Quote:
Atrocities said:
Sure a barrel of oil now costs $65.00, and is expected to reach $80.00 by the end of the month, but does that mean we need to see this cost of $80.00 a barrel passed onto us right now?
|
Well who should pay the extra cost of the black stuff? Most oil firms regard petrol as that annoying stuff that comes with the usefull stuff in oil. You look at say BP or Exxon and
all their money comes from stuff that isn't petrol, the margins are paper thin.
Shell was seriously considering selling their entire petrol station operation only a year or so ago, the only reason they didn't was they got distracted by losing 25% of their oil reserves
So they aren't going to make a lose on petrol, so the consumer pays it. As for releasing the strategic reserve, don't be an idiot. I hate to say it AT, but its true. Countries keep reserves of petrol for alot of good reasons, none of which are to keep people from paying a bit more for petrol. If US manufactures produced cars that did miles per gallon, not gallons per mile that would solve alot of the problem.
So to get to the final point, perhaps putting fuel duty up might encourage US car makers to use existing technology in their cars to improve fuel efficency. It can't be a bad thing can it?