Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 389: AR-15 Minutes of Fame

(+) Yeah! (+)

Maniac64 posted...

I don't know enough about Hollywood accounting to answer that. But this is profit margin for a product not for the whole business, which I think is the Hollywood issue.

You can still get around it by increasing your costs through Tom foolery.

Just start paying the CEO more. Boom. You made less money.

Maniac64 posted...

Cap on profit margins for gas.

For years gas stations have raised rates to match crude prices going up but not lowered them to match when prices go down increasing their margin with every cycle.

It's because they are delayed on raising them for the rise with existing stock so they take a loss and make it on the back end to make up for it. Gasoline generally sells on a very very slim margin of profit. 1 cent isn't out of the norm. Gasoline is a way to bring people into your store to buy over priced stuff at convenience costs. That's where gas stations make their profit.

Shale won't pump more and Opec won't pump more because Biden has alienated both with policy.

Price controls are a horrible idea and the only thing that would lead to is severe shortages.

masterplum posted...

Just start paying the CEO more. Boom. You made less money.

I think there's a limit on how much salary for one person can be taken off of a business's taxes, or something like that. It's why they shifted to paying CEOs using stock options and such rather than cash.

Also, Dems want to reduce fossil fuel usage right? So let the price of gasoline rise according to the market, and watch as fossil fuel usage goes down.

If Trump was president, he would be bragging constantly about how wonderful the economy is and how much more people are earning. Dems have completely failed at managing the narrative here. It takes some incredible political incompetence to have 83% of the country feel the economy is bad when unemployment is at a 50-year low and the working class have gotten the highest wage increases since Reagan took office!

masterplum posted...

You can still get around it by increasing your costs through Tom foolery.

Just start paying the CEO more. Boom. You made less money.

Again I'm talking product specific margin limits not company so increasing costs elsewhere wouldn't matter. They would have to increase the cost of the crude.

Corrik7 posted...

It's because they are delayed on raising them for the rise with existing stock so they take a loss and make it on the back end to make up for it. Gasoline generally sells on a very very slim margin of profit. 1 cent isn't out of the norm. Gasoline is a way to bring people into your store to buy over priced stuff at convenience costs. That's where gas stations make their profit.

I have never seen a delay in raising prices. I have seen that delay on lowering but in my area at least prices go up the same day that crude prices do. But I can't say for sure that you aren't right on the slim profit margins, that would just really surprise me. Especially given things like gas prices sometimes being different between stations of the same company in the same city.

This is not an area I am an expert on though so if I'm wrong I accept that.

Its basically impossible to do what you are proposing, because you have fixed costs and variable costs. You are proposing not allowing fixed costs to influence the profit margin but that isnt reasonable.

Do you not allow employee salaries to ever influence the cost? If you do that and wages rise you could be forcing companies to lose money and you are going to create a huge shortage. If you do allow some employees to tie into costs how are you policing it? Do you have a master list of acceptable employee costs? Whats to stop companies from just changing job titles?

It just doesnt really work

red sox 777 posted...

If Trump was president, he would be bragging constantly about how wonderful the economy is and how much more people are earning.

I don't know about "constantly" but I have seen an annoying amount of self-congratulating from Biden on this line

Corrik7 posted...

Shale won't pump more and Opec won't pump more because Biden has alienated both with policy.

That's not why they won't pump more at all btw.

Dancedreamer posted...

That's not why they won't pump more at all btw.

Sure.

There's an easy solution if it's a US company, or based in the US: just seize and nationalize it. Presto, now you can set whatever price you want!

then we'd have to invade and overthrow ourselves though

https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/russia-s-energy-revenue-higher-now-than-just-before-ukraine-war-u-s-official-says-1.5940378

So basically banning Russian oil means they sell less but the increase in prices makes that less they sell worth more and ultimately more revenue (and extremely more profit) than if they sold it all without an embargo normally.

Corrik7 posted...

So basically banning Russian oil means they sell less but the increase in prices makes that less they sell worth more and ultimately more revenue (and extremely more profit) than if they sold it all without an embargo normally.

Uhhh, not entirely true because they are selling it at a discount to what the rest of the world is currently selling oil.

That is to say, it is true but misleading. They are making more profits because the price and demand of oil is way up, but the relative profits to the rest of the industry are down.

But the story remains there is no oil shortage. Prices are high because the oil companiessimply decided they should be.

Oil companies don't have a lot of control over this. It's the governments of oil producing countries that decide production levels nowadays. But there's been no meaningful embargo on Russian oil and gas to date anyway. The US and Canada are self-sufficient and didn't really import from Russia before the war. Europe imports a lot from Russia, and they haven't stopped yet.

red sox 777 posted...

Oil companies don't have a lot of control over this. It's the governments of oil producing countries that decide production levels nowadays. But there's been no meaningful embargo on Russian oil and gas to date anyway. The US and Canada are self-sufficient and didn't really import from Russia before the war. Europe imports a lot from Russia, and they haven't stopped yet.

US was self-sufficient under Trump. It is not now to my knowledge. Shale companies refuse to go full blast again.

My understanding is that the bottleneck on gas prices are oil refineries. The crude oil supply is there but the ability to refine it isn't keeping up. And oil companies are refusing to build more, and even shutting them down, in part because they believe they can deliver more profits to shareholders that way - they are seeing record profits now and expanding presents a risk.

Hell, the US is still a net exporter in oil so we're still "energy independent" by the definition that we produce enough here to meet our energy needs (of course we still import it and always have because we use it for other consumption needs). But you still have to refine it.

xp1337 posted...

My understanding is that the bottleneck on gas prices are oil refineries. The crude oil supply is there but the ability to refine it isn't keeping up. And oil companies are refusing to build more, and even shutting them down, in part because they believe they can deliver more profits to shareholders that way - they are seeing record profits now and expanding presents a risk.

Hell, the US is still a net exporter in oil so we're still "energy independent" by the definition that we produce enough here to meet our energy needs. But you still have to refine it.

Well yeah. Isn't that the point of moving away from gas to renewable? Companies are seeing the writing on the wall and bailing.

I've seen a lot of "We need to go green, wait no not like that" from the left lately

I mean, I think I'm with Kenri there then - nationalize it. If capitalism is going to oppose the public good on a basic necessity like energy kinda feels like you need to step in. Though really you probably just need to float the idea and they'll scramble to do it themselves.

xp1337 posted...

I mean, I think I'm with Kenri there then - nationalize it. If capitalism is going to oppose the public good on a basic necessity like energy kinda feels like you need to step in. Though really you probably just need to float the idea and they'll scramble to do it themselves.

You are fighting with them environmentally to the point they can't run below a certain level of profit, and you want to nationalize them and make them run? I mean, I am sure they won't care as the wages will go up dramatically, but the US will pretty much be subsidizing them to run at a loss while also undermining their own environmental policies. Republicans will be running at 1.50 gas and democrats at $3 gallon gas while being called hypocrites on policy.

LOL were not hitting $3 gas anytime soon no matter who gets elected

Jakyl25 posted...

LOL were not hitting $3 gas anytime soon no matter who gets elected

It's as simple as producing more. If OPEC doubled production tomorrow, prices would drop to probably $2. They have no incentive to do this though. They refuse to produce more even with demand outstripping supply.

Is demand actually outstripping supply? Are there places where theres not enough gasoline?

Jakyl25 posted...

Is demand actually outstripping supply? Are there places where theres not enough gasoline?

Yes demand is outstripping supply and it was expected to be worse when China removed the lock down on Shanghai or wherever. OPEC increased production slightly beforehand but it is not expected to offset the new demand brought back online by removing the lockdown.

Corrik7 posted...

You are fighting with them environmentally to the point they can't run below a certain level of profit

What the fuck is this even trying to say.

I think hes referencing the idea of profit caps presented earlier in this topic

Remind me how nationalizing the oil company went in Venezuela

Jakyl25 posted...

Is demand actually outstripping supply? Are there places where theres not enough gasoline?

Of course. That's why prices are up.

masterplum posted...

Remind me how nationalizing the oil company went in Venezuela

I am not an expert but I believe very well for the country.

red13n posted...

What the fuck is this even trying to say.

You have raised their costs and increased costs of them expanding production. If you increase supply, cost of gasoline drops. If it drops below a certain level, you are operating at a loss. The environmental policies Biden has been trying to propose has shale companies nervous to produce more and expand production areas because it increases the price level needed for profitability.

We can produce more coke at my company right now. If we do, steel supply gets higher in comparison to demand and then steel prices plummet. This is why we don't do that and why subsidized steel production in countries like China hurt so much because they run at losses due to subsidized and then completely destroys unsubsidized countries ability to compete.

January 6th committee is pretty nuts so far. But yeah, Trump is totally not a fascist or anything lmao

I watched it as well. One thing of note that I don't think we knew before: multiple GOP members of Congress apparently asked Trump for pardons after January 6th.

I think the fact that Trump's December tweet calling for his supporters to come on 1/6 and that it'd "be wild" came within an hour of his secret meeting with Flynn, Powell, etc. - a meeting that the WH legal team immediately intervened in when they learned it was happening - is also new information.

Especially taken with the already known stuff that said meeting was where other coup-adjacent tactics were discussed like having the military seize voting machines.

I know you guys have been warning me about YouTube but I checked out the comments for a video of Biden's talk show appearance (didn't watch the whole thing because I heard a bit of it while my dad was watching TV). It wasn't QUITE as bad as I thought it was going to be but here's some gems:

-Asking what the POTUS is doing on a talk show while a Hollywood actor speaks from the White House. This is fairly reasonable, except uh I thought these guys wanted the President to be relatable? Plus the actor in question is very popular and is from the site of a recent mass shooting so there's at least context.

-Making it seem like Kimmel didn't ask any difficult questions. Because a talk show is totally the place for that.

-Acting like the media is in Biden's hip pocket. That's not the vibe I've gotten at all, although I guess in comparison to Trump maybe. I always got the vibe the media always scrutinized over the POTUS's actions (which they should, really), and Trump just gave them so much ammo along with his cult defending him at every turn.

-Someone said Biden is the reason YouTube hides dislikes. Any truth to that?

I detect a lot of BS. Simplest opinion I can give on Biden is it's at least really nice the US President has the slightest clue what he's doing.

It's really good that Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger stayed on that committee because otherwise this would look like a partisan witch hunt. Now it's clearly not. Can Trump please just retire?

LinkMarioSamus posted...

-Someone said Biden is the reason YouTube hides dislikes. Any truth to that?

literally the dumbest conspiratorial brained take imaginable and the fact that you actually need to ask shows once again the effect that watching dumb youtube people has with seeping through their message and completely pulled-from-their-ass theories even to so-called "skeptical" viewers

you keep posting about how you're totally not influenced by the stupid youtubers you watch but then you keep demonstrating how you are. it's incredibly simple: stop intentionally watching dumb culture-wars infested youtube takes that have zero reasoned insight to offer

Maybe...

LMS just isn't a smart person able to think for themselves

masterplum posted...

Well yeah. Isn't that the point of moving away from gas to renewable? Companies are seeing the writing on the wall and bailing.

I've seen a lot of "We need to go green, wait no not like that" from the left lately

There's a subset of the "progressive" left that absolutely hates hydroelectricity and nuclear power, despite them being the cheapest, easiest and most reliable solution to eliminating fossil fuels, so this absolutely tracks. What I personally can't wait for is in 5-7 years when people realize that electric vehicles may be great at reducing carbon emissions, we're going to have a massive issue with safe disposal of spent EV batteries that's likely to cause serious harm in a lot of areas. Now any sane person would understand that carbon emissions are the more pressing issue, but inevitably there will be people with no critical thinking skills that will be up in arms about it.

It's a major problem with politics, where bad faith actors will always "let perfect be the enemy of good enough". Gun control being another fantastic example of this

CelesMyUserName posted...

you keep posting about how you're totally not influenced by the stupid youtubers you watch but then you keep demonstrating how you are. it's incredibly simple: stop intentionally watching dumb culture-wars infested youtube takes that have zero reasoned insight to offer

What I meant to say is I'm so deep into this stuff it does cloud a lot of my perceptions. Also much of the time I don't know for certain what is "culture-war infested" before seeing the video.

LMS name a subject you like watching videos on

You know it's possible.... to not watch youtube videos about politics

masterplum posted...

You know it's possible.... to not watch youtube videos about politics

Nah fam I love watching different people's takes on things. I get it

https://twitter.com/revrrlewis/status/1535201848159883266?s=21&t=QCW_AAw_AJveaUgepOojYA

BlAcK TuRtLe posted...

There's a subset of the "progressive" left that absolutely hates hydroelectricity and nuclear power, despite them being the cheapest, easiest and most reliable solution to eliminating fossil fuels, so this absolutely tracks. What I personally can't wait for is in 5-7 years when people realize that electric vehicles may be great at reducing carbon emissions, we're going to have a massive issue with safe disposal of spent EV batteries that's likely to cause serious harm in a lot of areas. Now any sane person would understand that carbon emissions are the more pressing issue, but inevitably there will be people with no critical thinking skills that will be up in arms about it.

It's a major problem with politics, where bad faith actors will always "let perfect be the enemy of good enough". Gun control being another fantastic example of this

I read articles that said tires wear on the roads creates way more particle pollution than exhausts. Almost 100x+ to almost 2000x more. That EV usage is not really at all going to help with pollution.

https://www.rideapart.com/news/590974/study-tire-pollution-emissions-levels/

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jun/03/car-tyres-produce-more-particle-pollution-than-exhausts-tests-show

red sox 777 posted...

Now it's clearly not.

Someone hasn't seen the Fox News coverage.

someone just got written out of the will

https://twitter.com/NoLieWithBTC/status/1535254461215649792

Maniac64 posted...

Someone hasn't seen the Fox News coverage.

I'm pretty sure red sox knows that the modern day Republican party just calls them RINOs and they have god awful approval ratings by Rs nationwide. I never know for sure, but I always feel like red sox is just trolling. Whereas Corrik is actually just kind of lost sometimes, red sox always seems smarter than 98% of his posts.

Pretty sure red sox is unfortunately legitimate. Like I thought he was shitposting when he used to have absolute batshit takes about Crono during the character contests, but then he started politics posting and it was exactly the same. At a certain point you've gotta accept that if someone has been the same way for the better part of two decades, that's just who they are as a person.

red sox has always been insincere, like I get arguing with others who are cemented in on beliefs they truly hold but red sox is an entirely insincere persona