I recognize that the increases would only be passed on to the consumer. But what recourse do we really have?

 

Summary:

 

"It won't work, it won't penalize the oil companies;

"it WILL penalize the consumers (us);

"but let's do it anyway..."

 

 

Jim, I like you, but what the HECK are you THINKING?

 

 

Symbolic, Phyrric victories do NOT impress me.

As punishment for their greed. Not saying it would work; just that punishment is what it would be.

 

I have mixed feelings on this topic, because I recognize that the increases would only be passed on to the consumer. But what recourse do we really have? None? We're just to be held hostage by others' greed?

Jim, aren't the major gas companies publicly traded? Which would mean these companies you accuse of "greed" are actually just maximizing their profit for their stockholders. Are you equating making good business decisions with greed?

Summary:

 

"It won't work, it won't penalize the oil companies;

"it WILL penalize the consumers (us);

"but let's do it anyway..."

 

 

Jim, I like you, but what the HECK are you THINKING?

 

 

Symbolic, Phyrric victories do NOT impress me.

 

Again, I don't think the windfall tax is the answer. I was just wondering aloud what is.

 

Jim, aren't the major gas companies publicly traded? Which would mean these companies you accuse of "greed" are actually just maximizing their profit for their stockholders. Are you equating making good business decisions with greed?

 

I think there's a big difference between "good business decisions" and what goes on in the boardrooms at big oil companies, where decisions seem to be made with no regard whatsoever for the harm they will do. Cut-throat greed of the worst order is what I see coming from those guys, who probably would just as soon steal from their mothers as comb their hair in the morning.

 

And I certainly don't think there are too many patriots in those boardrooms acting in the best interest of our country and its people. Personally, I feel that those who invest in oil companies aren't much better, and should be encouraged to divest their holdings in these ethically-challenged companies.

1. Tell me how a tax will lower the prices.

 

2. If you were a business owner, would you make an investment that was not financially worth it, such as investing into alternative fuels?

 

1.The tax will clearly state: "Taxed when the price of crude is over $50 dollars. MANY people think they are manipulatiing the market. They could do more to get it back down to 50 dollars, they would just be sacrificing a few of their billions. Even at 50 dollar oil, they should still make BILLION dollar profits. It's just they will be making nice profits vs. record profits.

 

2. You are alluding to big oil and there greed. They are enjoying there multi-billion dollar profits so much why should they do anything to lower it? Well, if they are being taxed up to 50% that will be a very, very, nice piece of change to use strictly for developing alternative sources as opposed to charitable donations like Exxon gave of 100 million. Everyone agrees we have to get off oil. We need to experiment with a lot of sources and need to fund those sources.

 

Should we just continue to let big oil get rich.. after all it is capitalism, or should we try to balance things out some. American Airlines said they lost 328 million in the first quarter directly relating to oil/gas cost. They also are saying they are losing money on each flight or 3.3 million PER DAY. Maybe when big oil bankrups airlines all together and have to drive all over the country they will be annoyed.

The articles I have been reading all have said demand is down since the prices have been going up.

 

By how much, and again, demand being down has zero effect on current gas prices. Now if demand stays down and we'd like to stay on topic and talk about BP and Shell profits in say July or August then this may be a factor in the conversation.

Economic stimulus package will allow for an even bigger profit next quarter for oil companies..............news to retailers...........the money is not coming to you when gas is $4 a gallon. Its one last ploy for Bush to help oil companies not retailers..........:flame:

 

Ha wow, please show me Bush's profits that last quarter from all this oil money he's making.

My mother and father live in rural Garrard County. He works for the U.S. Postal Service in Nicholasville, 22 miles from his house to his office. He goes to work at 3:30 a.m. and is the only person in the office for the first hour. Only one other employee lives in Garrard County.

 

This is certainly not an attempt to make him look like a hero, but how many other Americans are in the exact same situation? And while his government job pays well, many others are not so fortunate. My question is this: How can this person, or anyone similar, carpool? What public transportation runs from Lancaster to Nicholasville? Can he realistically walk to work?

 

Your ideas are appreciated, but unrealistic. I have no concrete answers, but for many, many people public transportation isn't an option and carpooling isn't feasible.

 

 

I'm not disagreeing with you analysis of the situation, but do you realize the US has one of the least developed and even more so least used public transit systems in the WORLD. That's what we're heaidn towards. The US is going to be more middle to upper class in the suburbs and less middle class, and "working folk" in the suburbs. It's not ideal by any means, I hate the city. But that's what the US is heading towards unless alternative fuel sources are found within the next 40-50 years.

As punishment for their greed. Not saying it would work; just that punishment is what it would be.

 

I have mixed feelings on this topic, because I recognize that the increases would only be passed on to the consumer. But what recourse do we really have? None? We're just to be held hostage by others' greed?

 

That's like spanking the child for being bad, with you hand draped over their backside. It doesn't make since, their for it's not a good idea. To do something with no actual felt consequence is just doing something for name sake. That's politics, and not helpful in this case.

I do complain but I do things about my own use.

 

I have changed the way I drive. I coast to all stop lights and stop signs. I don't get over 55 on 2 land roads and only drive 70 on the interstate. This has upped my MPG by a lot.

 

We don't make any trips to go eat unless we have some other things to do. We don't just jump in the car and go eat anymore.

 

We traded vehicles to get one that gets better gas mileage.

 

You've followed the law, and not drove aggressively, no wonder the cops seem so bored lately....:eek:

Big oil is not putting what congress wants into alternative fuels. Exxon donated 100 million to alternative funding. Half of what AROD makes over what 8 years, not even that probably, and they made 40 billion last year.

 

Big oil does not want to invest billions into alternative funding to return millions. And again each time oil goes up just $1.00 big oil makes millions.

 

On my CNN blog which I read daily.. the big dog from Shell was on today. Weird coincidence, about 6 months away from a new president and they are showing up trying to justify there profits and asking for no windfall taxes. Where were they 2-3 years ago... sitting back and enjoying it.

 

Everyone needs to take a long hard look. If big oil is allowed to keep doing what they are doing and if McCain takes us to Iran... 3.50 gas will be considered VERY cheap.

 

 

Horrible comparison but you're saying that essentially Shell should cut their profits, and cut their employee's benefits just so we have it easier(even though "they" are a part of us)? Like has been said many times. Look at the way their profit comes about. They don't make as much % wise as most companies do, however most companies product aren't in nearly as a high of demand. So just because of that they should cut their profits. Sorry I'm a capitalist, and not a communist, I don't want the government controlling the trade market. Thanks but no thanks

Big oil is not putting what congress wants into alternative fuels. Exxon donated 100 million to alternative funding. Half of what AROD makes over what 8 years, not even that probably, and they made 40 billion last year.

 

Big oil does not want to invest billions into alternative funding to return millions. And again each time oil goes up just $1.00 big oil makes millions.

 

On my CNN blog which I read daily.. the big dog from Shell was on today. Weird coincidence, about 6 months away from a new president and they are showing up trying to justify there profits and asking for no windfall taxes. Where were they 2-3 years ago... sitting back and enjoying it.

 

Everyone needs to take a long hard look. If big oil is allowed to keep doing what they are doing and if McCain takes us to Iran... 3.50 gas will be considered VERY cheap.

 

Where were you 2-3 years ago? On your CNN blog?????

Big oil is not putting what congress wants into alternative fuels. Exxon donated 100 million to alternative funding. Half of what AROD makes over what 8 years, not even that probably, and they made 40 billion last year.

 

Big oil does not want to invest billions into alternative funding to return millions. And again each time oil goes up just $1.00 big oil makes millions.

 

On my CNN blog which I read daily.. the big dog from Shell was on today. Weird coincidence, about 6 months away from a new president and they are showing up trying to justify there profits and asking for no windfall taxes. Where were they 2-3 years ago... sitting back and enjoying it.

 

Everyone needs to take a long hard look. If big oil is allowed to keep doing what they are doing and if McCain takes us to Iran... 3.50 gas will be considered VERY cheap.

 

 

On a side note, where do you get your info other than a liberal media station or what you hear from other liberals?

I agree completely that all of this could be done by congress, it just will not be done by the current Democratic congress or senate.

I was asking more of what can they do today? One poster said, "Just wait until this fall". For what an unjust windfall tax? How will that lower gas prices?

 

Each of these companies has a responsibility to their share holders to make a profit, if the majority of that profit is taken is that right? I know if my 401K or retirement holds oil stocks I would not think that it was fair.

 

Exactly, to those people not invested and just a consumer "It's not fair"

 

Side note I own no stock in Oil companies.

1.The tax will clearly state: "Taxed when the price of crude is over $50 dollars. MANY people think they are manipulatiing the market. They could do more to get it back down to 50 dollars, they would just be sacrificing a few of their billions. Even at 50 dollar oil, they should still make BILLION dollar profits. It's just they will be making nice profits vs. record profits.

 

2. You are alluding to big oil and there greed. They are enjoying there multi-billion dollar profits so much why should they do anything to lower it? Well, if they are being taxed up to 50% that will be a very, very, nice piece of change to use strictly for developing alternative sources as opposed to charitable donations like Exxon gave of 100 million. Everyone agrees we have to get off oil. We need to experiment with a lot of sources and need to fund those sources.

 

Should we just continue to let big oil get rich.. after all it is capitalism, or should we try to balance things out some. American Airlines said they lost 328 million in the first quarter directly relating to oil/gas cost. They also are saying they are losing money on each flight or 3.3 million PER DAY. Maybe when big oil bankrups airlines all together and have to drive all over the country they will be annoyed.

 

DUDE.... Are you serious. If they can be doing more, please explain what. Then also follow it up as to WHY???? Because they're good people, because they're "Good Americans",... Oh wait that's right neither one is an American company. Yet us American folk we controll everything. Honestly what can and should these companies be doing. You think they should designate money to help "The Cause", yet this help won't increase gas prices?

 

Ok

1.The tax will clearly state: "Taxed when the price of crude is over $50 dollars. MANY people think they are manipulatiing the market. They could do more to get it back down to 50 dollars, they would just be sacrificing a few of their billions. Even at 50 dollar oil, they should still make BILLION dollar profits. It's just they will be making nice profits vs. record profits.

 

2. You are alluding to big oil and there greed. They are enjoying there multi-billion dollar profits so much why should they do anything to lower it? Well, if they are being taxed up to 50% that will be a very, very, nice piece of change to use strictly for developing alternative sources as opposed to charitable donations like Exxon gave of 100 million. Everyone agrees we have to get off oil. We need to experiment with a lot of sources and need to fund those sources.

 

Should we just continue to let big oil get rich.. after all it is capitalism, or should we try to balance things out some. American Airlines said they lost 328 million in the first quarter directly relating to oil/gas cost. They also are saying they are losing money on each flight or 3.3 million PER DAY. Maybe when big oil bankrups airlines all together and have to drive all over the country they will be annoyed.

1. A tax has never been shown to lower prices- in fact, those producers will wind up receiving less money, and the consumers will wind up paying more. I don't understand what "manipulating" the market means. They are charging a price that millions of Americans are paying. Where is the manipulation? And I can honestly tell you that this price is still far below what alternative fuel would cost. The beauty of our free market is that innovation is a key component. If there was a market for alternative fuels that would provide a less expensive option, it would be done already by some entrepreneur.

 

2. I want to show a graph on deadweight loss- with inelastic demand and elastic supply (which the gas market is)

 

The deadweight loss (tax incidence) falls more hardly on the consumer. Who wants that?