|
printable version
- js reader version
- view hidden posts
- tags and related articles
View article without comments
by Stewart A. Alexander
Monday, Jan. 16, 2006 at 10:09 PM
stewartalexander4p&f@adelphia.net
Again gasoline prices are soaring out of control and the petroleum giants are back on track to make record profits. Washington will not act so Californians need to protect their interest by boycotting the petroleum industry.
GASOLINE PRICE HIKING BOYCOTT
Today most Americans have a clear understanding of how inflation works in our economy, fill your gas tank once a week and will understand quickly. With most Californians having to commute daily between home and work gasoline price increases are making more and more people pinch dollars just to make ends meet.
Last Summer we saw gas prices rise above the $3.00 mark all over California and now we see the petroleum giants getting off to an early start to break last years records. 2006 should produce record profits for the petroleum industry and record loses for consumers. Also hit very hard by the increase cost on diesel fuel is the trucking and transportation industry. With the rising cost of diesel fuel the cost for many of the items we must purchase daily are being affected and are driving up consumer prices.
The petroleum industry executives were in hearing before congress in the last quarter of 2005 and it was clearly obvious that the U.S. Senators were more than intimidated in the presence of real power, on Capital Hill the oil executives were in charge.
In 2005 a group of citizens organized the California Gasoline Boycott to challenge out of control price increases. The goal was to bring 87 octane and diesel down to or below $2.25 a gallon. Prices for 87 octane dropped below $2.20 a gallon throughout California even though diesel fuel remained above $2.45 in most places. Now with price increases getting off to an early start we should see gas prices soaring well above $4.00 a gallon by the end of Spring.
Stewart Alexander, the author of the California Gasoline Boycott, believes it is necessary to implement the boycott with the same intensity as the price increases. This is a quarterly boycott and there is no limit on how much fuel a consumer may purchase, the boycott is restricted to two petroleum companies quarterly.
The boycott works as follows: consumers boycott Shell and Unocal 76 January through March, Mobil April through June, Exxon July through September, and Chevron and Texaco October through December.
I would like to see the boycott expand to all 50 states however California is the largest market for petroleum consumption and what works in California gets the attention of America. America must not allow the greed of the oil producing giants to continue down this path of senseless management that will increase poverty, drive up inflation and create a larger burden for families to exist and make ends meet.
For more information regarding the California Gasoline Boycott contact Stewart Alexander, Candidate for Lieutenant Governor, Peace and Freedom Party, at www.salt-g.com..
www.salt-g.com
Report this post as:
by driver
Tuesday, Jan. 17, 2006 at 1:28 AM
"consumers boycott Shell and Unocal 76 January through March ... "
OK. so at the same time they boost up the other gas companies.
THE REAL ANSWER HERE IS TO STOP DRIVING YOUR CAR. TAKE THE BUS OR A BIKE OR CARPOOL TO WORK. WALK MORE.
THE BOYCOTTING "ONE GAS COMPANY" IDEA CAN NEVER WORK.
Report this post as:
by OO
Tuesday, Jan. 17, 2006 at 8:38 AM
cor-jesus.jpeg, image/jpeg, 480x682
error
Report this post as:
by new and improved!
Tuesday, Jan. 17, 2006 at 10:42 AM
I was wanting to post my new and improved logo, and couldn't dream of a better segue to expose the hypocritical cockroaches to the Light. YEA!
Report this post as:
by Viva Chevez
Tuesday, Jan. 17, 2006 at 11:18 AM
Arrange to car pool, use alternate public service bicycle and attempt to restrict purchase to Citgo if possible. Attack on all fronts. Viva Chevez. http://www.citgo.com/SiteMap.jsp http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0516-25.htm
Report this post as:
by question
Tuesday, Jan. 17, 2006 at 11:49 AM
Does that mean shutting down the global indymedia network?
The last I heard, the indymedia is not solar powered.
aHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAhahahahaha
Report this post as:
by Windsong
Tuesday, Jan. 17, 2006 at 12:31 PM
Wasn't the private generator LA IMC used to use which was fueled by recovered or stolen tires replaced by the new hemp burning ram air turbine?
Report this post as:
by Sheepdog
Tuesday, Jan. 17, 2006 at 12:34 PM
Just because the existing power structure has been deliberately set up to feed the fossil fuel industry doesn't mean that we have to resort to non renewables. And CO2 producing ones at that. Viva Chevez.
Report this post as:
by turbinial
Tuesday, Jan. 17, 2006 at 12:41 PM
I bet the GreenPukes wouldn't complain about that exhaust.
Report this post as:
by Humm
Tuesday, Jan. 17, 2006 at 12:48 PM
High resin content would increase the fuel content of the product. I'll get to work on it.
Report this post as:
by johnk
Tuesday, Jan. 17, 2006 at 4:24 PM
The Free Market will take care of it all, after gas goes to $6 a gallon.
The rich will have bulletproof hybrid diesels to travel from castle to castle.
The poor will purchase the used SUVs, and live in them.
The rich will say, "see, capitalism works, because these poor people now get to live in vehicles that are larger than the vehicles they used to live in."
The poor people in cars will get angry an beat up on homeless Mexican people who sleep on the sidewalk.
The rich people will laugh about it, and keep living out their champagne and caviar lifestyle.
Report this post as:
by where do I sign up?
Tuesday, Jan. 17, 2006 at 4:34 PM
I'm sold, baby!
I want to become a lazy and shiftless thief, also known as a Leftists, who will always bitch about the rich but won't do shit to lift it's ass and go for a goal.
I wanna be a useless Leftist. I wanna join a commune. What the Left offers is nothing but stagnation, and I can't wait to hook up to the communal bong and wither away while blaming others.
Report this post as:
by johnk
Tuesday, Jan. 17, 2006 at 5:15 PM
I forgot to point out that the rich will blame the poor for their condition, even during a global depression.
Report this post as:
by just what DO you mean?
Tuesday, Jan. 17, 2006 at 8:33 PM
I'm not rich, far from it. But I'm not a collective bedwetter who always blames everyone else for our troubles.
I hate to break it to the Unbathed, but for there to be up, there has to be down. For there to be Light, there has to be darkness. For there to be winners, there has to be losers.
Guess which one the Left is?
Always down, always Dark, always bitching and complaining yet doing nothing beyond their protest marches, which is nothing but a chance to get face time and have a big old Grope and Slurp. Always marginalized, always the ugly women, always the ugly men, always the stench, always the stupidity and irrationality, always the carpet burns from cowardice.
The Left has never contributed anything of substance to Society. They always take it down. They talk, but that's all. Propping up Hussein was all the world needed to see about their "human rights" prattle.
By the way, the Right pushed through the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Thought I might throw that in, seeing as what day it is, so don't you Unbathed try and claim it was your doing.
All that said, I still don't know what you meant, but I do know the Left means stagnation and Death. Let Sheepshitferbrains and nessie be your guides.
Report this post as:
by johnk
Tuesday, Jan. 17, 2006 at 10:38 PM
If fuel costs double, we'll stop running some machinery because it costs too much to operate it, or the products won't have a market. People won't be able to pay off their loans. This time of transition could become a depression. Then, a lot of people will be poor.
A lot of middle class people will become poor.
Also, you've really got to get with reality if you think it was "the Right" that passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The bill was promoted by Kennedy, and it had bi-partisan support in the North and West. Southern Democrats opposed it, because they represented the interests of white southerners who wanted segregation.
Northern and Western Republicans were more progressive than Southern Democrats, on the segregation issue. It's pretty simple.
Dixiecrats voted against thier party many times, to vote for a conservative Republican. They got their name because many white Southern Democrats broke away from the party to vote for Strom Thurmond's third party candidacy for President.
It wasn't the Right that passed that law, it was many Democrats and Republicans.
Many of the people who started the Civil Rights Movement some 20+ years before, that did the hard work that led to the Civil Rights Bill, were Leftists. The Right were calling MLK a Communist, saying he associated with Communists. In fact, he probably knew his share.
When Black people needed help to get equal rights after WW2, it wasn't the Right that took up the cause. It was the Left.
Oh, and the kooky Right wing that included the KKK hated Kennedy because he was a Catholic. They thought he was the puppet of the Pope.
Report this post as:
|