Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

A dangerous development

What's on your mind?
General interest discussions, not necessarily related to depletion.

A dangerous development

Unread postby Colorado-Valley » Mon 15 Aug 2005, 02:35:20

I've been reading about the truckers who are organizing blockades like the one in Florida last week to protest high fuel prices, which are threatening to put them out of business.

This is not good. If the truckers decide to close down the interstate highway system, that will quickly lead to a hoarding complex at the supermarkets. The Long Emergency could quickly become the short, very very ugly emergency much sooner than any of us anticipated.

The truckers hold the trump card here, and they know it. But what could the government do to avert disaster? If they give the truckers extra fuel, the farmers will be demanding the same thing, then the food processors, then the airlines, then the energy companies ...

I am starting to wonder if fuel hits $3, whether United States citizens will go into a hysterical panic that sets the whole house of cards a tumbling.
User avatar
Colorado-Valley
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 729
Joined: Mon 16 Aug 2004, 03:00:00

Re: A dangerous development

Unread postby turmoil » Mon 15 Aug 2005, 03:07:48

shhhhhh!!! [smilie=eusa_shhh.gif] [smilie=eusa_shhh.gif] :)
"If you are a real seeker after truth, it's necessary that at least once in your life you doubt all things as far as possible"-Rene Descartes

"When you have excluded the impossible, whatever remains however improbable must be the truth"-Sherlock Holmes
User avatar
turmoil
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1088
Joined: Fri 13 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Richmond, VA, Pale Blue Dot

Re: A dangerous development

Unread postby PenultimateManStanding » Mon 15 Aug 2005, 03:12:52

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Colorado-Valley', '
') The Long Emergency could quickly become the short, very very ugly emergency much sooner than any of us anticipated.

I am starting to wonder if fuel hits $3, whether United States citizens will go into a hysterical panic that sets the whole house of cards a tumbling.
Doesn't seem too likely to me that $3 gasoline could unravel everything. Hard times, sure. Stock Market plunging, inflation, unemployment soaring, all that's pretty likely, in fact; but its gotta be something more than that to tear everything apart real quick. Maybe the 'perfect storm' idea: $7 gas, bird flu pandemic, 35% unemployment, stock market melt down, housing prices drop through the floor wiping out trillions in assets, international oil no longer sold in dollars, US flees Iraq and insurgents topple ME governments and set up Sharia Law everywhere, hyper inflation so it costs $500 to buy a can of pepsi, all the airlines go bankrupt and the Feds can't bail them out, GM, Ford go belly-up, etc; maybe that could make it all fall apart. (and all the legacy software in the big Fortune 500 Corporations start feeling the delayed effects of bad patches for the 00-date-field rollover)
User avatar
PenultimateManStanding
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11363
Joined: Sun 28 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Neither Here Nor There

Re: A dangerous development

Unread postby Specop_007 » Mon 15 Aug 2005, 03:26:45

The truckers are pissed because they have to eat the extra fuel costs.
Theres 3 simple solutions.

1) Subsidize independent truckers
2) Pass the cost on to consumers
3) Tell the independents to pound sand and another company comes in and picks up the extra business.

All in all, this isnt much of a problem for us as a whole. Let them park and piss and moan wherever they want.
User avatar
Specop_007
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5586
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2004, 03:00:00

Re: A dangerous development

Unread postby Hawkcreek » Mon 15 Aug 2005, 03:34:42

--
Last edited by Hawkcreek on Sun 09 Sep 2007, 17:28:21, edited 1 time in total.
Hawkcreek
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 1468
Joined: Sun 15 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Washington State

Re: A dangerous development

Unread postby Colorado-Valley » Mon 15 Aug 2005, 04:11:05

Where are those damn Mexican truck drivers when you need them?

I seriously wonder how the government would subsidize the truckers. Send them energy-compensation checks? And if they are getting energy-compensation checks, then why don't "I" get an energy-compensation check?

Are we entering the era of truck blockades of the interstates and tractorcades surrounding the Washington Capitol building?

Are we going to call the National Guard back from Iraq to quell domestic unrest? Would the National Guard follow orders to tear-gas truckers and farmers from the heartland?

If I were Bush I'd be on the phone to Senator Kerry. "You remember that electrion last fall? I think we should reconsider ..."
User avatar
Colorado-Valley
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 729
Joined: Mon 16 Aug 2004, 03:00:00

Re: A dangerous development

Unread postby PenultimateManStanding » Mon 15 Aug 2005, 04:52:38

William F. Buckley thinks we may have to go the way of gas rationing. The most important thing President Bush can do as things deteriorate is to tell the public why this is happening. He needs to confirm what Congressman Bartlett said in Congress and nip the false ideas in the bud. People are assuming that the oil companies are conspiring to 'gouge' us. People need to understand at the very least that the global supplies aren't sufficient for the global markets. If wrong-headed ideas are allowed to grow then we will have more sheer chaos. If everyone knows the situation then maybe we can pull together. (could this be the reason for Chevron's ad campaign?)
User avatar
PenultimateManStanding
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11363
Joined: Sun 28 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Neither Here Nor There

Re: A dangerous development

Unread postby gg3 » Mon 15 Aug 2005, 05:10:56

The truckers are being held to contract terms that were written at a time when anyone who predicted $65/barrel oil would have been labeled a doomer. These contracts force them to operate at a loss.

If you let these truckers go under, you get a new crop of truckers whose contracts allow for passing along fuel price increases.

Net result: truckers with contracts that allow passing along fuel price increases.

Far more enlightened, and less likely to lead to unrest, to allow the present circumstances to be considered covered by the "force majeure" clause ("acts of God, nature, or government") and let the present crop of truckers raise their rates.
User avatar
gg3
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 3271
Joined: Mon 24 May 2004, 03:00:00
Location: California, USA

Re: A dangerous development

Unread postby Specop_007 » Mon 15 Aug 2005, 05:18:02

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PenultimateManStanding', 'W')illiam F. Buckley thinks we may have to go the way of gas rationing. The most important thing President Bush can do as things deteriorate is to tell the public why this is happening. He needs to confirm what Congressman Bartlett said in Congress and nip the false ideas in the bud. People are assuming that the oil companies are conspiring to 'gouge' us. People need to understand at the very least that the global supplies aren't sufficient for the global markets. If wrong-headed ideas are allowed to grow then we will have more sheer chaos. If everyone knows the situation then maybe we can pull together. (could this be the reason for Chevron's ad campaign?)


Well, based on energy companies earnings it isnt too far os a stretch to think we're getting gouged. And quiter badly.

Your gonna have a hard time convincing someone we're facing a shortage when oil companies are making money hand over fist, posting record earnings that exceed ANY companies earnings in the history of business.

Far easier to just think we're getting price gouged rather then realize we're facing a far bigger issue.
User avatar
Specop_007
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5586
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2004, 03:00:00

Re: A dangerous development

Unread postby PenultimateManStanding » Mon 15 Aug 2005, 05:24:25

The oil companies are making a lot of money. But aren't the prices determined by the market? And the market is global. Short of some kind of New World Order Global Government taking over, the market is going to determine the price of oil, not the producers of the oil. That's what the president needs to make clear to people so they know what is going on.
User avatar
PenultimateManStanding
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11363
Joined: Sun 28 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Neither Here Nor There

Re: A dangerous development

Unread postby PenultimateManStanding » Mon 15 Aug 2005, 05:28:43

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('gg3', 'T')he truckers are being held to contract terms that were written at a time when anyone who predicted $65/barrel oil would have been labeled a doomer. These contracts force them to operate at a loss.

If you let these truckers go under, you get a new crop of truckers whose contracts allow for passing along fuel price increases.

Net result: truckers with contracts that allow passing along fuel price increases.

Far more enlightened, and less likely to lead to unrest, to allow the present circumstances to be considered covered by the "force majeure" clause ("acts of God, nature, or government") and let the present crop of truckers raise their rates.
Good point. Now is the time for rational decision making.
User avatar
PenultimateManStanding
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11363
Joined: Sun 28 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Neither Here Nor There

Re: A dangerous development

Unread postby Specop_007 » Mon 15 Aug 2005, 05:31:42

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PenultimateManStanding', 'T')he oil companies are making a lot of money. But aren't the prices determined by the market? And the market is global. Short of some kind of New World Order Global Government taking over, the market is going to determine the price of oil, not the producers of the oil. That's what the president needs to make clear to people so they know what is going on.


Obviously most here will understand this. I was speaking more in regards to those other people.
User avatar
Specop_007
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5586
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2004, 03:00:00

Re: A dangerous development

Unread postby Specop_007 » Mon 15 Aug 2005, 05:34:04

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('gg3', 'T')he truckers are being held to contract terms that were written at a time when anyone who predicted $65/barrel oil would have been labeled a doomer. These contracts force them to operate at a loss.

If you let these truckers go under, you get a new crop of truckers whose contracts allow for passing along fuel price increases.

Net result: truckers with contracts that allow passing along fuel price increases.

Far more enlightened, and less likely to lead to unrest, to allow the present circumstances to be considered covered by the "force majeure" clause ("acts of God, nature, or government") and let the present crop of truckers raise their rates.


This would only be dependent on if the truckers had signed long term contracts.
I know most contracts in my area are usually short term, which means once you reach your destination the contracts is fulfilled and you can head back and negotiate new contracts.

Aside from that, I cant see ANy even half witted trucker not being smart enough to write contracts that allow for rate fluxuation based on fuel costs. Not keeping an "out" for you in your contract is flat out stupid.

But apparently that must be the case, as the truckers are complaining.
User avatar
Specop_007
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5586
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Re: A dangerous development

Unread postby seldom_seen » Mon 15 Aug 2005, 05:35:45

If the truckers are allowed to pass on fuel price increases, that means the price of stuff goes up at Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart is already operating on razor thin margins. Therefore Wal-Mart goes under.

This could get interesting.
seldom_seen
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2229
Joined: Tue 12 Apr 2005, 03:00:00

Re: A dangerous development

Unread postby Specop_007 » Mon 15 Aug 2005, 05:45:03

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('seldom_seen', 'I')f the truckers are allowed to pass on fuel price increases, that means the price of stuff goes up at Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart is already operating on razor thin margins. Therefore Wal-Mart goes under.

This could get interesting.


Razor thin?? Really.....

Revenue - Quarterly (In MILLIONS)
2004, 1st - 56,718
2004, 2nd - 62,637

2005, 1st - 64,763
2005, 2nd - 69,722

2006, 1st - 70,908

Total Net income (In MILLIONS)
2001 - 6,295
2002 - 6,671
2003 - 8,039
2004 - 9,054
2005 - 10,267
User avatar
Specop_007
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5586
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Re: A dangerous development

Unread postby shakespear1 » Mon 15 Aug 2005, 05:48:18

Why shouldn't truckers pass the cost on? DO IT.

Hell, trucking is a tough job and they deserve every penny they earn. Driving amongst Polish regular drivers ( operating word is IDIOTS ) and the roads here ( narrow and sh*t ), I feel sympathy for any trucker doing work in this part of the world. No one is doing them a favor for being truckers. :evil:
Men argue, nature acts !
Voltaire

"...In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation."

Alan Greenspan
shakespear1
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1532
Joined: Fri 13 May 2005, 03:00:00

Re: A dangerous development

Unread postby PenultimateManStanding » Mon 15 Aug 2005, 05:56:49

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PenultimateManStanding', 'T')he oil companies are making a lot of money. But aren't the prices determined by the market? And the market is global. Short of some kind of New World Order Global Government taking over, the market is going to determine the price of oil, not the producers of the oil. That's what the president needs to make clear to people so they know what is going on.


Obviously most here will understand this. I was speaking more in regards to those other people.
Understood, and that's why I think the President needs to let all those other folks know what's going on. He doesn't even need to mention the idea of diminishing supplies (which apparently hasn't actually happened yet anyway). One bad news thing at a time.
User avatar
PenultimateManStanding
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11363
Joined: Sun 28 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Neither Here Nor There
Top

Re: A dangerous development

Unread postby The_Virginian » Mon 15 Aug 2005, 06:09:19

economic disruptions = social unrest


I have a soft spot in heart for truckers, I sure hope they are incorperated, that way when they do go bankrupt, they can wipe out the debts and start afresh with contracts allowing for fuel increase clauses...

At least the bankrupcy laws were only passed on the peons (non-strawman/ non-embodied fininacial entities) and not upon the Credit (or any) corporations themselves!
[urlhttp://www.youtube.com/watchv=Ai4te4daLZs&feature=related[/url] "My soul longs for the candle and the spices. If only you would pour me a cup of wine for Havdalah...My heart yearning, I shall lift up my eyes to g-d, who provides for my needs day and night."
User avatar
The_Virginian
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1684
Joined: Sat 19 Jun 2004, 03:00:00

Re: A dangerous development

Unread postby seldom_seen » Mon 15 Aug 2005, 06:12:48

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', '
')Razor thin?? Really.....

Revenue - Quarterly (In MILLIONS)
2004, 1st - 56,718
2004, 2nd - 62,637

2005, 1st - 64,763
2005, 2nd - 69,722

2006, 1st - 70,908

Total Net income (In MILLIONS)
2001 - 6,295
2002 - 6,671
2003 - 8,039
2004 - 9,054
2005 - 10,267

hah, where did you come up with this data? You have the quarterly revenue for 1st quarter 2006, yet it's still 2005.

Bottom line is that rising oil prices will sink Wal-Mart. It's not a matter of if, but when. Allow me to use a picture to help illustrate my point.

The guy on the left is Wal-Mart, the guy on the right is high oil prices:

Image
seldom_seen
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2229
Joined: Tue 12 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: A dangerous development

Unread postby Specop_007 » Mon 15 Aug 2005, 06:22:43

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('seldom_seen', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', '
')Razor thin?? Really.....

Revenue - Quarterly (In MILLIONS)
2004, 1st - 56,718
2004, 2nd - 62,637

2005, 1st - 64,763
2005, 2nd - 69,722

2006, 1st - 70,908

Total Net income (In MILLIONS)
2001 - 6,295
2002 - 6,671
2003 - 8,039
2004 - 9,054
2005 - 10,267

hah, where did you come up with this data? You have the quarterly revenue for 1st quarter 2006, yet it's still 2005.

Bottom line is that rising oil prices will sink Wal-Mart. It's not a matter of if, but when. Allow me to use a picture to help illustrate my point.

The guy on the left is Wal-Mart, the guy on the right is high oil prices:

Image


Its called projections, and will make or break a companies stock price.
Missing your projections by even a small margin can negatively affect your stock price.
Go to MSN then look up Wal-Mart for the complete financial data.
User avatar
Specop_007
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5586
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Next

Return to Open Topic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron