Oil over $108 / Barrel

[dkwid]

jordan

 

[MikeSF340]

Jordan? Don't know about a democracy but they have a HOT queen!

 

[ackattacker]

Jordon is a hybrid. It is a Constitutional Monarchy similar to England circa 1708. They do hold parliamentary elections. Unlike modern England however the King does wield real power including appointing governors. This is slowly changing though and it's likely Jordon will make a transition to a more true democracy without the need for rioting in the streets.

 

[earhart]

Jordon is a hybrid. It is a Constitutional Monarchy similar to England circa 1708. They do hold parliamentary elections. Unlike modern England however the King does wield real power including appointing governors. This is slowly changing though and it's likely Jordon will make a transition to a more true democracy without the need for rioting in the streets.

JordAn.

"more true democracy"- no.

Agree with some of the sentiments, though.

 

[atpcliff]

FlyinGuy:

How about we (the good ole US of A) get a real "Energy Policy"! But no....we need to listen to some liberal pansies that want us to hedge our futures on some unstable dictator in the middle east and drive a smart car.

The Liberals, and conservatives, like Nixon, wanted an Energy Policy way back in the 1970s. Many conservatives today are just catching on that relying on ME oil is bad for us.
Nixon proposed a 45 mph natl speed limit, as, overall, 45 is best econ speed for an ICE engine. Congress wanted 65: They compromised, which is how we got the 55 mph limit. I bet if we switched to a 45 mph limit today, we could stop importing ME crude!!!


BoilerUP:

My pickup gets 15mph, and I drive it because (among other reasons) its paid for and reliable.

Taking on a loan to buy a new vehicle simply because of fuel economy is a financially stupid decision...

You are correct, unless you purchased a car like the Nissan Leaf, Chevy Volt, or Honda Civic NG-those cars use (or can use) very little oil.

Short-term cost-wise, it WOULD make sense to buy an older, small, used car that gets great mileage. When you needed the truck, drive the truck. If you had to go 8 miles to the grocery store, use the little high-mileage car. That is one of the reasons I have kept my 1993 Civic Si-35 mpg.


Data:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyer1015
Peoples' free will cannot be oppressed forever.....


There is no reason why ANYONE should be driving a SUV/car that consumes less than 20 miles/gallon.

Is there anything else you want to dictate to us my Leige?

Data, U R correct. There are LOTS of reasons why someone needs an SUV/Truck/Car that gets less than 20 mpg. There are also some not very smart reasons for driving a low-mileage vehicle.


Baronman:

Love him or hate him, Gadaffi is stability.

In an old way of thinking, the above IS correct. But, if you look at TV or the Inet today, you can see that Gadaffi's system is VERY UNSTABLE. If it WAS stable, everyone in Libya would be at home, and they would give him a high favorability rating!

cliff
AMS

 

[igneousy2]

The answer is for the government to do nothing.

The government just makes these kinds of problems worse because usually there is a government program on each side of the problem pushing against each other or even worse, actually do the exact opposite of what they intend to do....IE HUD programs to make housing "affordable" by giving downpayment assistance, 3% down loans, and Fannie/Freddie underwriting almost 100% of all mortgages in this counntry which keeps mortgage rates artificially low which all combine to increase the overall capacity to pay for real estate....which increases prices...gasoline prices controls in the 1970's...gasoline price controls in Hawaii 5 years ago(lasted less than a year)...

I actually see no problem...prices go up...people pay more...people drive less...peope buy more fuel efficient cars...airlines flying less efficient airplanes either replace them or die...we move to larger capacity airplanes flying less frequently...that is what capitalism is all about...and that is the roots this country needs to get back to.

The reality the only thing the government can do to make things better is...get out of the way.

 

[nwaredtail]

This will bring more consolidation and parking of airplanes.

Good thing there are DC-9's and MD-88's to park, otherwise........ Like I said, my $ is on 9500 by 2015.

 

[boxjockey]

The answer is for the government to do nothing.

The government just makes these kinds of problems worse because usually there is a government program on each side of the problem pushing against each other or even worse, actually do the exact opposite of what they intend to do....IE HUD programs to make housing "affordable" by giving downpayment assistance, 3% down loans, and Fannie/Freddie underwriting almost 100% of all mortgages in this counntry which keeps mortgage rates artificially low which all combine to increase the overall capacity to pay for real estate....which increases prices...gasoline prices controls in the 1970's...gasoline price controls in Hawaii 5 years ago(lasted less than a year)...

I actually see no problem...prices go up...people pay more...people drive less...peope buy more fuel efficient cars...airlines flying less efficient airplanes either replace them or die...we move to larger capacity airplanes flying less frequently...that is what capitalism is all about...and that is the roots this country needs to get back to.

The reality the only thing the government can do to make things better is...get out of the way.

You sir, can clearly see the "big picture". Well done.

box

 

[vikesfanIV]

How is Airtran, your merger partner, hedged? If they aren't protected at all, that could affect you too.


OYS

Good point... I'm sure it will to some degree. For 2010 Southwest flew approximately 24.8 billion ASM's, Airtran flew 5.7 billion.

So, just based roughly on how many miles each carrier flew, if they are 0% hedged it would have an overall impact of reducing our hedging effectiveness somewhere around 20-25%. Not great but not the end of the world either.

 

[maxblast72]

Good point... I'm sure it will to some degree. For 2010 Southwest flew approximately 24.8 billion ASM's, Airtran flew 5.7 billion.

So, just based roughly on how many miles each carrier flew, if they are 0% hedged it would have an overall impact of reducing our hedging effectiveness somewhere around 20-25%. Not great but not the end of the world either.

Not sure where you got your numbers from but Southwest flew 98.4 Billion ASMs in 2010 while Airtran flew 24.1 Billion ASMs in 2010. Also, according to Airtran's 10-K annual SEC filing, Airtran had 52% of their 2011 fuel needs hedged as of 12/31/2010. Benefits start kicking in just under $90/barrel. From the chart on page 59 of the filing, Airtran would make $75 million on the derivatives if oil averaged $110/barrel helping reduce economic fuel cost felt by Airtran. So don't worry, Southwest pilots won't be subsizing Airtran fuel costs.

For the past 2 years, Airtran's economic fuel cost per gallon has been lower than Southwests. Here are the numbers:

Airtran 2009: $1.87/gal
Southwest 2009: $1.97/gal

Airtran 2010: $2.33/gal
Southwest 2010: $2.39/gal