Ridiculous Gas prices? I'll thank Bush.

Americans shouldn't complain too much about petrol [gas] prices.....all they need to do is look at the pricing around the rest of the world...

I think Australia at $1.00 per Litre [not gallon, US or otherwise], with a continent of the same size and therefore same mileage to cover has it a tad worse off......[though we'd rather sell our first-born for medical research....better value]...

Yeah. And Bush is at fault for everything in Iraq, He personally needs to be more in touch with the people (yeah like Kerry is), and he should have got the UN to go in to Iraq (Oh that's right he did try, but they were too busy being bribed). Oh if Gore could only be in office instead (scary thought), or even Kerry (very scary thought). (Got to stop-)

It is easy to blame one person for all of our woes, but we as a people have to take responsiblity at times also. The problems with that gasoline had been forcasted years ago, and we choose to ignore them, or more apporopriatly the green (tree huggers) people did. We have not allowed many refineries to be built, but yet we keep consuming more gas every day. Similiar to the problem California had with it's power plants, explosive growth but no new powerplants build in DECADES. It catchs up to youMy point is, this is not politics, does not matter who is in office this would be happening, maybe not as bad, maybe worse, but it would still be happening none the less.

As Jafo said, we should not complain, there are many countries that would love to pay only $2.00 per gallon.

Problem is we need less politicians that are more concerned about getting reelected so they are unwilling to make critical choices that some may not agree with. You cannot please everyone even part of the time.

Anyway, love this forum

Fobar. Why does it post twice like that.

87 cents per litre here in Sundre, Alberta and what gets me is we pull it out of the ground and refine it. We should be way cheaper but I thank our federal and provicial governments for all the taxes on it.......with no relief in sight >

in london, last i heard petrol was an equivalent 7$ to a gallon. we just hit 2$, while yes, it sucks, it could be worse - and will be worse. i'll be riding my bike the 5 miles to work this summer, to save myself some money and get in shape.

oil prices are not bush's fault directly. its up for grabs whether the world was any more stable before iraq, though oil was constant. the chinese are invoking an economic revolution centered around steel. the U.S. economy is also picking up, both are pinching a demand for oil. a jitter stock market because of global terrorism also contributes to prices. while bush doesn't help, its not his fault. you know me.. i'd love to smack him with a plank.. but i think he's making a good move in not releasing oil from the national stockpile, as the democrats are demanding. he said he wasn't going to use something so important just to curb prices and whether that's because his texas homeboys are all making money off of it or not, it's wise.. just gotta conserve more. skip a couple trips to the beach.

Hard to find anything less than 2.15(US)/Gallon here...Its more like 2.25+ at most stations...

$1.96-$1.99 here, which is as Jafo pointed out, pretty cheap considering what the rest of the world pays. Also if you look at other things, price of a car, a house, a trip to the grocery store and compare how much they've gone up in the last 10-15 years against gas prices, again it's still cheap. Though going from $20-$30 a month in my old Aspire to $25-$30 a week in my Ford F-150 hurts a little.

2.29 here. I think I'll have to use the bus near the end of month now.

At a guess...I'd say the Aussie equivalent would be about US $3.50 a gallon....and as a reminder of our 'size' we have a single ranch in Oz larger than your biggest State [Texas]....

£80.9 per litre here in the UK, and set to rise another 4-5p per litre.

At current exchange rates that's about $6.60 per gallon...

I just got a quarter of a tank off of 15 bucks. Needless to say I had to quit my job when I drive a 79 Wagon and it eats gas and i travel 44 miles a day and only work twice a week. Counter productive. lol

Jafo is right.

I can remember in 1988 it use to cost me about 85 USD (after Her Majesty conversion) to fill up my 20 gallon tank in Eriswell, England.

But hey! I got a nice collection of free pint tankards, I forget if it was from BP or Esso.

And I also agree with DesignCaddy.

He makes some good points. You can''t just point the finger at Bush entirely.


I still think the best solution (for all western countries) is to start demanding that we get off the oil standard and into hybrid

fuels, fuel cells (hydrogen), renewable energies, wind mills, fusion power (if they ever decide the test reactor will be built in Japan

or France). This is what we need to throw our money at.


And one final thought,

Politically what do you think about a region that relies 100 percent on oil exports going to do, if 65 percent or 45 percent or even 30

percent of their customers no longer need their oil?

[Message Edited]

fusion power (if they ever decide the test reactor will be built in Japan

Correct me if i'm wrong but that's where we put the atom back together right? And fission is where we split it right? i get them confused all the time.

and as a reminder of our 'size' we have a single ranch in Oz larger than your biggest State [Texas].

That'd be 'Alaska', Jafo.

Yes kona, thats where they ''put the atom back together''...


Well, kinda like that, But Im too tired to give a lengthy explanation.

An A-bomb (Hiroshima, Nagasaki) is Fission (along with current Nuclear Powerplants), A H-bomb (which obiterated some atoll in the south pacific in the ''50s...correct me if Im wrong) is Fusion. Theres a big difference in the amount of power that comes off each.

[Message Edited]

Yep Kona0197 your right, fusion is the reaction in which two atoms of hydrogen combine together, or fuse, to form an atom of helium, giving off tremendous amounts of energy.

Read more at: http://www.iter.org/

Oh, EH....same difference either way... [Gosh aren't the Texans miffed they aren't the biggest?]...

Size doesnt matter.


...You sure youve got a ranch down there thats bigger than Alaska?

/me digs up some quick facts... 570,374 sq miles (no idea what that is in sq km)...or 365,039,104 sq acres ...2.3x the size of Texas...

[Message Edited]

#20 by Admin Jafo - 5/19/2004 3:52:23 AM Oh, EH....same difference either way... [Gosh aren't the Texans miffed they aren't the biggest?]...

Alaska has 1,447,267.5 sq. km. in land area, which is more than twice the size of Texas, at a mere 678,358.1 sq. km., and about 19% of Australia's 7,692,024 sq. km. That would be quite a ranch. Who owns it?

Well...it's definitely bigger than Texas....but I'll have to chase up a link to clarify its total area....btw....we call 'em 'Stations' out here, not 'ranches'...

#12 by Admin Jafo - 5/19/2004 2:50:57 AM At a guess...I'd say the Aussie equivalent would be about US $3.50 a gallon....and as a reminder of our 'size' we have a single ranch in Oz larger than your biggest State [Texas]....

#23 by Admin Jafo - 5/19/2004 5:09:33 AM Well...it's definitely bigger than Texas....but I'll have to chase up a link to clarify its total area....btw....we call 'em 'Stations' out here, not 'ranches'...

Well, make up your mind...

I was using US-friendly vocabulary,Shameless, as I'm sure many would be lost at what exactly a 'station' was...

http://www.wrightsair.com.au/anna.htm

Ah...this must be it...34,000 square Kms...or about 11 times larger than the biggest ranch in the US....though I'm sure there's a relative comment somewhere about Texas....

Still....pretty high density living with a human population of one person per 2000 square Kms....talk about room to move....

Since when have you used US-friendly terms for anything?