Lefty

^^^me ^^^you I wasn't calling you a socialist... Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

Not in San Francisco, I'd assume. But in more rational locales there are circumstances which allow for the use of deadly force (although the P.C. intent is "to stop" not "to kill"). Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

Think of it as insurance. Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

Seems like a pretty bad business practice to simply horde money instead of using it to expand and to make more money. It seems like any company which really engaged in that practice wouldn't have made it far enough to even be of consequence in the whole price gouging debate. Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

Price controls and the distribution of goods (in this case gas) are a facet of government planning of the economy, hence socialism. I wasn't calling you a socialist or anything, but price controls enforced by the government don't really lend themselves to free-market type thinking. Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

Nor are price controls. The difference is that the gas companies cannot coerce consumers (alliteration points for me) into buying their gas, but the government can coerce companies into artificially lowering the prices they charge. I'd say the former is more "free market" than the latter, and I'd rather have an oligopoly than socialism. Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

Morally, yes I do have a problem with it. Economically, no. The concept of corporate responsibility has been inflated to the point where we expect and legally demand that corporations not act like the profit-motivated entities they are and give us their property...if it's an "emergency" and we "need" it. However, consumers do have options besides running to the government to force a company to give them what they want, ie buying gas from someone who knows how to help and who demonstrates their commitment to a community in trouble, and not buying gas from those who exploit. Free market, and all that. Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

Practical in the sense that there is not such a quick shortage of gas. Even here in College Station, TX, which barely received any rain during the hurricanes, people gobbled up the gas before the prices had time to adjust at all. I didn't buy any at first because I figured everyone was just panicking and I didn't want to add to it, but after a day or two I didn't buy any gas because there was none to be found. Had there truly been an emergency here, I would have taken a $4/gal tank of gas (which fewer people would have been willing to pay for than if the price were at an artificially lower amount) over none at all any day. I don't feel that I have any right to "cheap" gas. If a company wants to engage in "profiteering off the suffering of others", they can be dealt with after the emergency by consumers who remember that company's behavior during the crisis and who punish them by going elsewhere for their fuel. It is a moot point I'm making, since it's illegal anyway. Get enough people educated in economics by the government and you can villify anything you want. Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

I agree that it is morally not very nice, but economically it makes sense. In an emergency, the demand for a product (gas) goes up. If prices are kept artificially low because business are afraid of "price gouging", then the supply-demand curve gets all thrown off and there is a shortage of gas because people are buying more gas than they otherwise would had the prices been allowed to adjust. So in the end, people who need gas have to do without instead of just having to pay more. Like I said, it may not be very nice, but it seems practical. -Edited for clarification- Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

Just for clarification, is there any specific profit margin that denotes "price gouging" or is it more of a rough guess? ----------------------------- Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

On a lighter note from Iraq... Amarillo ------------------------------ Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

Awesome! About time someone reaffirmed our God-given right to cheap gas. "Windfall profits tax"...hahaha, that'll show 'em. Politics *sigh*. ----------------------------------- Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

Maybe Roosevelt didn't feel like listening to people blame him for starting a war against an enemy that was not a threat because it did not overtly attack us first. Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

Ok, then, let's just ask some different questions. For instance: "Bush lied about weapons of mass destruction in the State of the Union Address" True or False?, "The US acted unilaterally in going to war with Iraq" True or False?, etc. Let's see whose viewers have misconceptions about those questions... - Lefty Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

I agree, but they weren't the topics for discussion on the same day. As for people hearing what they want to hear in the news, you're probably right. I'm just glad more and more people would rather hear it from a place like FOX or talk radio rather than CNN or the New York Times. - Lefty Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

That's not really the large-picture view I was expecting, considering all the FOX headlines were taken from the same day. Anyway, it's not the headlines that bother me so much as what goes on between the headlines. Like the other day while I was enjoying some fine cuisine at CiCi's, I saw some anchor interviewing a military consultant on CNN. She asked him about things that were going wrong, and he told her. Then she asked about things that were going well. At this point, the consultant seemed to cheer up and started talking about the positive things. Not two sentences came out of his mouth before the anchor broke in squawking about negative stuff. If I remember correctly, the dialogue went something like this: Consultant : "And we were also able to open up a new elementary school in Baghdad and-" Anchor: "But what about terrorists and bombings and Saddam not being found and blah, blah, blah, blah." It was a very thinly veiled attempt to start whining about Iraq, and nothing more. Would you see that on FOX? No. I believe that is more of what the article is talking about, anyway. - Lefty Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

I bet this has already been posted, but I've been playing with this program for about an hour now and it's just too cool. http://www.keyhole.com/ - Lefty Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

I think you forgot the first part of your statement while you were writing the second part. The key word used was "only". Liberal media only report the bad news. Fox reports the good as well as the bad. - Lefty Edited to change sig to "Lefty" instead of Paul, which doesn't exist for me in skydiving, as I've been reminded many times. Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

I know you all probably don't have the time to read this whole thing, but I found it interesting enough to read it all. I especially liked that part about South Park. http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110004245 - Lefty Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

Glad he's my Senator...not that I'm a Republican or anything. http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110004250 - Lefty Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

What part of Atlanta are you moving to? I may be able to give you more info if I know the area, having lived in Gwinnett Country for about 15 years. - Lefty Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

For some reason, that makes me think of a Talking Heads song. - Lefty Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

Too bad it was cloudy today...I saw them doing some even kick-assinger stuff yesterday during my MilSci lab while the skies were clear. - Lefty Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

Found this on Neal Boortz's web page today. Interesting read. http://www.townhall.com/columnists/calthomas/ct20031030.shtml I expect the liberals will just ignore this thread though. - Lefty Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin

>I know, companies try to do that all the time. Doesn't make it right. Oh ok, so by this rationale almost anyone who has ever had a job in the private sector is disqualified from serving in public office because they might be partial to their former employer. Guess that leaves career politicians like Ted Kennedy in charge *shudder*. It is the right of the company and the employee to determine pay, and Cheney is getting his. Damn, that free market stuff sucks, doesn't it? - Lefty Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin