in the southern gulf that decreased production because well they built all their refineries down there. Noone said they were smart.
If they were really stupid they’d be letting their government get away with charging them £6.00 per gallon based on around 70% tax 
.
But if I read it right newmercman said elsewhere previously that the price of fuel does’nt matter because it can just be passed on to the customer in the form of higher rates/fuel surcharges 
.
Carryfast:
But if I read it right newmercman said elsewhere previously that the price of fuel does’nt matter because it can just be passed on to the customer in the form of higher rates/fuel surcharges .
You read it right, increased fuel costs should be passed onto the buyer of the transport, it’s the cost of doing business, especially in the quasisocialist countries like England and Obama’s America, but a country emerging from recession can only take so much, there will have been casualties in the economic downturn, so when things pick up, numbers are down, therefore supply and demand will drive up rates, this will be a burden on people buying transport, but the better economy will support it, now add over inflated fuel prices and there’s another increase in the costs, maybe too much for the economy to bear.
The USA has a vast stockpile of oil, a liquid Fort Knox if you will, called the Stategic Oil Reserves, they could let that trickle out and lessen their dependance on OPEC and it’s economic blackmail, they could also drill for the oil in their own country and achieve the same result at a slower pace, but they do SFA
Carryfast:
Brentanna:
Nice when we have the oil, but we still get fleeced everytime the US does something stupid, or anytime there is a big storm in the southern gulf that decreased production because well they built all their refineries down there. Noone said they were smart.
If they were really stupid they’d be letting their government get away with charging them £6.00 per gallon based on around 70% tax .
But if I read it right newmercman said elsewhere previously that the price of fuel does’nt matter because it can just be passed on to the customer in the form of higher rates/fuel surcharges .
Totally different the location of the major US refineries in the hurricane zone has nothing to do with taxes. It has to do with stupidity
newmercman:
Carryfast:
But if I read it right newmercman said elsewhere previously that the price of fuel does’nt matter because it can just be passed on to the customer in the form of higher rates/fuel surcharges .
You read it right, increased fuel costs should be passed onto the buyer of the transport, it’s the cost of doing business, especially in the quasisocialist countries like England and Obama’s America, but a country emerging from recession can only take so much, there will have been casualties in the economic downturn, so when things pick up, numbers are down, therefore supply and demand will drive up rates, this will be a burden on people buying transport, but the better economy will support it, now add over inflated fuel prices and there’s another increase in the costs, maybe too much for the economy to bear.
The USA has a vast stockpile of oil, a liquid Fort Knox if you will, called the Stategic Oil Reserves, they could let that trickle out and lessen their dependance on OPEC and it’s economic blackmail, they could also drill for the oil in their own country and achieve the same result at a slower pace, but they do SFA
It’s high fuel prices which are one of the main ‘causes’ of recession 
because it cuts down on disposable incomes and therefore demand for goods and services like transport and the idea that it’s possible to have both a strong economy and high fuel prices is a contradiction.
The reality is that it’s a choice between the US of the 1950’s and1960’s or Obama’s,and even worse Britain’s ,economy of today because fuel prices at this level will always be too much for the economy to bear regardless of how many hauliers bite the dust and how many survive.The reduction in capacity won’t translate into customers suddenly being able to afford the higher rates just because the competitive element has reduced it will just add to the inflation in the economy already caused by the high fuel costs.
My idea would be to not just let that strategic stockpile trickle out I’d throw open the doors and re open those US oil fields at the same time with the condition that it’s only for the US market.Hopefully that would bring fuel prices there back down to 1950’s levels and it would be like the 1960’s again and at the same time ditch the idea of the free market global economy making US jobs for US workers and what America does Britain usually follows especially in this case as it would work 
.
Brentanna:
Carryfast:
Brentanna:
Nice when we have the oil, but we still get fleeced everytime the US does something stupid, or anytime there is a big storm in the southern gulf that decreased production because well they built all their refineries down there. Noone said they were smart.
If they were really stupid they’d be letting their government get away with charging them £6.00 per gallon based on around 70% tax .
But if I read it right newmercman said elsewhere previously that the price of fuel does’nt matter because it can just be passed on to the customer in the form of higher rates/fuel surcharges .
Totally different the location of the major US refineries in the hurricane zone has nothing to do with taxes. It has to do with stupidity
There are different levels of stupidity though and having refineries on the Gulf coast did’nt do any harm in winning WW2 by supplying 100+ octane for Spitfires whereas we definitely would have lost if we’d have charged ourselves £6 per gallon for the stuff when we got it here .
Brentanna:
There are different levels of stupidity though and having refineries on the Gulf coast did’nt do any harm in winning WW2 by supplying 100+ octane for Spitfires whereas we definitely would have lost if we’d have charged ourselves £6 per gallon for the stuff when we got it here .
The fuel for the British war effort came from the east coast of Canada, not the Gulf states.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Ohio
ww2talk.com/forum/news-artic … ain-5.html
Ok so how does the Med affect the fuel stocks in Britian during WW2 ? It doesnt, so how is the shipment of oil the the Med relevent ?
Not going to argue with you. Although the way the govenment thinks why not ship it from more distant refineries, gave the Uboats more time to try to sink them. 
Brentanna:
Not going to argue with you. Although the way the govenment thinks why not ship it from more distant refineries, gave the Uboats more time to try to sink them.
At that time it would’nt have made any difference because the product was shipped by sea from the Gulf coast to the North East of the US or Eastern Canada anyway because the pipelines to the North East from Texas were’nt finished until 1943 and unluckily for many tanker crews the Germans knew it.
But Hurricanes certainly don’t seem to have been a factor in stopping refining of crude into 100 octane petrol at any of the US refineries on the Gulf coast during ww2.
But the question remains why did the US and UK allow the OPEC issues of the 1970’s and world oil prices since to wreck our economies when we’re both self sufficient in oil .
Although that question is easier to answer in the British governments case because when it comes to stupidity they’ve got the yanks beat by adding a 70% taxation insult to a world price and global market injury .
ww2db.com/battle_spec.php?battle_id=276
hnn.us/articles/339.html
Wheel Nut:
Brentanna:
Not going to argue with you.
good thinking, good call
Dont know about that last time it only took him like 15 pages to finally realise he was well very wrong.
I really dont want to go into the national archives and dig up all the data for production and shipping of fuel, and fuel oil to Britian. Or the amounts shipped by rail across Canada to the terminal in Halifax.
Brentanna:
Wheel Nut:
Brentanna:
Not going to argue with you.
good thinking, good call
Dont know about that last time it only took him like 15 pages to finally realise he was well very wrong.
I really dont want to go into the national archives and dig up all the data for production and shipping of fuel, and fuel oil to Britian. Or the amounts shipped by rail across Canada to the terminal in Halifax.
Don’t ever remember admitting that I’ve ever been ‘very wrong’ about any of our previous discussions 
.But the facts related as to how it was that we had an ‘aircraft fuelling’ advantage during ww2 are well known here as is to where the credit for that mostly belongs.
But in addition to archive documentation related to the ships that made it through a lot of the the evidence is also at the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico and along the rest of the shipping route from the US Gulf Coast to the UK. 
