?The ?California Premium?: Why the Golden State?s ?Take Per Gallon? consistently outpaces refiner earnings?
https://www.oann.com/newsroom/the-california-premium-why-the-golden- states-take-per-gallon-consistently-outpaces-refiner-earnings/
?As California moves through 2026, a clear fiscal reality is visible at
the gas pump.?
?For every gallon of regular unleaded gasoline sold in the state,
combined taxes, fees, and regulatory program costs imposed by state and local governments now represent a substantial portion of the final price
? frequently exceeding the net profit margins earned by refiners after costs.?
?This has intensified debate over the persistent ?California Premium,?
the roughly $1.70?$1.90 per gallon gap between what Californians pay compared to the national average.?
I know one place I do not want to move to, California.
Lynn
?The ?California Premium?: Why the Golden State?s ?Take Per Gallon? consistently outpaces refiner earnings?
https://www.oann.com/newsroom/the-california-premium-why-the-golden- states-take-per-gallon-consistently-outpaces-refiner-earnings/
?As California moves through 2026, a clear fiscal reality is visible at
the gas pump.?
?For every gallon of regular unleaded gasoline sold in the state,
combined taxes, fees, and regulatory program costs imposed by state and local governments now represent a substantial portion of the final price
? frequently exceeding the net profit margins earned by refiners after costs.?
?This has intensified debate over the persistent ?California Premium,?
the roughly $1.70?$1.90 per gallon gap between what Californians pay compared to the national average.?
I know one place I do not want to move to, California.
Lynn
I know one place I do not want to move to, California.
On 4/21/2026 5:19 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:Gallon?
?The ?California Premium?: Why the Golden State?s ?Take Per
atconsistently outpaces refiner earnings?
https://www.oann.com/newsroom/the-california-premium-why-the-golden-
states-take-per-gallon-consistently-outpaces-refiner-earnings/
?As California moves through 2026, a clear fiscal reality is visible
andthe gas pump.?
?For every gallon of regular unleaded gasoline sold in the state,
combined taxes, fees, and regulatory program costs imposed by state
pricelocal governments now represent a substantial portion of the final
after? frequently exceeding the net profit margins earned by refiners
costs.?All those taxes & fees don't come out of what the gas station charges,
they are in ADDITION to the what the gas station charges. OAN wouldn't
know reality if it bit their genitals off.
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes:
<right-wing ravings elided>
I know one place I do not want to move to, California.
That's fine by us.
I've been to Houston. Didn't like it.
On Tue, 21 Apr 2026 17:45:11 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
<dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
On 4/21/2026 5:19 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:at=20
=93The =91California Premium=92: Why the Golden State=92s =91Take Per = >Gallon=92=20
consistently outpaces refiner earnings=94
=20
https://www.oann.com/newsroom/the-california-premium-why-the-golden-=20
states-take-per-gallon-consistently-outpaces-refiner-earnings/
=20
=93As California moves through 2026, a clear fiscal reality is visible=
the gas pump.=94All those taxes & fees don't come out of what the gas station charges,=20 >>they are in ADDITION to the what the gas station charges. OAN wouldn't=20 >>know reality if it bit their genitals off.
=20
=93For every gallon of regular unleaded gasoline sold in the state,=20
combined taxes, fees, and regulatory program costs imposed by state = >and=20
local governments now represent a substantial portion of the final = >price=20
=97 frequently exceeding the net profit margins earned by refiners = >after=20
costs.=94
=20
If you are thinking that the gas station charges, say, $5.9999 (local
price seen in Seattle) and that does /not/ include the various State
and Federal taxes
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes:
<right-wing ravings elided>
I know one place I do not want to move to, California.
That's fine by us.
I've been to Houston. Didn't like it.
Scott Lurndal wrote:
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes:
<right-wing ravings elided>
I know one place I do not want to move to, California.
That's fine by us.
I've been to Houston. Didn't like it.
All big cities have good areas.
On my only trip to Dallas the driver could not understand that I didn't >want to visit the assassination site. Which perhaps colours my
impression of Dallas negatively.
But I'm going to join the hipster crowd and say that Austin is the best >big-city place to live in in Texas. Bastrop, just outside of Austin, is >supposed to be excellent. Moorcock lived there in his Texas years.
Which reminds me that I haven't read his book of Texas stories.
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> writes:
On Tue, 21 Apr 2026 17:45:11 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
<dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
On 4/21/2026 5:19 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:Gallon=92=20
=93The =91California Premium=92: Why the Golden State=92s =91Take Per =
at=20consistently outpaces refiner earnings=94
=20
https://www.oann.com/newsroom/the-california-premium-why-the-golden-=20 >>>> states-take-per-gallon-consistently-outpaces-refiner-earnings/
=20
=93As California moves through 2026, a clear fiscal reality is visible=
and=20the gas pump.=94
=20
=93For every gallon of regular unleaded gasoline sold in the state,=20 >>>> combined taxes, fees, and regulatory program costs imposed by state =
price=20local governments now represent a substantial portion of the final =
after=20=97 frequently exceeding the net profit margins earned by refiners =
costs.=94All those taxes & fees don't come out of what the gas station charges,=20 >>> they are in ADDITION to the what the gas station charges. OAN wouldn't=20 >>> know reality if it bit their genitals off.
=20
If you are thinking that the gas station charges, say, $5.9999 (local
price seen in Seattle) and that does /not/ include the various State
and Federal taxes
I knew exactly what he meant, which was that the price at the pump
includes fees that don't get paid to the depot that supply the
fuel to the gas station nor do they profit to the station owner.
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> writes:=91Take Per =
On Tue, 21 Apr 2026 17:45:11 -0700, Dimensional Traveler >><dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
On 4/21/2026 5:19 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
=93The =91California Premium=92: Why the Golden State=92s
https://www.oann.com/newsroom/the-california-premium-why-the-golden-=20Gallon=92=20
consistently outpaces refiner earnings=94
=20
visible=states-take-per-gallon-consistently-outpaces-refiner-earnings/
=20
=93As California moves through 2026, a clear fiscal reality is
state,=20at=20
the gas pump.=94
=20
=93For every gallon of regular unleaded gasoline sold in the
=combined taxes, fees, and regulatory program costs imposed by state
=and=20
local governments now represent a substantial portion of the final = >>price=20
=97 frequently exceeding the net profit margins earned by refiners
charges,=20after=20
costs.=94All those taxes & fees don't come out of what the gas station
=20
wouldn't=20they are in ADDITION to the what the gas station charges. OAN
know reality if it bit their genitals off.
If you are thinking that the gas station charges, say, $5.9999 (local
price seen in Seattle) and that does /not/ include the various State
and Federal taxes
I knew exactly what he meant, which was that the price at the pump
includes fees that don't get paid to the depot that supply the
fuel to the gas station nor do they profit to the station owner.
On my only trip to Dallas the driver could not understand that I didn't
want to visit the assassination site. Which perhaps colours my
impression of Dallas negatively.
William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com> writes:
Scott Lurndal wrote:
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes:
<right-wing ravings elided>
I know one place I do not want to move to, California.
That's fine by us.
I've been to Houston. Didn't like it.
All big cities have good areas.
But the smog and humidity were the parts
of Houston that I disliked the most. Also
the spread-out nature of the metropolis made
getting anywhere painful. I have trouble
tolerating humidity and the area is flat, flat,
flat (after decades in California, flat is boring :-)
<snip>
On my only trip to Dallas the driver could not understand that I didn't
want to visit the assassination site. Which perhaps colours my
impression of Dallas negatively.
Most of my visits to Dallas were for conferences and meetings;
often the meeting was at the hotel in the middle of DFW, and
we seldom left the airport. Had a few good meals downtown.
I've been there visiting IBM during an ice storm in January, when there were more cars in the ditch than on the road.
But I'm going to join the hipster crowd and say that Austin is the best
big-city place to live in in Texas. Bastrop, just outside of Austin, is
supposed to be excellent. Moorcock lived there in his Texas years.
Which reminds me that I haven't read his book of Texas stories.
That was my favorite city in Texas. The music scene on 6th
street at night was fantastic; although I was last there in the 90s.
San Antonio is nice.
On Wed, 22 Apr 2026 16:51:23 -0400, William Hyde
<wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:
<snippo: visiting/living in Texas>
On my only trip to Dallas the driver could not understand that I didn't
want to visit the assassination site. Which perhaps colours my
impression of Dallas negatively.
I suspect that the driver asked because most visitors want to see it.
Scott Lurndal wrote:
William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com> writes:
Scott Lurndal wrote:
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes:
<right-wing ravings elided>
I know one place I do not want to move to, California.
That's fine by us.
I've been to Houston. Didn't like it.
All big cities have good areas.
But I'm going to join the hipster crowd and say that Austin is the best
big-city place to live in in Texas. Bastrop, just outside of Austin, is >>> supposed to be excellent. Moorcock lived there in his Texas years.
Which reminds me that I haven't read his book of Texas stories.
That was my favorite city in Texas. The music scene on 6th
street at night was fantastic; although I was last there in the 90s.
San Antonio is nice.
Friends lived there a year and were not so happy. It looks nice in
parts, but not where they could afford to live (and she was a highly >qualified physician).
I enjoyed my one brief stay there.
William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com> writes:
Scott Lurndal wrote:
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes:
<right-wing ravings elided>
I know one place I do not want to move to, California.
That's fine by us.
I've been to Houston. Didn't like it.
All big cities have good areas.
But the smog and humidity were the parts
of Houston that I disliked the most. Also
the spread-out nature of the metropolis made
getting anywhere painful. I have trouble
tolerating humidity and the area is flat, flat,
flat (after decades in California, flat is boring :-)
<snip>
On my only trip to Dallas the driver could not understand that I didn't
want to visit the assassination site. Which perhaps colours my
impression of Dallas negatively.
Most of my visits to Dallas were for conferences and meetings;
often the meeting was at the hotel in the middle of DFW, and
we seldom left the airport. Had a few good meals downtown.
I've been there visiting IBM during an ice storm in January, when there were more cars in the ditch than on the road.
But I'm going to join the hipster crowd and say that Austin is the best
big-city place to live in in Texas. Bastrop, just outside of Austin, is
supposed to be excellent. Moorcock lived there in his Texas years.
Which reminds me that I haven't read his book of Texas stories.
That was my favorite city in Texas. The music scene on 6th
street at night was fantastic; although I was last there in the 90s.
San Antonio is nice.
Another feature of Houston is that they have no codes saying where you
can and where you can't build a particular type of building. So it is perfectly legal to have a chemical plant right next to a day care
center. When my parents were looking for a house to buy in Houston in
the middle '60s, my Dad passed on one because it had an empty corner lot next to it. Not long after, a kennel was built there.
On 4/27/2026 12:46 PM, BCFD 36 wrote:
....
Another feature of Houston is that they have no codes saying where you
can and where you can't build a particular type of building. So it is
perfectly legal to have a chemical plant right next to a day care
center. When my parents were looking for a house to buy in Houston in
the middle '60s, my Dad passed on one because it had an empty corner
lot next to it. Not long after, a kennel was built there.
The lack of building codes also leads to lack of adequate drainage and
flood control. Houston is notorious for flooding. The local flood
control district estimates a major flood every two years.
On 4/28/2026 9:10 AM, Jay Morris wrote:
On 4/27/2026 12:46 PM, BCFD 36 wrote:
....
Another feature of Houston is that they have no codes saying where
you can and where you can't build a particular type of building. So
it is perfectly legal to have a chemical plant right next to a day
care center. When my parents were looking for a house to buy in
Houston in the middle '60s, my Dad passed on one because it had an
empty corner lot next to it. Not long after, a kennel was built there.
The lack of building codes also leads to lack of adequate drainage and
flood control. Houston is notorious for flooding. The local flood
control district estimates a major flood every two years.
Houston also gets 65+ inches of rain a year on average.ÿ Tough to drain
it all away when it half of it comes over three days like Hurricane
Harvey.ÿ And the population of the Houston Metropolitan area just hit
eight million.
Lynn
On 4/28/2026 9:10 AM, Jay Morris wrote:[stuff deleted]
On 4/27/2026 12:46 PM, BCFD 36 wrote:
....
Houston also gets 65+ inches of rain a year on average.ÿ Tough to drain
it all away when it half of it comes over three days like Hurricane
Harvey.ÿ And the population of the Houston Metropolitan area just hit
eight million.
Lynn
On 4/28/2026 4:20 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
On 4/28/2026 9:10 AM, Jay Morris wrote:
On 4/27/2026 12:46 PM, BCFD 36 wrote:
....
Another feature of Houston is that they have no codes saying where
you can and where you can't build a particular type of building. So
it is perfectly legal to have a chemical plant right next to a day
care center. When my parents were looking for a house to buy in
Houston in the middle '60s, my Dad passed on one because it had an
empty corner lot next to it. Not long after, a kennel was built there. >>>>
The lack of building codes also leads to lack of adequate drainage
and flood control. Houston is notorious for flooding. The local flood
control district estimates a major flood every two years.
Houston also gets 65+ inches of rain a year on average.ÿ Tough to
drain it all away when it half of it comes over three days like
Hurricane Harvey.ÿ And the population of the Houston Metropolitan area
just hit eight million.
Lynn
I believe I read some time ago that they were considering a tunnel, or tunnels, like San Antonio? Before the tunnel we had 5' of water in
downtown San Antonio during one flood, since then, even with greater
rain, nothing.
On 4/29/2026 12:02 PM, Jay Morris wrote:
On 4/28/2026 4:20 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
On 4/28/2026 9:10 AM, Jay Morris wrote:
On 4/27/2026 12:46 PM, BCFD 36 wrote:
....
Another feature of Houston is that they have no codes saying where
you can and where you can't build a particular type of building. So
there.it is perfectly legal to have a chemical plant right next to a day
care center. When my parents were looking for a house to buy in
Houston in the middle '60s, my Dad passed on one because it had an
empty corner lot next to it. Not long after, a kennel was built
flood
The lack of building codes also leads to lack of adequate drainage
and flood control. Houston is notorious for flooding. The local
areacontrol district estimates a major flood every two years.
Houston also gets 65+ inches of rain a year on average.? Tough to
drain it all away when it half of it comes over three days like
Hurricane Harvey.? And the population of the Houston Metropolitan
just hit eight million.
Lynn
I believe I read some time ago that they were considering a tunnel, or
tunnels, like San Antonio? Before the tunnel we had 5' of water in
downtown San Antonio during one flood, since then, even with greater
rain, nothing.
They are considering putting 30 foot diameter drainage tunnels under the
existing bayous in Houston. The cost estimate is amazing.
On Wed, 29 Apr 2026 15:20:18 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
I believe I read some time ago that they were considering a tunnel, or= >=20
tunnels, like San Antonio? Before the tunnel we had 5' of water in=20
downtown San Antonio during one flood, since then, even with greater=20
rain, nothing.
They are considering putting 30 foot diameter drainage tunnels under the= >=20
existing bayous in Houston. The cost estimate is amazing.
Such estimates often are. And tend to the low side.
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> writes:
On Wed, 29 Apr 2026 15:20:18 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
=20I believe I read some time ago that they were considering a tunnel, or=
tunnels, like San Antonio? Before the tunnel we had 5' of water in=20
downtown San Antonio during one flood, since then, even with greater=20 >>>> rain, nothing.
They are considering putting 30 foot diameter drainage tunnels under the= >> =20
existing bayous in Houston. The cost estimate is amazing.
Such estimates often are. And tend to the low side.
The estimate for the houston tunnel system is $30 billion
(and of course, Elon is involved). It faces substantial
hurdles in both funding and engineering feasbility.
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> writes:
On Wed, 29 Apr 2026 15:20:18 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
=20I believe I read some time ago that they were considering a tunnel, or=
tunnels, like San Antonio? Before the tunnel we had 5' of water in=20
downtown San Antonio during one flood, since then, even with greater=20 >>>> rain, nothing.
They are considering putting 30 foot diameter drainage tunnels under the= >> =20
existing bayous in Houston. The cost estimate is amazing.
Such estimates often are. And tend to the low side.
The estimate for the houston tunnel system is $30 billion
(and of course, Elon is involved). It faces substantial
hurdles in both funding and engineering feasbility.
https://www.hcfcd.org/Community/Press-Room?post=Flood+Control+District+releases++Phase+2+results+of+Tunnel+Feasibility+Study
At least California High Speed Rail is feasible, even if
it does require substantial tunnelling on both ends.
On 4/30/2026 10:52 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> writes:
On Wed, 29 Apr 2026 15:20:18 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
=20I believe I read some time ago that they were considering a tunnel, >>>>> or=
=20tunnels, like San Antonio? Before the tunnel we had 5' of water in=20 >>>>> downtown San Antonio during one flood, since then, even with
greater=20
rain, nothing.
They are considering putting 30 foot diameter drainage tunnels under
the=
existing bayous in Houston.ÿ The cost estimate is amazing.
Such estimates often are. And tend to the low side.
The estimate for the houston tunnel system is $30 billion
(and of course, Elon is involved).ÿ It faces substantial
hurdles in both funding and engineering feasbility.
https://www.hcfcd.org/Community/Press-Room?
post=Flood+Control+District+releases+
+Phase+2+results+of+Tunnel+Feasibility+Study
At least California High Speed Rail is feasible, even if
it does require substantial tunnelling on both ends.
That is a 2022 study.ÿ I saw a pundit's esposition recently who thought
it was understated by at least 3X, they thought it would be at least
$100 billion.
Plus Houston needs to build the third 5,000+ acre retaining pond on the north side which will be a few billion dollars more.
Lynn
inflation
caused by tax cuts to the most wealthy since before Reagan and continuing >under the present "conservative" regime. The economic crashes at the >beginning of the century in which the wealthy and the companies they
depended upon were kept in business while the people who lost homes
and livlihoods were left without support.
Bobbie Sellers <blissInSanFrancisco@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
inflation
caused by tax cuts to the most wealthy since before Reagan and continuing >>under the present "conservative" regime. The economic crashes at the >>beginning of the century in which the wealthy and the companies they >>depended upon were kept in business while the people who lost homes
and livlihoods were left without support.
What is so ironic is that the train service today is far poorer than it
was in the 1890s, the last time we had this sort of economy. (And back
then the huge gains in wealth among the top few percent were a consequence
of railway expansion too.)
kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:
Bobbie Sellers <blissInSanFrancisco@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
inflation
caused by tax cuts to the most wealthy since before Reagan and continuing >>>under the present "conservative" regime. The economic crashes at the >>>beginning of the century in which the wealthy and the companies they >>>depended upon were kept in business while the people who lost homes
and livlihoods were left without support.
What is so ironic is that the train service today is far poorer than it
was in the 1890s, the last time we had this sort of economy. (And back >>then the huge gains in wealth among the top few percent were a consequence >>of railway expansion too.)
Mostly due to the free land given to the RR companies along the ROW, IIRC.
Bobbie Sellers <blissInSanFrancisco@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
inflation
caused by tax cuts to the most wealthy since before Reagan and continuing
under the present "conservative" regime. The economic crashes at the
beginning of the century in which the wealthy and the companies they
depended upon were kept in business while the people who lost homes
and livlihoods were left without support.
What is so ironic is that the train service today is far poorer than it
was in the 1890s, the last time we had this sort of economy. (And back
then the huge gains in wealth among the top few percent were a consequence
of railway expansion too.)
Scott Lurndal <slp53@pacbell.net> wrote:
Mostly due to the free land given to the RR companies along the ROW,IIRC.
That was some of it, although of course there was a lot of land and notrailroads.)
very much demand at the time. (The demand came later after the
There was also a lot of money being made in consolidating railroads into >large interstate companies that couldn't effectively be regulated bystate
governments.
| Sysop: | Jacob Catayoc |
|---|---|
| Location: | Pasay City, Metro Manila, Philippines |
| Users: | 5 |
| Nodes: | 4 (0 / 4) |
| Uptime: | 493850:11:48 |
| Calls: | 146 |
| Files: | 547 |
| D/L today: |
6 files (97K bytes) |
| Messages: | 76,927 |