Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Senior Contributor

Re: Wrong, wrong, wrong...

as an old timing man, i dont remember what my point was, so **bleep** too everybody. party on garth!

0 Kudos
Veteran Advisor

Re: Wrong, wrong, wrong...

Your in fine form tonight dap!  Just remeber the gov giveth and the gov taketh cursed be the name of the gov!

0 Kudos
Frequent Contributor

Re: Wrong, wrong, wrong...

Party on dapper!
0 Kudos
Andrew SE NE4036981

was against

I was against the extension of the blenders credit last winter.  You know government, never give up something without something in return.  Right or definitely wrong. 


Mandates to 10% is good for the marketplace as it creates some competition.  Do you think big oil would give any of the additional profits from an additional 10% demand for gasoline to the consumer, farmer, ethanol plant?  No.  Why would big oil (even at 80 cents a gallon profit for blending ethanol) share their market place.  Crack spreads would jump much more than 50 cents per gallon on 10% of total gasoline demand if there was no ethanol...and big oil would be smiling (fwiw...crack spreads were 50 cents a gallon higher on 100% of total gasoline demand in 2007).  Ethanol has to sell to its competition, therefore the mandate.     


Remember, a rising tide lifts all boats.  Ag is good today. 

0 Kudos