Originally Posted by
Roody
What I propose is that we become a hell of a lot less dependent on petroleum, for both strategic and environmental reasons.
Barring that, I believe in very stringent government regulation of energy and related industries. Another weakness of capitalism, besides the one I mentioned earlier, is that there is no economic incentive for producers to safeguard the common good. That is the role of government in a well run capitalist economy.
i think any sympathy for the "over-regulated" energy companies is comically misplaced. They have managed to eke out some pretty impressive profits year after year. And they certainly don't give a damn about you or me or anything else in the world.
First, Wow! You do seem to be harboring a lot of anger... I was simply pointing out that you hypothesized a cause for the lack of construction of new refineries--and indicated a way you thought such refineries should be built... A cause that I believe ignored a more fundamental issue; one that would apply to your proposed alternative builders as well.
Perhaps a refresh of your claims that I was discussing;
Originally Posted by
Roody
This is just a basic problem with capitalism. There is no incentive for a private company to make more gasoline than it can sell at a good price, even if its in the national interest. That's one reason that the government buys and stores large amounts of petroleum products (stabilization of markets).
So, the problem is that refinery capacity is the current constraint as discussed in the OP. While reduced demand or even the eventual consumption of the raw supply might be other factors; they don't affect the current qestion proposed; why no additional capacity has been constructed... I think this will be my last attempt at a civil exchange, I would suggest that exercise in the form of bike riding is a wonderful way to deal with anger issues.
BTW, 'energy' company profits are typically in the 10% range; hardly what would be considered impressive...