WWTBAM Bored

A home for the weary.
It is currently Sat Jan 19, 2019 4:27 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 84 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:34 am 
Offline
Bored Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Posts: 17729
Location: By the phone
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
Spock wrote:

Just curious, how much do you drive in a year? I am guessing gas is not a major part of your budget. Obviously, you have no concern for poor and middle class people, especially in rural areas, who drive a lot, and for whom gas is a major expense.

For example, those service workers who can't afford to live in the Silicon Valley and who might have to drive an hour or more just to get to work.
I drive about 12,000 miles a year. But I breathe every day.

You've never lived here, right? When I first got here, we were well on our way to air of the quality that Mexico City and Beijing currently "enjoy." Pasadena is about five miles south of the San Gabriel Mountains and when the air was bad I literally couldn't see them. When you can see them, they loom over the city quite impressively. --Bob


Does this outrage you, bob-tel?

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/business/energy-green/sd-fi-california-gasoline-20180402-story.html
If there's a possibility that we are suffering from market manipulation by the oil companies, I would find that outrageous. We've been there, done that, with our electricity markets. But the story (from nine months ago) simply says we don't know why California is paying about a dime a gallon more than we should be paying -- market manipulation is only one of the theories. --Bob

_________________
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:35 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 8:01 pm
Posts: 2622
Bob78164 wrote:
Spock wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
Gas is more expensive in California because we use a different formula than the rest of the country uses, not because our gas taxes are higher. Refineries outside California don't prepare gasoline that complies with our requirements so supplies are limited.

I moved to California a little more than 40 years ago. Back then, during the summer, there were plenty of days when my eyes were burning simply from exposure to all of the crap that used to be in our air. That doesn't happen any more. I'll cheerfully pay the extra buck and a half a gallon to avoid the air pollution of Shanghai and Mexico City. Particularly since my son and his mother both have asthma. --Bob


Just curious, how much do you drive in a year? I am guessing gas is not a major part of your budget. Obviously, you have no concern for poor and middle class people, especially in rural areas, who drive a lot, and for whom gas is a major expense.

For example, those service workers who can't afford to live in the Silicon Valley and who might have to drive an hour or more just to get to work.
I drive about 12,000 miles a year. But I breathe every day.

You've never lived here, right? When I first got here, we were well on our way to air of the quality that Mexico City and Beijing currently "enjoy." Pasadena is about five miles south of the San Gabriel Mountains and when the air was bad I literally couldn't see them. When you can see them, they loom over the city quite impressively. --Bob


Don't worry, you will get back to being Mexico City again. How are the emission checks on the vehicles of illegal immigrants going?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:40 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 8:01 pm
Posts: 2622
silverscreenselect wrote:
Spock wrote:
We have established that they can't own 3 yachts. Obviously, he has to define "Yacht" and "Yacht Equivalents."


Jerry Jones Buys 357-Foot Superyacht


Cool, a lot of people made good money building that boat.

Oh, wait a second, that was not your point.

You fall more on the "Stand him against the wall, shoot him and take his shit" side of the continuum.

So never mind.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 11:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
Posts: 4469
Location: Atlanta, GA
Bob78164 wrote:
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
I drive about 12,000 miles a year. But I breathe every day.

You've never lived here, right? When I first got here, we were well on our way to air of the quality that Mexico City and Beijing currently "enjoy." Pasadena is about five miles south of the San Gabriel Mountains and when the air was bad I literally couldn't see them. When you can see them, they loom over the city quite impressively. --Bob


Does this outrage you, bob-tel?

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/business/energy-green/sd-fi-california-gasoline-20180402-story.html
If there's a possibility that we are suffering from market manipulation by the oil companies, I would find that outrageous. We've been there, done that, with our electricity markets. But the story (from nine months ago) simply says we don't know why California is paying about a dime a gallon more than we should be paying -- market manipulation is only one of the theories. --Bob


Not a problem for you if it's you noble, saintly, incorruptible one party system that's shafting you. I would venture to guess that in a free market system, with such a big market, competition would drive the price down even with your 'different blends'. But let's blame it on the oil companies and only be outraged at them with 'no evidence' (the focus group tested phrase of the day).
You seem to enjoy being outraged. Do a little research on creeping socialism and it will expand your outrage universe, bob-tel.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 12:28 pm 
Offline
Bored Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Posts: 17729
Location: By the phone
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
If there's a possibility that we are suffering from market manipulation by the oil companies, I would find that outrageous. We've been there, done that, with our electricity markets. But the story (from nine months ago) simply says we don't know why California is paying about a dime a gallon more than we should be paying -- market manipulation is only one of the theories. --Bob


Not a problem for you if it's you noble, saintly, incorruptible one party system that's shafting you. I would venture to guess that in a free market system, with such a big market, competition would drive the price down even with your 'different blends'. But let's blame it on the oil companies and only be outraged at them with 'no evidence' (the focus group tested phrase of the day).
You seem to enjoy being outraged. Do a little research on creeping socialism and it will expand your outrage universe, bob-tel.
How did you get from a post where I explicitly said that we don't know why prices are higher than they should be to the conclusion that I'm blaming it on the oil companies? One might think you're looking for excuses to label me as unreasonable when I'm actually and explicitly saying that I'm reserving judgment because I don't know what's going on. --Bob

_________________
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 12:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
Posts: 4469
Location: Atlanta, GA
Bob78164 wrote:
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
If there's a possibility that we are suffering from market manipulation by the oil companies, I would find that outrageous. We've been there, done that, with our electricity markets. But the story (from nine months ago) simply says we don't know why California is paying about a dime a gallon more than we should be paying -- market manipulation is only one of the theories. --Bob


Not a problem for you if it's you noble, saintly, incorruptible one party system that's shafting you. I would venture to guess that in a free market system, with such a big market, competition would drive the price down even with your 'different blends'. But let's blame it on the oil companies and only be outraged at them with 'no evidence' (the focus group tested phrase of the day).
You seem to enjoy being outraged. Do a little research on creeping socialism and it will expand your outrage universe, bob-tel.
How did you get from a post where I explicitly said that we don't know why prices are higher than they should be to the conclusion that I'm blaming it on the oil companies? One might think you're looking for excuses to label me as unreasonable when I'm actually and explicitly saying that I'm reserving judgment because I don't know what's going on. --Bob


Quote:
if we are suffering from market manipulation by the oil companies, I would find that outrageous

The only possibility you would be outraged at. By implication, if it was over-regulation, public official corruption or malfeasance or just the general wastefulness of the state government, that would be ok with you.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 12:56 pm 
Offline
Queen of Wack

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Posts: 9621
Location: Location.Location.Location
Bob78164 wrote:
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
If there's a possibility that we are suffering from market manipulation by the oil companies, I would find that outrageous. We've been there, done that, with our electricity markets. But the story (from nine months ago) simply says we don't know why California is paying about a dime a gallon more than we should be paying -- market manipulation is only one of the theories. --Bob


Not a problem for you if it's you noble, saintly, incorruptible one party system that's shafting you. I would venture to guess that in a free market system, with such a big market, competition would drive the price down even with your 'different blends'. But let's blame it on the oil companies and only be outraged at them with 'no evidence' (the focus group tested phrase of the day).
You seem to enjoy being outraged. Do a little research on creeping socialism and it will expand your outrage universe, bob-tel.
How did you get from a post where I explicitly said that we don't know why prices are higher than they should be to the conclusion that I'm blaming it on the oil companies? One might think you're looking for excuses to label me as unreasonable when I'm actually and explicitly saying that I'm reserving judgment because I don't know what's going on. --Bob


I'm confused. In a previous post you, Bob, said

Gas is more expensive in California because we use a different formula than the rest of the country uses, not because our gas taxes are higher. Refineries outside California don't prepare gasoline that complies with our requirements so supplies are limited.

So now you are unclear based on someone else's link or what?

_________________
Oh please.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 12:57 pm 
Offline
Bored Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Posts: 17729
Location: By the phone
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
flockofseagulls104 wrote:

Not a problem for you if it's you noble, saintly, incorruptible one party system that's shafting you. I would venture to guess that in a free market system, with such a big market, competition would drive the price down even with your 'different blends'. But let's blame it on the oil companies and only be outraged at them with 'no evidence' (the focus group tested phrase of the day).
You seem to enjoy being outraged. Do a little research on creeping socialism and it will expand your outrage universe, bob-tel.
How did you get from a post where I explicitly said that we don't know why prices are higher than they should be to the conclusion that I'm blaming it on the oil companies? One might think you're looking for excuses to label me as unreasonable when I'm actually and explicitly saying that I'm reserving judgment because I don't know what's going on. --Bob


Quote:
if we are suffering from market manipulation by the oil companies, I would find that outrageous

The only possibility you would be outraged at. By implication, if it was over-regulation, public official corruption or malfeasance or just the general wastefulness of the state government, that would be ok with you.
Wrong. There's no evidence that gasoline manufacture in California is over-regulated (I don't consider regulation that's necessary to make sure we can continue to breathe our air safely "over"-regulation) and I don't see any mechanism by which any of your other boogeymen could possibly affect prices at the pump.

On the other hand, we have relatively recent experience with actual illegal market manipulation in the electricity markets that led to brownouts and other highly visible consequences. Those consequences were initially blamed on the usual conservative boogeymen and if memory serves they contributed to the case against Gov. Davis when he was recalled. It took years of investigation before the truth emerged. --Bob

_________________
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 3:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
Posts: 4469
Location: Atlanta, GA
Bob78164 wrote:
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
How did you get from a post where I explicitly said that we don't know why prices are higher than they should be to the conclusion that I'm blaming it on the oil companies? One might think you're looking for excuses to label me as unreasonable when I'm actually and explicitly saying that I'm reserving judgment because I don't know what's going on. --Bob


Quote:
if we are suffering from market manipulation by the oil companies, I would find that outrageous

The only possibility you would be outraged at. By implication, if it was over-regulation, public official corruption or malfeasance or just the general wastefulness of the state government, that would be ok with you.
Wrong. There's no evidence that gasoline manufacture in California is over-regulated (I don't consider regulation that's necessary to make sure we can continue to breathe our air safely "over"-regulation) and I don't see any mechanism by which any of your other boogeymen could possibly affect prices at the pump.

On the other hand, we have relatively recent experience with actual illegal market manipulation in the electricity markets that led to brownouts and other highly visible consequences. Those consequences were initially blamed on the usual conservative boogeymen and if memory serves they contributed to the case against Gov. Davis when he was recalled. It took years of investigation before the truth emerged. --Bob


There you go with the 'no evidence' mantra again. The main 'evidence' is that you pay almost twice as much for a gallon of gas, and they want to put even more tax on it. Show me some evidence that it is correctly or under-regulated, bob-tel. Just one reputable article that says anything in your state is under-regulated except illegal immigration. Once it gets into the government's hands, there is no motivation for anyone to investigate whether it can be done more inexpensively to achieve the same results. They want their committees and departments to stay just the way they are and grow them if possible. Some pigs are more equal than others.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 4:23 pm 
Offline
Bored Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Posts: 17729
Location: By the phone
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
flockofseagulls104 wrote:


The only possibility you would be outraged at. By implication, if it was over-regulation, public official corruption or malfeasance or just the general wastefulness of the state government, that would be ok with you.
Wrong. There's no evidence that gasoline manufacture in California is over-regulated (I don't consider regulation that's necessary to make sure we can continue to breathe our air safely "over"-regulation) and I don't see any mechanism by which any of your other boogeymen could possibly affect prices at the pump.

On the other hand, we have relatively recent experience with actual illegal market manipulation in the electricity markets that led to brownouts and other highly visible consequences. Those consequences were initially blamed on the usual conservative boogeymen and if memory serves they contributed to the case against Gov. Davis when he was recalled. It took years of investigation before the truth emerged. --Bob


There you go with the 'no evidence' mantra again. The main 'evidence' is that you pay almost twice as much for a gallon of gas, and they want to put even more tax on it. Show me some evidence that it is correctly or under-regulated, bob-tel. Just one reputable article that says anything in your state is under-regulated except illegal immigration. Once it gets into the government's hands, there is no motivation for anyone to investigate whether it can be done more inexpensively to achieve the same results. They want their committees and departments to stay just the way they are and grow them if possible. Some pigs are more equal than others.
Evidence that it is correctly regulated is that I no longer suffer from burning eyes on hot summer days, the way I did when I first moved to California. If you think there's an issue with particular regulations, it's your job to identify them and explain why those regulations are a bad idea.

And the people of California confirmed the Legislature's decision to increase our gas tax in November. We're tired of breaking our axles on roads with potholes. The money is already being put to use on a variety of public highways -- I can see evidence of the work most weeks as I drive through the construction zones. Most importantly, it's a done deal, confirmed by the people. --Bob

Gas prices in my neighborhood are currently around $3.25 per gallon. (I saw gas in the Central Valley on Sunday under $3.00 per gallon, and that was along the freeway. It's probably even cheaper away from the freeways.) You know somewhere that it's available for $1.60 per gallon? $1.50 per gallon? --Bob

_________________
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 4:26 pm 
Offline
Queen of Wack

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Posts: 9621
Location: Location.Location.Location
Beebs52 wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
flockofseagulls104 wrote:

Not a problem for you if it's you noble, saintly, incorruptible one party system that's shafting you. I would venture to guess that in a free market system, with such a big market, competition would drive the price down even with your 'different blends'. But let's blame it on the oil companies and only be outraged at them with 'no evidence' (the focus group tested phrase of the day).
You seem to enjoy being outraged. Do a little research on creeping socialism and it will expand your outrage universe, bob-tel.
How did you get from a post where I explicitly said that we don't know why prices are higher than they should be to the conclusion that I'm blaming it on the oil companies? One might think you're looking for excuses to label me as unreasonable when I'm actually and explicitly saying that I'm reserving judgment because I don't know what's going on. --Bob


I'm confused. In a previous post you, Bob, said

Gas is more expensive in California because we use a different formula than the rest of the country uses, not because our gas taxes are higher. Refineries outside California don't prepare gasoline that complies with our requirements so supplies are limited.

So now you are unclear based on someone else's link or what?


Bueller?

_________________
Oh please.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 4:44 pm 
Offline
Bored Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Posts: 17729
Location: By the phone
Beebs52 wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
flockofseagulls104 wrote:

Not a problem for you if it's you noble, saintly, incorruptible one party system that's shafting you. I would venture to guess that in a free market system, with such a big market, competition would drive the price down even with your 'different blends'. But let's blame it on the oil companies and only be outraged at them with 'no evidence' (the focus group tested phrase of the day).
You seem to enjoy being outraged. Do a little research on creeping socialism and it will expand your outrage universe, bob-tel.
How did you get from a post where I explicitly said that we don't know why prices are higher than they should be to the conclusion that I'm blaming it on the oil companies? One might think you're looking for excuses to label me as unreasonable when I'm actually and explicitly saying that I'm reserving judgment because I don't know what's going on. --Bob


I'm confused. In a previous post you, Bob, said

Gas is more expensive in California because we use a different formula than the rest of the country uses, not because our gas taxes are higher. Refineries outside California don't prepare gasoline that complies with our requirements so supplies are limited.

So now you are unclear based on someone else's link or what?
Even with that taken into account, the story says that our prices shouldn't be quite as high as they are, but no one knows how to account for the discrepancy. I'm perfectly happy to pay higher gas prices to breathe air that doesn't cause my eyes to burn. --Bob

_________________
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 5:09 pm 
Offline
Queen of Wack

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Posts: 9621
Location: Location.Location.Location
I give up. Yep.

_________________
Oh please.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 6:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:43 pm
Posts: 10095
Location: In Texas of course!
Bob78164 wrote:
Even with that taken into account, the story says that our prices shouldn't be quite as high as they are, but no one knows how to account for the discrepancy. I'm perfectly happy to pay higher gas prices to breathe air that doesn't cause my eyes to burn. --Bob


Gas prices are a very complex issue. What is made from a barrel of oil is determined by the crack spread. There is no "all other things being equal" because so many things ARE different. CA gas taxes are about $0.35/gal higher than Texas. Retail gas is about $1.38 higher so we are down to about a $1 difference. Other factors would be the cost of the formulation required for California. That cost includes the shutdown and restarting of a refinery by season.

Then there are supply issues (price is a function of supply and demand). In Texas we have refinery capacity well exceeding our in state demand so there is a glut of available gas and most is shipped out of state. California has reduced its refining capacity by more than 20% over the last few decades and will likely not every increase that capacity. So now we have to introduce distribution channels into the mix. We are talking pipelines and trucks. Trucks are obviously more expensive but permitting new refined product pipelines in California is almost if not impossible.

If you believe the evil big oil companies are greedy then that greed will manifest itself in to an as efficient market at possible. In other words if EBO #1 won't sell for $0.99 aand EBO #2's marginal cost is less than $0.99 then they will likely sell the product in California. But it all depends on the crack spreads, and screwing Californians is not a variable.

_________________
In the end, they will all pretty much taste the same.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 8:32 pm 
Offline
Bored Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Posts: 17729
Location: By the phone
BackInTex wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
Even with that taken into account, the story says that our prices shouldn't be quite as high as they are, but no one knows how to account for the discrepancy. I'm perfectly happy to pay higher gas prices to breathe air that doesn't cause my eyes to burn. --Bob


Gas prices are a very complex issue. What is made from a barrel of oil is determined by the crack spread. There is no "all other things being equal" because so many things ARE different. CA gas taxes are about $0.35/gal higher than Texas. Retail gas is about $1.38 higher so we are down to about a $1 difference. Other factors would be the cost of the formulation required for California. That cost includes the shutdown and restarting of a refinery by season.

Then there are supply issues (price is a function of supply and demand). In Texas we have refinery capacity well exceeding our in state demand so there is a glut of available gas and most is shipped out of state. California has reduced its refining capacity by more than 20% over the last few decades and will likely not every increase that capacity. So now we have to introduce distribution channels into the mix. We are talking pipelines and trucks. Trucks are obviously more expensive but permitting new refined product pipelines in California is almost if not impossible.

If you believe the evil big oil companies are greedy then that greed will manifest itself in to an as efficient market at possible. In other words if EBO #1 won't sell for $0.99 aand EBO #2's marginal cost is less than $0.99 then they will likely sell the product in California. But it all depends on the crack spreads, and screwing Californians is not a variable.
That assumes all markets are perfect and efficient. We know that's not so in general. But I don't claim to know whether market imperfections are affecting the pump price of gas in California.

I could be wrong but I don't think California refineries are shut down and restarted by season. --Bob

_________________
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 9:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
Posts: 4469
Location: Atlanta, GA
Bob78164 wrote:
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
Wrong. There's no evidence that gasoline manufacture in California is over-regulated (I don't consider regulation that's necessary to make sure we can continue to breathe our air safely "over"-regulation) and I don't see any mechanism by which any of your other boogeymen could possibly affect prices at the pump.

On the other hand, we have relatively recent experience with actual illegal market manipulation in the electricity markets that led to brownouts and other highly visible consequences. Those consequences were initially blamed on the usual conservative boogeymen and if memory serves they contributed to the case against Gov. Davis when he was recalled. It took years of investigation before the truth emerged. --Bob


There you go with the 'no evidence' mantra again. The main 'evidence' is that you pay almost twice as much for a gallon of gas, and they want to put even more tax on it. Show me some evidence that it is correctly or under-regulated, bob-tel. Just one reputable article that says anything in your state is under-regulated except illegal immigration. Once it gets into the government's hands, there is no motivation for anyone to investigate whether it can be done more inexpensively to achieve the same results. They want their committees and departments to stay just the way they are and grow them if possible. Some pigs are more equal than others.
Evidence that it is correctly regulated is that I no longer suffer from burning eyes on hot summer days, the way I did when I first moved to California. If you think there's an issue with particular regulations, it's your job to identify them and explain why those regulations are a bad idea.

And the people of California confirmed the Legislature's decision to increase our gas tax in November. We're tired of breaking our axles on roads with potholes. The money is already being put to use on a variety of public highways -- I can see evidence of the work most weeks as I drive through the construction zones. Most importantly, it's a done deal, confirmed by the people. --Bob

Gas prices in my neighborhood are currently around $3.25 per gallon. (I saw gas in the Central Valley on Sunday under $3.00 per gallon, and that was along the freeway. It's probably even cheaper away from the freeways.) You know somewhere that it's available for $1.60 per gallon? $1.50 per gallon? --Bob


I saw it at $1.89 at a station not far from the Perimeter a couple of days ago. I just filled up at $1.99. If you don't believe me, ask aSSShole.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Jan 10, 2019 3:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Posts: 15833
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
I saw it at $1.89 at a station not far from the Perimeter a couple of days ago. I just filled up at $1.99. If you don't believe me, ask aSSShole.


I sure hope you're using all the money you save on gas to buy lottery tickets.

_________________
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Jan 10, 2019 10:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
Posts: 4469
Location: Atlanta, GA
silverscreenselect wrote:
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
I saw it at $1.89 at a station not far from the Perimeter a couple of days ago. I just filled up at $1.99. If you don't believe me, ask aSSShole.


I sure hope you're using all the money you save on gas to buy lottery tickets.

What? Do you have a lottery fixation now?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Jan 10, 2019 10:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Posts: 15833
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
silverscreenselect wrote:
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
I saw it at $1.89 at a station not far from the Perimeter a couple of days ago. I just filled up at $1.99. If you don't believe me, ask aSSShole.


I sure hope you're using all the money you save on gas to buy lottery tickets.

What? Do you have a lottery fixation now?


I should; I'm in their offices eight hours a day, five days a week.

_________________
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2019 7:26 am 
Offline
Evil Genius
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 1:16 am
Posts: 9372
Location: Garden Grove, CA
Someone copied & pasted this into a comment on an article about AOC:

Cortez Is still running around the Capital looking for Phil Abusters office.
She says she wants to be on the appropriations committee because she understands when something is appropriate.
She says we shouldn’t just teach Civics in schools, we should teach about all automobiles.
When they delivered a new TV to her office and read on the box built-in antenna she asked the delivery person if antenna was a city in China.
She just completed a jigsaw puzzle that said 5-7 years, she was so proud to get it done in 2 weeks.
When asked of her choice for speaker of the house she said Bose.
She says she supports veterans because they help pets.
She wore a sleeveless shirt at a meeting to support her right to bare arms.
She wanted a trade embargo on Romania because of tainted romaine lettuce.
She wanted to know how much tuition is at the Electoral College.

_________________
A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five.
Groucho Marx


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2019 10:18 am 
Offline
Bored Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Posts: 17729
Location: By the phone
Estonut wrote:
Someone copied & pasted this into a comment on an article about AOC:

Cortez Is still running around the Capital looking for Phil Abusters office.
She says she wants to be on the appropriations committee because she understands when something is appropriate.
She says we shouldn’t just teach Civics in schools, we should teach about all automobiles.
When they delivered a new TV to her office and read on the box built-in antenna she asked the delivery person if antenna was a city in China.
She just completed a jigsaw puzzle that said 5-7 years, she was so proud to get it done in 2 weeks.
When asked of her choice for speaker of the house she said Bose.
She says she supports veterans because they help pets.
She wore a sleeveless shirt at a meeting to support her right to bare arms.
She wanted a trade embargo on Romania because of tainted romaine lettuce.
She wanted to know how much tuition is at the Electoral College.
So they're trying to caricature her as stupid and/or ditzy when all of the evidence is to the contrary. --Bob

_________________
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2019 11:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Posts: 15833
Bob78164 wrote:
Estonut wrote:
Someone copied & pasted this into a comment on an article about AOC:

Cortez Is still running around the Capital looking for Phil Abusters office.
She says she wants to be on the appropriations committee because she understands when something is appropriate.
She says we shouldn’t just teach Civics in schools, we should teach about all automobiles.
When they delivered a new TV to her office and read on the box built-in antenna she asked the delivery person if antenna was a city in China.
She just completed a jigsaw puzzle that said 5-7 years, she was so proud to get it done in 2 weeks.
When asked of her choice for speaker of the house she said Bose.
She says she supports veterans because they help pets.
She wore a sleeveless shirt at a meeting to support her right to bare arms.
She wanted a trade embargo on Romania because of tainted romaine lettuce.
She wanted to know how much tuition is at the Electoral College.
So they're trying to caricature her as stupid and/or ditzy when all of the evidence is to the contrary. --Bob


It's her gender. See Hillary and Nancy Pelosi. If this was Rep. Alexander Ocasio-Cortez, we wouldn't have heard two peeps out of the right wingers.

_________________
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2019 12:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:31 am
Posts: 6470
Location: Montana
Bob78164 wrote:
Estonut wrote:
Someone copied & pasted this into a comment on an article about AOC:

Cortez Is still running around the Capital looking for Phil Abusters office.
She says she wants to be on the appropriations committee because she understands when something is appropriate.
She says we shouldn’t just teach Civics in schools, we should teach about all automobiles.
When they delivered a new TV to her office and read on the box built-in antenna she asked the delivery person if antenna was a city in China.
She just completed a jigsaw puzzle that said 5-7 years, she was so proud to get it done in 2 weeks.
When asked of her choice for speaker of the house she said Bose.
She says she supports veterans because they help pets.
She wore a sleeveless shirt at a meeting to support her right to bare arms.
She wanted a trade embargo on Romania because of tainted romaine lettuce.
She wanted to know how much tuition is at the Electoral College.
So they're trying to caricature her as stupid and/or ditzy when all of the evidence is to the contrary. --Bob



All evidence? Really? :lol: :lol: :lol:

_________________
The only thing we have to fear, is fear itself. And clowns.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2019 12:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:31 am
Posts: 6470
Location: Montana
silverscreenselect wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
Estonut wrote:
Someone copied & pasted this into a comment on an article about AOC:

Cortez Is still running around the Capital looking for Phil Abusters office.
She says she wants to be on the appropriations committee because she understands when something is appropriate.
She says we shouldn’t just teach Civics in schools, we should teach about all automobiles.
When they delivered a new TV to her office and read on the box built-in antenna she asked the delivery person if antenna was a city in China.
She just completed a jigsaw puzzle that said 5-7 years, she was so proud to get it done in 2 weeks.
When asked of her choice for speaker of the house she said Bose.
She says she supports veterans because they help pets.
She wore a sleeveless shirt at a meeting to support her right to bare arms.
She wanted a trade embargo on Romania because of tainted romaine lettuce.
She wanted to know how much tuition is at the Electoral College.
So they're trying to caricature her as stupid and/or ditzy when all of the evidence is to the contrary. --Bob


It's her gender. See Hillary and Nancy Pelosi. If this was Rep. Alexander Ocasio-Cortez, we wouldn't have heard two peeps out of the right wingers.


LMAO - is gender the new 'racist' for you? You're right though - right wingers would never mock the likes of Beto, Chuckie, Jim Carrey, etc... oh, wait...

_________________
The only thing we have to fear, is fear itself. And clowns.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2019 12:27 pm 
Offline
Bored Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Posts: 17729
Location: By the phone
tlynn78 wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
Estonut wrote:
Someone copied & pasted this into a comment on an article about AOC:

Cortez Is still running around the Capital looking for Phil Abusters office.
She says she wants to be on the appropriations committee because she understands when something is appropriate.
She says we shouldn’t just teach Civics in schools, we should teach about all automobiles.
When they delivered a new TV to her office and read on the box built-in antenna she asked the delivery person if antenna was a city in China.
She just completed a jigsaw puzzle that said 5-7 years, she was so proud to get it done in 2 weeks.
When asked of her choice for speaker of the house she said Bose.
She says she supports veterans because they help pets.
She wore a sleeveless shirt at a meeting to support her right to bare arms.
She wanted a trade embargo on Romania because of tainted romaine lettuce.
She wanted to know how much tuition is at the Electoral College.
So they're trying to caricature her as stupid and/or ditzy when all of the evidence is to the contrary. --Bob



All evidence? Really? :lol: :lol: :lol:
Yes, really. From the award she won in a national high school science competition to her degree at a pretty good university to her accomplishment in defeating an entrenched incumbent to her ability to single handedly shift the policy conversation substantially to the left, she has consistently demonstrated her intelligence.

Note on she threaded the needle on January 3. She voted for Speaker Pelosi (thereby saving at least one newly elected Democrat a vote he or she would have found uncomfortable), but then she voted against the rules package to signal that she hasn't been coopted.

What I think is really going on is that Republicans are afraid that her policy preferences are gaining traction so they're trying to make her an object of ridicule as a way of attacking her long-term effectiveness. And yes, I think they're playing to stereotypes of women in the process. This isn't mocking her as some sort of a wild-eyed radical (which she's not). This is mocking her as stupid, which she's definitely not. --Bob

_________________
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 84 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Americanized by Maël Soucaze.