Tbar220 From United States, joined Feb 2000, 6892 posts, RR: 38 Posted (5 years 5 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 433 times:
Gas prices for Iraqi's are insanely low at around 5-10 cents a gallon. Part of the reason is that while under Sadaam, gas prices were similar, so with the desposing of his regime, U.S. authorities were worried that a spike in gas prices would upset the population to the point of violence rioting (a correct assumption IMO). The reason gas is so cheap is that there are hundreds of millions of tax dollars and U.S. subsidies going to support cheap gas prices there.
The problem I see is that once gas prices start to climb there as our influence in Iraq diminishes and perhaps capitalistic style economy starts to take hold, people are going to be pissed off. Also, I don't like seeing so much of our tax dollars going for cheap gas in Iraq, but I don't want to see rioting and violence over high gas prices in Iraq.
Jwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10017 posts, RR: 29 Reply 2, posted (5 years 5 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 402 times:
Iraqi gasprices are determined by the Iraqi government and oil refineries.
They have a massive advantage in the essentially zero transportation cost and in not having to pay the OPEC-dictated prices for the raw product.
They can just pipe it directly from the wells into the refineries and then pump the refined product directly into their cars.
While gasoline taxes may rise to help pay for rebuilding from 20+ years of Saddamite pillaging, I doubt that will cause prices to rise to 40 times+ their current levels (let alone the 150 times+ to make them equal to European prices).
Schoenorama From Spain, joined Apr 2001, 2440 posts, RR: 38 Reply 3, posted (5 years 5 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 395 times:
Tbar220:
"Gas prices for Iraqi's are insanely low at around 5-10 cents a gallon."
That really depends on what you compare it with; when you compare it with your own economy (how much year earn each year and how much you pay for gas in your country), then it is insanely low. But what you should do really is compare it with Iraqi economy now. Although reliable info for 2003/2004 is not available, the 1999 per capita GDP was $247. One can except that now, still in the aftermath of the Second Gulf War, the actual per capita figure is even lower than that. Five to ten cents a gallon when you earn even less then $247 is certainly not insanely low.
"Also, I don't like seeing so much of our tax dollars going for cheap gas in Iraq, but I don't want to see rioting and violence over high gas prices in Iraq."
Now this might sound extremely cheap, but perhaps one should have thought about the real costs of rebuilding an entire nation before pre-emptively attacking it on bogus reasons.
Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
Tbar220 From United States, joined Feb 2000, 6892 posts, RR: 38 Reply 5, posted (5 years 5 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 369 times:
Well as far as I've heard, gas prices are determined by the millions of dollars of tax payer subsidies our government is sending that way. Also, the GDP figure you gave was for before the war, I expect that to go up post war.
Schoenorama From Spain, joined Apr 2001, 2440 posts, RR: 38 Reply 8, posted (5 years 5 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 337 times:
Tbar:
”Also, the GDP figure you gave was for before the war, I expect that to go up post war.”
Iraq is not just recovering from 1 war, it is recovering from 2 major wars and 10 years of economic sanctions. None of the leading international experts on economy believe Iraq’s GDP will experience dramatic changes in the next 10-15 years. According to a 2003 article published by the BBC on its website, the International Financing Facility in a report noted that Iraq’s GDP per capita would not pass the $3,500 in the next 10-15 years. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3158348.stm)
I do believe it is an irony that an american citizen like you complains about the low gas prices in another country. As also the US economy is very reliant on gas prices, you will know very well what effect drastic increments in those prices would have on your own personal economy and that of your country. The same happens with the Iraqis, with the only difference that they did not ask for Saddam to be their head of state, nor did they ask for more than 10 years of economic santions which affected their personal economies, nor did they ask the US to pre-emtpively attack their country creating even more destruction to their already heavily damaged economies.
An interesting issue you are perhaps not aware of is that the UN Security Council (UNSC) in 1990 established a Committee to see to it that Iraq repaid the ‘damages of war’ suffered by a number or nations, individuals and companies after Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait. This commission, called the UN Compensation Comission (UNCC) consisted of all 15 UNSC members and thus the 5 permanent members (US, France, China, Russia and the UK) had most of the control over the comission. In the year 2000, some Members of the Comision wanted to grant a $15.9 billion claim made by the Kuwait Oil Company. The amount included legal fees the inmensely rich Kuwait Oil Company had incurred to when contracting the most expensive international law firms around preparing that same claim, and the Iraqi people could not do anything against it. In other words, the Iraqi people were getting even less daily food-rations as Kuwaiti businesses could claim anything they wanted as an ‘invasion related damage’. Of the UNCC permanent members, France, Russia and China rejected to ratify and later an altered version whas adopted.
Now that the US/UK have pre-emptively invaded Iraq, one would expect the UNSC to adopt a similar resolution to make them pay back the incredible damage to Iraqi property in general. For the US and UK, this is a typical situation where being a Permanent Member of the UNSC comes in handy. It is incredible to see whith what ease the US/UK made the ordinary Iraqi citizens pay for their Dictators’ acts by allowing incredible dubious claims to be paid (such as the Kuwait Oil Company claim), but prefers to look the other way when its own Acts of Invasions and its consequences are being discussed.
It comes to no suprise at all to me that now, all of a sudden, the UN ‘Oil-for-Food’ programme becomes heavily critisized from your part of the world. For decades, it was critisized by France and Russia for allowing claims such as the one above to be granted at the expense of the Iraqi people’s daily rations. Now that, after the recent pre-emptive invasion of Iraq, the Iraqis could seek compensation for their damages from the US/UK, what better than to critisize the program as a whole in order to minimize Iraqi compensation claims posibilities through the UN?
Sponsor Message: 
From United States, joined Feb 2000, 6892 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10017 posts, 
From Spain, joined Apr 2001, 2440 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
Printer friendly format 
