Trains.com

If the cost of Oil Goes up would not the cost of all basic Commodities go up as well?

1442 views
41 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    December 2003
  • From: St Paul, MN
  • 6,218 posts
Posted by Big_Boy_4005 on Tuesday, March 8, 2005 10:00 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by up829

QUOTE: Originally posted by Modelcar

...Fellows, I agree with all of your above posts...and I am really concerned as you fellows are. For sure..! One of my bewilderments is why we can't use some leverage of our own agains the mid east sheiks....They use their oil reserves against the free world all the time to keep oil prices high so there must be ways we could apply some pressure to them to balance this situation....They must not manufacture much of anything on their own and who protects them from the world tyrants that might come in ant take their oil...Of course Uncle Sam with lives and money....We do...! I'm sure we have a bigger stick to use than we're using to lower oil prices and I'm saying it's time to use it....If Demoracy is starting to run over there, fine....let them persue it and lets start thinking of some of OUR needs for a while....!


Neo-conservatives(Bush etc.) like high oil prices because it makes them and their campaign contributors much wealthier. Why do what we did in Iraq and then make them a member of OPEC and hand it all back over to the Sh'ites???

Liberals like high oil prices because it encourages conservation, smaller cars, mass-transit, and all the social-engineering they favor. Some would tax gas even more.


An excellent observation, and support for my theory that unless we vote them all out and start fresh, nothing will change. I don't worry about the liberals as much, at least their hearts are in a better place.

As for going in and using leverage against the sheiks, guess what, we did. What do you think Iraq is? The political agenda is a pretty thin veil, Sadam was an easy mark. Our current mission is to install a friendly regiem, under the guise of democracy and freedom for the people, stableize the infrastructure, and make the oil flow freely. When we are done, it's on to Iran, to put the fear of God into the Saudis, as in "you're next" unless you cooperate.

The thing that boggles my mind is, there are technologies out there that we can use to reduce our dependance on oil, but because it is not politically or economicly advantageous, we can't. Hello, Washington? ***, line's busy, must be talking to Detroit.[swg]

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Tuesday, March 8, 2005 10:02 AM
We live in large single family homes. Heat'em and cool'em like crazy. Drive everywhere - for everything - all the time. Consume manufactured products that are packaged to the hilt like there's no tomorrow. Eat up way up the food chain.

All of this is built on cheap energy, particularly petroleum.

Then, we sell the rest of the world on our values. They buy in and join the party.

Which causes energy prices to rise.

The problem isn't the oil companies gouging us.

It isn' t our government.

It isn't foreign governments.

Its US! Its how we live and what we value!

So, no whining allowed! No pity parties. No righteous indignation.

Nobody forced us to live an American, suburban, consumer livestyle. We chose it with our own free will. Heck, we actually got our government to subsidized it along the way!

Now oil costs more because of demand. So, we have to pay. The good news is there is plenty of energy to be had, it just costs more to get it and convert than traditional petroleum. There are also more ways to conserve energy that will be economically viable as prices rise.

No need to panic, just plan to pay a bit more for our lifestyle.

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    July 2002
  • From: A State of Humidity
  • 2,441 posts
Posted by wallyworld on Tuesday, March 8, 2005 10:16 AM
The short answer is yes. The more serious issue is both China and Japan holding the credit for our national debt in terms of bonds. At the same time we as a nation buy more goods than we sell. The balance of trade worsens every year. If our lendors return on investment continues to dwindle in comparison to that offered by other countries, our creditors could seek a higher yield. If they transfer their investments away from the U.S , it will seriously devalue the dollar. Your dollar will purchase less. They are happy to finance our credit card in order that we buy their goods, but what is the tipping point? Another potential problem is our own government's bipartisan fiscal irresponsibility, This is a major potential issue whilr pork barrel politics conducts it's business as usual. Regardless of how one views the current debate over social security, the problem that no politician on either side of the aisle is willing to take responsibility for, is that despite having installed a "lock box" on social security funds, they have defeated the purpose of their own legislation and are using our supposedly secure savings to finance daily government operations. They are all stuffing IOU's in our retirement accounts while bemoaning the situation. Meanwhile if you look at the rise of the cost of living over the past several decades and compare this to the growth in both income and the purchase power of a dollar, your answer is seen in that most families now have to have both parents working full time just to make ends meet. So in effect the cost of living ie; commodities has been increasing all along.
The escalating price of oil is just another bit of bad news in this larger dynamic.

Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has.

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, March 8, 2005 12:55 PM
There are only a handfull of Citys in the US were there is viable transit system. Buses are too slow and dont go were people need to go. transit servcei often stops at the city line at night and wont let low income city dwleers out tio the suberbs were the malls are(and the jobs). White Flight has taken not only the whites but there department stores and there jobs out to Office parks and suberban shopping malls. In order for me to get grocerys it is a 4 hour all day adventure.
  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Tuesday, March 8, 2005 1:19 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by Dunkirkeriestation

There are only a handfull of Citys in the US were there is viable transit system. Buses are too slow and dont go were people need to go. transit servcei often stops at the city line at night and wont let low income city dwleers out tio the suberbs were the malls are(and the jobs). White Flight has taken not only the whites but there department stores and there jobs out to Office parks and suberban shopping malls. In order for me to get grocerys it is a 4 hour all day adventure.


You're missing the point!

Live in the city! Work in the city! Shop in the city!

Here's a list right off the top of my head where you can have a perfectly good middle class lifestyle in a city without a car. All these cities have decent middle class and better neighborhoods, lots of shopping and entertainment all in the city and within walking or short transit ride. I'm sure there are more places - these are just the ones I personally know of.

Boston
Montreal
Toronto
New York
Philadelphia
Baltimore
DC
Atlanta
Charleston SC
Chicago
Cleveland
Pittsburgh
Seattle
Portland
SanFran
LA
SanDiego

On top of that , there are many large, new "mixed use" developments going in around the country where you can live, work and shop in the same place.

I think being from NY state has left you with a skewed perspective. NY is not like the rest of the country. I used to live there - went to college there, too.

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    August 2004
  • From: Louisville, KY
  • 1,345 posts
Posted by CSXrules4eva on Tuesday, March 8, 2005 1:50 PM
Originally posted by spbed

We have to find some way to become self sufficent otherwise the middle east guys will always control our destiny. Years ago there was something call gasohol which was made out of corn & methane or alcohol I think. Maybe something like that has to be used by power plants & manufactuers so we reach the goal of only using our own oil. Of we can reach that goal besides of no longer being controlled by the middle east the present minus in or imports to exports would drop like a rock does in water which would also be very benefical to the USA [:o)]

This is real interesting spbed. I've always though that ever since the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries that since they had most of the black gold that at any given time they could say. Ok US or any other country we're not going to sell you any oil. It seems to me that OPEC can gain control since I'm sure we'd be beaging them for some oil. This was evident in the 1970's when their was an oil shortage. However, I don't think this is going to happen espually since a majority of OPEC's bussness comes from the states.





LORD HELP US ALL TO BE ORIGINAL AND NOT CRISPY!!! please? Sarah J.M. Warner conductor CSX
  • Member since
    December 2003
  • From: St Paul, MN
  • 6,218 posts
Posted by Big_Boy_4005 on Tuesday, March 8, 2005 3:05 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd

We live in large single family homes. Heat'em and cool'em like crazy. Drive everywhere - for everything - all the time. Consume manufactured products that are packaged to the hilt like there's no tomorrow. Eat up way up the food chain.

All of this is built on cheap energy, particularly petroleum.

Then, we sell the rest of the world on our values. They buy in and join the party.

Which causes energy prices to rise.

The problem isn't the oil companies gouging us.

It isn' t our government.

It isn't foreign governments.

Its US! Its how we live and what we value!

So, no whining allowed! No pity parties. No righteous indignation.

Nobody forced us to live an American, suburban, consumer livestyle. We chose it with our own free will. Heck, we actually got our government to subsidized it along the way!

Now oil costs more because of demand. So, we have to pay. The good news is there is plenty of energy to be had, it just costs more to get it and convert than traditional petroleum. There are also more ways to conserve energy that will be economically viable as prices rise.

No need to panic, just plan to pay a bit more for our lifestyle.


Don, there is a lot of truth to what you say, but I think there are other forces at work here. This didn't happen over night, this is a result of 60 years worth of moving down this path. Contributing factors are things like the interstate highway system, and the television.

Now the interstate highway system is a direct result of the government, and is almost single-handedly responsible for urban sprawl. Just add another exit a few miles beyond the city limits, and instant burbs. The American dream is to own a home and some land, not pay rent to a landlord, and have your neighbors on the other side of a thin wall.

So what does the television have to do with all this? It is the voice that urges us to buy. Think about what television was in it's early days. Who were the first advertisers? All of the same ones that were on the radio, tobacco, automobiles, soap and household products, foods and soft drinks, beer, etc. Suddenly, everyone has to have a car and a television. The road to ruin is now paved, but with cheap oil, no problem, yet.

Now the rest of the world sees this and wants it too.

Personally, I am sickened by the consumption in our society, and do everything within my power to reject and resist it. Last year I drove less than 5000 miles. I live in an energy efficient home. I don't buy much of anything beyond food. The problem is that if everyone did that a lot of Americans would be unemployed. Of course a lot more Chineese and Indonesians would be unemployeed. But there is really no need to worry, we are hooked.
  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Tuesday, March 8, 2005 3:30 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by Big_Boy_4005

QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd

We live in large single family homes. Heat'em and cool'em like crazy. Drive everywhere - for everything - all the time. Consume manufactured products that are packaged to the hilt like there's no tomorrow. Eat up way up the food chain.

All of this is built on cheap energy, particularly petroleum.

Then, we sell the rest of the world on our values. They buy in and join the party.

Which causes energy prices to rise.

The problem isn't the oil companies gouging us.

It isn' t our government.

It isn't foreign governments.

Its US! Its how we live and what we value!

So, no whining allowed! No pity parties. No righteous indignation.

Nobody forced us to live an American, suburban, consumer livestyle. We chose it with our own free will. Heck, we actually got our government to subsidized it along the way!

Now oil costs more because of demand. So, we have to pay. The good news is there is plenty of energy to be had, it just costs more to get it and convert than traditional petroleum. There are also more ways to conserve energy that will be economically viable as prices rise.

No need to panic, just plan to pay a bit more for our lifestyle.


Don, there is a lot of truth to what you say, but I think there are other forces at work here. This didn't happen over night, this is a result of 60 years worth of moving down this path. Contributing factors are things like the interstate highway system, and the television.

Now the interstate highway system is a direct result of the government, and is almost single-handedly responsible for urban sprawl. Just add another exit a few miles beyond the city limits, and instant burbs. The American dream is to own a home and some land, not pay rent to a landlord, and have your neighbors on the other side of a thin wall.

So what does the television have to do with all this? It is the voice that urges us to buy. Think about what television was in it's early days. Who were the first advertisers? All of the same ones that were on the radio, tobacco, automobiles, soap and household products, foods and soft drinks, beer, etc. Suddenly, everyone has to have a car and a television. The road to ruin is now paved, but with cheap oil, no problem, yet.

Now the rest of the world sees this and wants it too.

Personally, I am sickened by the consumption in our society, and do everything within my power to reject and resist it. Last year I drove less than 5000 miles. I live in an energy efficient home. I don't buy much of anything beyond food. The problem is that if everyone did that a lot of Americans would be unemployed. Of course a lot more Chineese and Indonesians would be unemployeed. But there is really no need to worry, we are hooked.


I agree with your assessment of the "Consumption mentality", it's most worrisome the amount of debt some people wrack up just getting more stuff.

The mindset of Americans after WWII was one where they fell in love with driving. That the interstate network promoted sprawl was not even a blip on the radar screen. Nobody argued against it.

But sprawl was already off and running before Eisenhower's roads - and everyone was cheering. Road building didn't wait for Eisenhower.

I'd also say that we still have "cheap oil" -- gasoline is about the same price as in the 1960s, ajusted for inflation, and cars, in general get better mileage. Add in that income has grown faster than inflation and you have a gallon of gas that takes fewer minutes of work to buy than in the 1960s.

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 10, 2005 1:29 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by DSchmitt
Many of the people who drive SUV's or trucks have need of them part of the time. It would not be efficient to them, to society, or good for the environment for them to own an additional vehicle just to be politically correct.


Listen, I didn't say anything about owning an additional vehicle or being POLITICALLY CORRECT. The last thing on my mind is to be PC [}:)]. I just think it's ridiculous when every 3rd car on the road is a soccer mom or some kid with a SUV. Every auto company has an SUV now. Why is that? Do we need a Porsche SUV? Is the Cadialac Escalade the name you think of when some says utility? SO it is about need when you buy an 4x4 SUV and put 24" rims on it rendering off-road useless? SO it is about need when you buy an SUV and lowwer it to a 3" clearence making it useless except for on pavement? SO it is about need when you buy an SUV becuase all your friends have one? Come on!![soapbox]

I don't have a problem if you really need it. My stepfather uses his Trailblazer for everthing from hauling hay to making deliveries for his company, so I know about need. But he really needs it all the time, not occasionally. When I bought my new car, need was the firsrt thing I considered, next was gas mileage and yes I looked at 3 different SUV's. Besides, it's that other 65% you failed to mention that sets me off. The don't even need an SUV ocassionally. They could get a something like a Subaru wagon and be able to fill all their needs. Oh and I don't live in the city, don't use public transportation but still think its a good idea, even it is subsidized (from more than just highway use taxes, usually property and sales taxes depending on the size of the city). If I want to catch atrain, I have to drive 2 to 3 hours to the closest station. North Carolina was going to extend passenger service to Asheville which would have put me within an hour of a train station. They ran out of money, so plans are suspended, but that's another story.[:(]
  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Thursday, March 10, 2005 7:24 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by wncrails

QUOTE: Originally posted by DSchmitt
Many of the people who drive SUV's or trucks have need of them part of the time. It would not be efficient to them, to society, or good for the environment for them to own an additional vehicle just to be politically correct.


Listen, I didn't say anything about owning an additional vehicle or being POLITICALLY CORRECT. The last thing on my mind is to be PC [}:)]. I just think it's ridiculous when every 3rd car on the road is a soccer mom or some kid with a SUV. Every auto company has an SUV now. Why is that? Do we need a Porsche SUV? Is the Cadialac Escalade the name you think of when some says utility? SO it is about need when you buy an 4x4 SUV and put 24" rims on it rendering off-road useless? SO it is about need when you buy an SUV and lowwer it to a 3" clearence making it useless except for on pavement? SO it is about need when you buy an SUV becuase all your friends have one? Come on!![soapbox]

I don't have a problem if you really need it.


I'll agree that a Porche SUV is a silly thing. And, I don't get the Escalades with the large rims, either. I laugh when I see them! But, if that's what people want to spend their money on, why shouldn't they.

And, why does it make you angry?

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Austin TX
  • 4,941 posts
Posted by spbed on Thursday, March 10, 2005 7:44 AM
Actually most of us only know of OPEC but one of the world biggest exporters of oil is Russia. Just think of how much they are profiting now because we cannot come to grips with controlling out thirst for oil. Our citizens continue to go out & buy the Hummers of the world. To me every time some one buys a gas guzzler it is like commiting a crime against America since it makes us weaker. The stock market they say is always looking ahead & yeserday it dropped on what investors see is the future for oil in our country. As crazy as this may sound the RRs should relook into electrifing their systems. While the start up costs may be hi the ROI may make it worth it will also help us reach self sufficency which we have to do sooner or later. If we can put men on the moon & return them safely to the earth & invent the A-bomb we can surely solve this problem if we put our energies to it like we did in WW 2. Just to give you a idea Ford is now offering Explorers on lease here for $199.00 per month. Maybe they should rethink that policy & look to attract consumers to buy/lease energy efficent vehicles[:)]




QUOTE: Originally posted by CSXrules4eva

Originally posted by spbed

We have to find some way to become self sufficent otherwise the middle east guys will always control our destiny. Years ago there was something call gasohol which was made out of corn & methane or alcohol I think. Maybe something like that has to be used by power plants & manufactuers so we reach the goal of only using our own oil. Of we can reach that goal besides of no longer being controlled by the middle east the present minus in or imports to exports would drop like a rock does in water which would also be very benefical to the USA [:o)]

This is real interesting spbed. I've always though that ever since the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries that since they had most of the black gold that at any given time they could say. Ok US or any other country we're not going to sell you any oil. It seems to me that OPEC can gain control since I'm sure we'd be beaging them for some oil. This was evident in the 1970's when their was an oil shortage. However, I don't think this is going to happen espually since a majority of OPEC's bussness comes from the states.






Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR  Austin TX Sub

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: California - moved to North Carolina 2018
  • 4,422 posts
Posted by DSchmitt on Thursday, March 10, 2005 10:57 AM
oltmannd Actually, I don't disagree, but where I live people don't have Porsche SUV's. They have work vehicles. We don't have many Soccer Moms either.

I tried to sell my two cents worth, but no one would give me a plug nickel for it.

I don't have a leg to stand on.

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy