http://www.somerset-kentucky.com/newslive/x998003383/City-preparing-public-gas-station
http://www.cspnet.com/fuels-news-prices-analysis/fuels-news/articles/why-somerset-ky-planning-open-gas-station
Personally, I think this is a good shot across the bow against collusion in gasoline pricing. When I posted this on Facebook, I was surprised at the number of people who disagreed.
I think it's a fantastic idea. It's needed up this way, too.
Looks like the city is cutting off it's nose to spite it's face. This will lead to Mexican type gas retail. Only the state will sell gas when and where it wants to. No thanks.
Might be okay if the local government obeys all the rules; property taxes, zoning, regulations, etc...
But when the referee gets in the game, its over. No way this can remain fair.
The local government should be asking why no competitors come in and punish any fraud if found.
But if there are needlessly restrictive policies or regulations (within their authority), they should get out of the way.
Usually those who created a problem are in the best position to fix it.
Quote from: Avalanchez71 on June 19, 2014, 08:11:11 AM
Looks like the city is cutting off it's nose to spite it's face. This will lead to Mexican type gas retail. Only the state will sell gas when and where it wants to. No thanks.
I don't think this will lead to that.
Quote from: hbelkins on June 18, 2014, 11:50:51 AM
http://www.somerset-kentucky.com/newslive/x998003383/City-preparing-public-gas-station
http://www.cspnet.com/fuels-news-prices-analysis/fuels-news/articles/why-somerset-ky-planning-open-gas-station
Personally, I think this is a good shot across the bow against collusion in gasoline pricing. When I posted this on Facebook, I was surprised at the number of people who disagreed.
I think in theory this is a good idea. If a city statute was passed on how the station will function I think it will work. It's a local government helping it's people, not a hostile takeover of private companies. However it should be closely monitored.
iPhone
This is basically socialism. If collusion is actually occurring, that is illegal, and the proper role of government would be to prosecute that on behalf of its citizens, or to start regulating the cost of fuel, not to start selling gas.
Now, if as with electricity and roads there is a good argument to make that government can leverage its economies of scale to make the provision of fuel more efficient, and it therefore should be a public service then there is merit to this and other socialist ideas, but I doubt a random county in Kentucky had the resources to really study this.
Quote from: corco on June 19, 2014, 12:21:51 PM
This is basically socialism. If collusion is actually occurring, that is illegal, and the proper role of government would be to prosecute that on behalf of its citizens, or to start regulating the cost of fuel, not to start selling gas.
Now, if as with electricity and roads there is a good argument to make that government can leverage its economies of scale to make the provision of fuel more efficient, and it therefore should be a public service then there is merit to this and other socialist ideas, but I doubt a random county in Kentucky had the resources to really study this.
I don't understand how this is socialism. The city is an entity to sell gasoline. It's not forcing it's citizens to buy there, or manipulating gas prices (an average of other stations is fair). It is not shutting down competitors.
They are using a capitalist idea to provide a service to its' citizens
iPhone
Quote from: Arkansastravelguy on June 19, 2014, 12:42:39 PM
Quote from: corco on June 19, 2014, 12:21:51 PM
This is basically socialism. If collusion is actually occurring, that is illegal, and the proper role of government would be to prosecute that on behalf of its citizens, or to start regulating the cost of fuel, not to start selling gas.
Now, if as with electricity and roads there is a good argument to make that government can leverage its economies of scale to make the provision of fuel more efficient, and it therefore should be a public service then there is merit to this and other socialist ideas, but I doubt a random county in Kentucky had the resources to really study this.
I don't understand how this is socialism. The city is an entity to sell gasoline. It's not forcing it's citizens to buy there, or manipulating gas prices (an average of other stations is fair). It is not shutting down competitors.
They are using a capitalist idea to provide a service to its' citizens
iPhone
Agreed on those points, but if it turns out that those other stations had a reason for those prices, they will go out of business because of government interference. A government entity highly undercutting price probably isn't overt socialism for the reasons you mentioned, but it is a backdoor way into it.
If they are colluding, in fact, and prices would be lower in a fair market, then collusion is illegal so I don't see why they don't just prosecute that. Seems more sustainable and ethical than just blackmailing private gas stations with a public fuel shop ready to go at any given point. This seems like treating the symptoms, when the disease is still out there.I do think government intervention is warranted here in some way, I just really feel like government going into business should always be the very last option considered.
As was mentioned up thread, government is the referee- it is their job to make sure everyone is playing nice. It is not their job to get down on the field and start tackling.
Quote from: corco on June 19, 2014, 12:53:38 PM
Quote from: Arkansastravelguy on June 19, 2014, 12:42:39 PM
Quote from: corco on June 19, 2014, 12:21:51 PM
This is basically socialism. If collusion is actually occurring, that is illegal, and the proper role of government would be to prosecute that on behalf of its citizens, or to start regulating the cost of fuel, not to start selling gas.
Now, if as with electricity and roads there is a good argument to make that government can leverage its economies of scale to make the provision of fuel more efficient, and it therefore should be a public service then there is merit to this and other socialist ideas, but I doubt a random county in Kentucky had the resources to really study this.
I don't understand how this is socialism. The city is an entity to sell gasoline. It's not forcing it's citizens to buy there, or manipulating gas prices (an average of other stations is fair). It is not shutting down competitors.
They are using a capitalist idea to provide a service to its' citizens
iPhone
Agreed on those points, but if it turns out that those other stations had a reason for those prices, they will go out of business because of government interference. A government entity highly undercutting price probably isn't overt socialism for the reasons you mentioned, but it is a backdoor way into it.
If they are colluding, in fact, and prices would be lower in a fair market, then collusion is illegal so I don't see why they don't just prosecute that. Seems more sustainable and ethical than just blackmailing private gas stations with a public fuel shop ready to go at any given point. This seems like treating the symptoms, when the disease is still out there.I do think government intervention is warranted here in some way, I just really feel like government going into business should always be the very last option considered.
As was mentioned up thread, government is the referee- it is their job to make sure everyone is playing nice. It is not their job to get down on the field and start tackling.
This would be a good case for a constable if they wanted it.
In the Coos Bay-North Bend OR area, the collusion has gone on for decades. In the 1970's you could come here and see the exact same price at every station whether it was an independent or a branded one. The way it worked then was that the station owners gathered at a local cafe for breakfast, one guy would say what he thought the price of gas would be, the rest would go along and that was that.
Today it is more about the local jobbers jobbing us since they also own the stations. Go 45 miles up the coast to Florence and there you will see a real competitive environment with prices lower than here and even lower than Eugene-Springfield (60 miles away), which is where the pipeline terminates.
Socialism? Hell, I don't care if it's Stalinism with gulags and executions if it gets gas price gougers dealt with! We had over 100 local people file a complaint with the state AG years ago (Hardy Myers) and after 2 1/2 years he could find out nothing. I found out everything within a couple of visits to gas stations where I quizzed the employees. If you want to count on the state (in Oregon) to save your ass from predatory pricing, think again!
Rick
Somerset is going to buy its gas from a local refinery, the former Somerset Oil Company. There were a number of Somerset stations in the counties around Pulaski, including a station in Irvine (Estill County) where my former boss used to work during the summers as a pump jockey.
Somerset is actually closer to Knoxville than to Louisville, so it shouldn't be held hostage to any supposed monopoly that Marathon-Ashland has on the wholesale market in Kentucky. I remember when I was a kid hearing that some local stations got their gas from a terminal in Louisville, while others got it from one in Knoxville.
I really wish Sheetz would come into northern Kentucky. That might spur some competition.
Quote from: corco on June 19, 2014, 12:21:51 PM
This is basically socialism.
That's why it works so well.
I had actually noticed that Somerset was about .30 higher than what I had seen in Corbin on my last trip in that area. I typically don't like to see the government getting involved in matters that should be left to the private sector. With that said, I travel a lot for my job, and really get tired of seeing the spikes and large swings in pricing from market to market. Why is Evansville and Louisville usually the highest places in Indiana and Kentucky, or why is Henderson always about .20 higher than Owensboro and at least .25 higher than Hopkinsville?
Quote from: Captain Jack on June 20, 2014, 01:59:05 AM
I had actually noticed that Somerset was about .30 higher than what I had seen in Corbin on my last trip in that area. I typically don't like to see the government getting involved in matters that should be left to the private sector. With that said, I travel a lot for my job, and really get tired of seeing the spikes and large swings in pricing from market to market. Why is Evansville and Louisville usually the highest places in Indiana and Kentucky, or why is Henderson always about .20 higher than Owensboro and at least .25 higher than Hopkinsville?
Is it lower than Evansville? I seem to recall that the big station on the West side before the bridge seemed to have lower prices.
Louisville is more expensive because of the need for RFG.
Corbin is one of the cheapest markets in this part of the state.
It is not really "socialism" but it is an interference with the Market, the only perfect thing that can exist on Earth. In the Market, every person acts in his own best interest, and his value is exactly equal to his $$. And Market actors only get some of another Market actor's $$ via a fair exchange in which both felt they were doing the best thing for their own interest. The Market will respond, in relation to each person's value. Perfect.
In politics, every person will also act in his own best interest, however every person's value is exactly equal. One vote. And government has the power to involuntarially (under threat of jail and at the point of a gun) to take as many $$ from each person as it wants. So, unlike in the Market, illogical decisions will be made. If 50% +1 want gasoline to be $0.99/gallon, then government will sell it for that. At the expense of others, since values are skewed. Those who pay the freight are different from those who receive the benefit.
Quote from: SP Cook on June 22, 2014, 07:27:39 AM
It is not really "socialism" but it is an interference with the Market, the only perfect thing that can exist on Earth. In the Market, every person acts in his own best interest, and his value is exactly equal to his $$. And Market actors only get some of another Market actor's $$ via a fair exchange in which both felt they were doing the best thing for their own interest. The Market will respond, in relation to each person's value. Perfect.
In politics, every person will also act in his own best interest, however every person's value is exactly equal. One vote. And government has the power to involuntarially (under threat of jail and at the point of a gun) to take as many $$ from each person as it wants. So, unlike in the Market, illogical decisions will be made. If 50% +1 want gasoline to be $0.99/gallon, then government will sell it for that. At the expense of others, since values are skewed. Those who pay the freight are different from those who receive the benefit.
That's all fine and dandy for an ideal until the market winds up rigged. Crony capitalism is just ripping people off with nothing going back to the people, just the pockets of the cheats.
Rick
Quote from: nexus73 on June 22, 2014, 11:08:25 AMThat's all fine and dandy for an ideal until the market winds up rigged. Crony capitalism is just ripping people off with nothing going back to the people, just the pockets of the cheats.
This is true. Capitalism gets blamed for a lot of things that are true not for capitalism but for
crony capitalism. And the really bad thing about crony capitalism is that it usually goes hand-in-hand with crony government, which is as bad, if not worse, and is certainly worse when the two are combined.
Quote from: nexus73 on June 19, 2014, 02:25:47 PM
Socialism? Hell, I don't care if it's Stalinism with gulags and executions...
I'll take this as well-intended hyperbole, because the only problem with actually saying this is that when enough people say it, that's exactly what you get. Just ask the Russians, the Chinese, the Vietnamese, the Cubans, the...
Quote from: SP Cook on June 22, 2014, 07:27:39 AM
The Market will respond, in relation to each person's value. Perfect.
And this is fair HOW?!? How much money one has is determined by more uncontrollable factors (how much money your parents have, whether the hiring manager at certain companies likes you, whether disaster hits your home, whether the economy decides to tank into a recession, etc.) than controllable ones. Something that is so unfair can never be perfect.
The more I think about it, the more okay I am with the idea. My first reaction was that this seemed like blatant governmental overreach, but this is local government doing what it can to make the lives of its citizens better. The fact that the system today allowed it to get to the point that government actually opening a gas station and getting into business is the best idea is terrible, and I wish the state and the feds were better at controlling gouging/collusion (a state regulation that requires gas companies to set their price at no more than x% higher than the purchasing price of fuel + the cost of whatever clearly marked and delineated additives (like Techron) that allows station owners to get a reasonable return on investment while also not gouging customers would be something I support since gas is more or less a necessity in rural areas as much as power and water. Evidence also shows that most convenience stores profit off the convenience store side far more than the gas side, in general, which makes it more tenable.).
At the end of the day though, this probably is the only tool available to the local jurisdiction to do something about it, and something has to be done, so it's good that local government is trying something innovative to fix the problem. It just tells me that the system is broken if this is the only thing that can be done.
I would love to see something like this transition into a citizen -owned coop though, where the local citizenry owns the station through some sort of quasi-governmental or even entirely non-governmental, non-profit body. I don't know about in Kentucky, but out in the plains states, gas co-ops are fairly common to help keep down the cost of fuel- though it can be difficult for out of towners to get access to those pumps. I don't know of it being done through government, but the model of fuel co-op in rural areas is that folks basically pay an annual membership fee that covers the costs of pump upkeep and things like that, and then gas is bought more or less at cost. Non-members either pay an inflated rate or don't have access to the pumps. If you wanted to make it a government-run co-op, I guess local taxpayers would pay taxes and get automatic access to the pumps, but then you'd still probably want a member program for people who live just outside of whatever taxing entity.
Quote from: nexus73 on June 19, 2014, 02:25:47 PM
Socialism? Hell, I don't care if it's Stalinism with gulags and executions...
(From qguy) I'll take this as well-intended hyperbole, because the only problem with actually saying this is that when enough people say it, that's exactly what you get. Just ask the Russians, the Chinese, the Vietnamese, the Cubans, the...
Congrats on having an IQ higher than a sponge! A truly intelligent person would have known it was hyperbole and needed to comment no further.
Rick
Quote from: nexus73 on June 22, 2014, 09:15:26 PM
Quote from: nexus73 on June 19, 2014, 02:25:47 PM
Socialism? Hell, I don't care if it's Stalinism with gulags and executions...
(From qguy) I'll take this as well-intended hyperbole, because the only problem with actually saying this is that when enough people say it, that's exactly what you get. Just ask the Russians, the Chinese, the Vietnamese, the Cubans, the...
Congrats on having an IQ higher than a sponge! A truly intelligent person would have known it was hyperbole and needed to comment no further.
Rick
Congrats on having a personality lower than a reptile. A truly human person would have simply pointed out–without the venom–that I missed the cue.
I would've responded, "Oops, my bad;" we both would've chuckled over the whole thing and been on our way. Now wouldn't that have been much better?
Quote from: SP Cook on June 22, 2014, 07:27:39 AM
It is not really "socialism" but it is an interference with the Market, the only perfect thing that can exist on Earth. In the Market, every person acts in his own best interest, and his value is exactly equal to his $$. And Market actors only get some of another Market actor's $$ via a fair exchange in which both felt they were doing the best thing for their own interest. The Market will respond, in relation to each person's value. Perfect.
But the Market produced government, because the Market exists in a state of nature, and individuals acting within it attained Success at creating the man-made institution of government. The Market — which is perfect — did and continues to allow it. Nothing exists unless the Market allows it. Government is no exception.
Quote from: qguy on June 23, 2014, 02:35:07 PM
Quote from: nexus73 on June 22, 2014, 09:15:26 PM
Quote from: nexus73 on June 19, 2014, 02:25:47 PM
Socialism? Hell, I don't care if it's Stalinism with gulags and executions
(From qguy) I'll take this as well-intended hyperbole, because the only problem with actually saying this is that when enough people say it, that's exactly what you get. Just ask the Russians, the Chinese, the Vietnamese, the Cubans, the
Congrats on having an IQ higher than a sponge! A truly intelligent person would have known it was hyperbole and needed to comment no further.
Rick
Congrats on having a personality lower than a reptile. A truly human person would have simply pointed outwithout the venomthat I missed the cue.
I would've responded, "Oops, my bad;" we both would've chuckled over the whole thing and been on our way. Now wouldn't that have been much better?
Congrats on bringing it out with your approach. You could have made a better reply too but you chose not to, thus you got the fangs.
Rick
Quote from: nexus73 on June 23, 2014, 07:27:43 PMCongrats on bringing it out with your approach. You could have made a better reply too but you chose not to, thus you got the fangs.
My approach? I could see if I started ripping on you or something, but I didn't so why reach for the nuclear option right out of the box? Why so techy in the first place? Sheesh, just dial it down a notch.
Quote from: qguy on June 24, 2014, 07:52:47 AM
Quote from: nexus73 on June 23, 2014, 07:27:43 PMCongrats on bringing it out with your approach. You could have made a better reply too but you chose not to, thus you got the fangs.
My approach? I could see if I started ripping on you or something, but I didn't so why reach for the nuclear option right out of the box? Why so techy in the first place? Sheesh, just dial it down a notch.
When you come out of the box playing the "oblivious" card and then go on a political rant about the Eeeevils Of Communism, you pushed my button and since I was USAF/SAC (radio ops) with the mission of delivering the EWO over the air, you got nuked of course...LOL!
Now back 'em off buddy if you want to have a measure of peace. That's my profession you know!
Rick
Quote from: Pete from Boston on June 23, 2014, 04:05:11 PM
Quote from: SP Cook on June 22, 2014, 07:27:39 AM
It is not really "socialism" but it is an interference with the Market, the only perfect thing that can exist on Earth. In the Market, every person acts in his own best interest, and his value is exactly equal to his $$. And Market actors only get some of another Market actor's $$ via a fair exchange in which both felt they were doing the best thing for their own interest. The Market will respond, in relation to each person's value. Perfect.
But the Market produced government, because the Market exists in a state of nature, and individuals acting within it attained Success at creating the man-made institution of government. The Market — which is perfect — did and continues to allow it. Nothing exists unless the Market allows it. Government is no exception.
I think we are going on a limb calling gasoline a "market". In today's times it falls closer to a necessity than a market. Although it is possible to not use gasoline (walk, bike, etc), for an overwhelming percentage of Americas population it would cause a severe disruption in daily life not to have gasoline. Although I'm conservative and dislike big government, I do think it should be regulated as like electricity is since it's similar as a necessity.
iPhone
Quote from: Arkansastravelguy on June 24, 2014, 10:40:50 AM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on June 23, 2014, 04:05:11 PM
Quote from: SP Cook on June 22, 2014, 07:27:39 AM
It is not really "socialism" but it is an interference with the Market, the only perfect thing that can exist on Earth. In the Market, every person acts in his own best interest, and his value is exactly equal to his $$. And Market actors only get some of another Market actor's $$ via a fair exchange in which both felt they were doing the best thing for their own interest. The Market will respond, in relation to each person's value. Perfect.
But the Market produced government, because the Market exists in a state of nature, and individuals acting within it attained Success at creating the man-made institution of government. The Market — which is perfect — did and continues to allow it. Nothing exists unless the Market allows it. Government is no exception.
I think we are going on a limb calling gasoline a "market". In today's times it falls closer to a necessity than a market. Although it is possible to not use gasoline (walk, bike, etc), for an overwhelming percentage of Americas population it would cause a severe disruption in daily life not to have gasoline. Although I'm conservative and dislike big government, I do think it should be regulated as like electricity is since it's similar as a necessity.
iPhone
Gas and electricity are the same. You don't necessarily need electricity. You could live in a shack and cook food over a fire, not have AC, not have TV, etc. However that wouldn't be a very good lifestyle. Neither would riding a bike or walking 20 miles to work everyday.
Quote from: nexus73 on June 24, 2014, 10:16:58 AMWhen you come out of the box playing the "oblivious" card and then go on a political rant about the Eeeevils Of Communism...
1. Hadn't thought I was, what's that, playing the "oblivious" card, but OK whatever. One of the things I've done in my career is teach communication; one of the primary principles is that when there is miscommunication, the error is always with the communicator, not the one being communicated to, so my bad.
2. Didn't know a single line was a rant, but OK you can have that too. I suppose.
Quote from: nexus73 on June 24, 2014, 10:16:58 AM
...I was USAF/SAC (radio ops) with the mission of delivering the EWO over the air...
Cool.
Quote from: nexus73 on June 24, 2014, 10:16:58 AMNow back 'em off buddy if you want to have a measure of peace. That's my profession you know!
You can't do anything to disturb my peace, but I get the reference. Very good!
Quote from: nexus73 on June 24, 2014, 10:16:58 AM
...you pushed my button...
Howzabout we just say we accidentally pushed each other buttons (or is that "turned each other's keys" ha-ha) and call it a day?
Okay, it's a day! :bigass:
Now with all that said, I sure wish we had the gas prices of the late 1990's back!
Rick
Quote from: SP Cook on June 22, 2014, 07:27:39 AM
It is not really "socialism" but it is an interference with the Market, the only perfect thing that can exist on Earth.
That's hilarious.
Some more news coverage of this situation:
http://www.lex18.com/news/lex-18-investigates-somerset-s-gas-war/
Quote"'I think it's going to lead to a lot of price fixing, anti-trust issues,' said State Sen. Chris Girdler."
Sorry, but there are already price fixing and anti-trust issues. Gas station owners in individual locales collude on prices. It's as obvious as the day is long. No one station owner seems willing to undercut everyone else by a significant amount. There's no logical reason why gas prices in Town A are all within a penny or two of each other, while gas prices in Town B, 25 miles away -- which is closer to the terminal, so transportation costs should be lower -- are generally a dime higher than in Town A, and gas in Town C, 20 miles even closer to the terminal, is a dime higher still.
The station is now open.
http://www.kentucky.com/2014/07/19/3343236/ky-town-starts-retail-gas-venture.html?sp=/99/164/263/