Fuel prices aren't dropping
Guest
Posts: n/a
You don't live on the west coast then, its still over $2.15 a gal.
BigJohnson@mailcity.com wrote:
> Gas is down to $1,899.
>
>
> mike hunt
BigJohnson@mailcity.com wrote:
> Gas is down to $1,899.
>
>
> mike hunt
Guest
Posts: n/a
On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 02:42:31 GMT, Mike <pactrail@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>BigJohnson@mailcity.com wrote:
>> Gas is down to $1,899.
>
>You don't live on the west coast then, its still over $2.15 a gal.
93 octane is still above $2.29 in New England...
>BigJohnson@mailcity.com wrote:
>> Gas is down to $1,899.
>
>You don't live on the west coast then, its still over $2.15 a gal.
93 octane is still above $2.29 in New England...
Guest
Posts: n/a
In article <rI9xc.6271$uX2.2706@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink. net>,
Mike <pactrail@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> You don't live on the west coast then, its still over $2.15 a gal.
In the SF Bay Area it's over $2.50/gal for REGULAR. It will be at $3.00
before the summer peaks.
--
George Graves
------------------
"This election is shaping up great. Our choices
are a guy who has a lot of second thoughts, or
a guy who has never had a first thought."
-- Jay Leno
Mike <pactrail@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> You don't live on the west coast then, its still over $2.15 a gal.
In the SF Bay Area it's over $2.50/gal for REGULAR. It will be at $3.00
before the summer peaks.
--
George Graves
------------------
"This election is shaping up great. Our choices
are a guy who has a lot of second thoughts, or
a guy who has never had a first thought."
-- Jay Leno
Guest
Posts: n/a
On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 08:12:27 GMT, George Graves
<gmgravesnos@pacbell.net> wrote:
>In article <rI9xc.6271$uX2.2706@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink. net>,
> Mike <pactrail@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>> You don't live on the west coast then, its still over $2.15 a gal.
>
>In the SF Bay Area it's over $2.50/gal for REGULAR. It will be at $3.00
>before the summer peaks.
I think the Bay area needs to have their own special fuel blended just
for them, since they have different weather than the rest of the west
coast. The left has had control in California so long that it would
take 10-20 years to fix the messes they have created, if you could
even convince the people that there is a problem.
I visited England (at least as liberal as California) about 3 years
ago and was astonished to find that the "subjects" there felt noble
about paying about $4.50 a gallon in fuel because they felt the high
prices encouraged conservation. I got blank stares of disbelief when
I asked them if they felt raped by the government due to the $3 per
gallon tax they were assessed.
<gmgravesnos@pacbell.net> wrote:
>In article <rI9xc.6271$uX2.2706@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink. net>,
> Mike <pactrail@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>> You don't live on the west coast then, its still over $2.15 a gal.
>
>In the SF Bay Area it's over $2.50/gal for REGULAR. It will be at $3.00
>before the summer peaks.
I think the Bay area needs to have their own special fuel blended just
for them, since they have different weather than the rest of the west
coast. The left has had control in California so long that it would
take 10-20 years to fix the messes they have created, if you could
even convince the people that there is a problem.
I visited England (at least as liberal as California) about 3 years
ago and was astonished to find that the "subjects" there felt noble
about paying about $4.50 a gallon in fuel because they felt the high
prices encouraged conservation. I got blank stares of disbelief when
I asked them if they felt raped by the government due to the $3 per
gallon tax they were assessed.
Guest
Posts: n/a
On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 08:27:57 -0400, Bob Muse <bmuse1@no.spam.comcast.net>,
wrote:
>
>I visited England (at least as liberal as California) about 3 years
>ago and was astonished to find that the "subjects" there felt noble
>about paying about $4.50 a gallon in fuel because they felt the high
>prices encouraged conservation. I got blank stares of disbelief when
>I asked them if they felt raped by the government due to the $3 per
>gallon tax they were assessed.
Oh those were the days. Cheap fuel, low taxes. Now Tony B Liar wants
to add another tax increase in Sept to buy a few more bombs.
Pete
--
<iowna156@rustclubalfa.com>
156 2.0 TS (2001) - Proteo Rosso (his)
147 2.0 TS (2002) - Gem Green (her's)
wrote:
>
>I visited England (at least as liberal as California) about 3 years
>ago and was astonished to find that the "subjects" there felt noble
>about paying about $4.50 a gallon in fuel because they felt the high
>prices encouraged conservation. I got blank stares of disbelief when
>I asked them if they felt raped by the government due to the $3 per
>gallon tax they were assessed.
Oh those were the days. Cheap fuel, low taxes. Now Tony B Liar wants
to add another tax increase in Sept to buy a few more bombs.
Pete
--
<iowna156@rustclubalfa.com>
156 2.0 TS (2001) - Proteo Rosso (his)
147 2.0 TS (2002) - Gem Green (her's)
Guest
Posts: n/a
"daytripper" <day_trippr@REMOVEyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5jcac0l5poktm2j2u5gc7dv0t2gtt40cql@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 02:42:31 GMT, Mike <pactrail@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> >BigJohnson@mailcity.com wrote:
> >> Gas is down to $1,899.
> >
> >You don't live on the west coast then, its still over $2.15 a gal.
>
> 93 octane is still above $2.29 in New England...
87 octane is $98.5 a litre in BC. That's nearly four dollars
a gallon, or about $3 US a gallon. You still have it cheap...
-'dreas
Guest
Posts: n/a
On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 13:26:41 GMT, "dreas" <dreas@shaw.ca>, wrote:
>87 octane is $98.5 a litre in BC
Please excuse my ignorance but What do you use 87 octane for?
Pete
--
<iowna156@rustclubalfa.com>
156 2.0 TS (2001) - Proteo Rosso (his)
147 2.0 TS (2002) - Gem Green (her's)
>87 octane is $98.5 a litre in BC
Please excuse my ignorance but What do you use 87 octane for?
Pete
--
<iowna156@rustclubalfa.com>
156 2.0 TS (2001) - Proteo Rosso (his)
147 2.0 TS (2002) - Gem Green (her's)
Guest
Posts: n/a
In article <rqbbc05msusovtkpml9r7o6lu4tr1tc5p4@4ax.com>, bmuse1
@no.spam.comcast.net says...
> I visited England (at least as liberal as California) about 3 years
> ago and was astonished to find that the "subjects" there felt noble
> about paying about $4.50 a gallon in fuel because they felt the high
> prices encouraged conservation. I got blank stares of disbelief when
> I asked them if they felt raped by the government due to the $3 per
> gallon tax they were assessed.
>
you visited a different england to the one I live in then.
We currently have threats of a fuel protest due to fuel being too
expensive at about 85p(about $1.55USD) per litre. About $5.89 per US
gallon, or about $6.98 for an imperial/UK gallon.
Scary thing is I'm looking at at Alfa (either a 33, a 75 2litre TS, or a
155 narrowbody) for fuel economy purposes. Not usually most people
thoughts when they look at Alfas, I admit, but far better than my
current car, and probably as much fun to drive with better handling
thrown in.
--
The poster formerly known as Skodapilot.
http://www.bouncing-czechs.com
@no.spam.comcast.net says...
> I visited England (at least as liberal as California) about 3 years
> ago and was astonished to find that the "subjects" there felt noble
> about paying about $4.50 a gallon in fuel because they felt the high
> prices encouraged conservation. I got blank stares of disbelief when
> I asked them if they felt raped by the government due to the $3 per
> gallon tax they were assessed.
>
you visited a different england to the one I live in then.
We currently have threats of a fuel protest due to fuel being too
expensive at about 85p(about $1.55USD) per litre. About $5.89 per US
gallon, or about $6.98 for an imperial/UK gallon.
Scary thing is I'm looking at at Alfa (either a 33, a 75 2litre TS, or a
155 narrowbody) for fuel economy purposes. Not usually most people
thoughts when they look at Alfas, I admit, but far better than my
current car, and probably as much fun to drive with better handling
thrown in.
--
The poster formerly known as Skodapilot.
http://www.bouncing-czechs.com


