Obama Backs Oil Profits Tax, Attacks McCain

[billvon 2,402]

>so you disagree, then you agree . . .

Pure competition will not reduce the price of a commodity if there isn't much profit margin on it already.

Added supply of a substitute commodity will reduce prices by reducing demand of the original commodity, though.

It's an important distinction. It means that just having ethanol available will not reduce fuel prices, even if it's cheaper. You have to be able to substitute a significant amount of gasoline with ethanol to have an effect on gas prices.

>So, you think in terms of a fixed budget then?

I think more in terms of a balanced budget.

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

Nuclear will be one part of the solution, but cannot be the only solution.

Agreed.

We are all engines of karma

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

What would make anyone think that's a real question?


more obtuse version for the less subtle folks: Was that 'really' a question? (a question initiated with "what would make anyone think.......")

Yes, it was a real (albeit loaded) question, actually two questions poorly worded. One would be "WTF?" and the other would be "what line of reasoning are ANWR drilling proponents subscribing to when they posit that a minimal temporary influx of oil will lead to any real consumer price reductions in the global market.?"

Quote

agree, 'more oil' wouldn't necessarily increase supply to the point that competition would lower prices - you'd need more "oil companies" entering the market (unlikely as it's not a big enough supply to attract additional players), plus refineries, plus fewer formulations/regulations, plus less taxes on the product and the suppliers, plus alternate energy sources to provide a more dynamic level of competition to trigger the old supply/demand response

I think there are sufficient barriers to any one of these things to make the 'drill more' argument a bit of an oversimplification. Drill more is fine, but it takes a lot of supporting efforts in the background to enable it that isn't friendly to a quick soundbite.

strange how so many of these barriers are a direct result of (albeit naive but well intentioned) gov meddling -

don't ya think?

And just to touch on a couple of your points, I think the taxes are necessary to secure funds for highway infrastructure.
I think that increased development of alternative energy would help drive the price down more than drilling due to the decreased demand as well as the increase in competition.
And What would make people think that an oil company, which is having no trouble with meeting gasoline production demands, would want to invest the $billions necessary to build a new refinery considering that by operating that refinery they would flood the market and reduce their profits?

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

>so you disagree, then you agree . . .
It's an important distinction. It means that just having ethanol available will not reduce fuel prices, even if it's cheaper. You have to be able to substitute a significant amount of gasoline with ethanol to have an effect on gas prices.

>So, you think in terms of a fixed budget then?

I think more in terms of a balanced budget.

1 - your "distinction" is just an opportunity for you to state the obtuse - that's fine

2 - You can balance a budget by reducing spending. It's hard to see the waste when there are 'invisible' taxes and subsidies cancelling each other out in 'favored' industries. Everyone loses except those that broker those same taxes and subsidies. Again, why do we need to be obtuse in an area that's pretty blatant?

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

One would be "WTF?" and the other would be

Quote

I think the taxes are necessary to secure funds for highway infrastructure.

so? tax directly into a general fund. you still collect for the support, but this way you have to *GASP* prioritize what the money is spent on and maybe cancel some programs that don't make the budget cutoff line.......


we're pretty much on the same page, but apparently, there are intricacies (in-trick-a-sees) that are important and require caviats and particular grammar to make the point in a more "correct" manner

Quote

I think that increased development of alternative energy would help drive the price down more than drilling due to the decreased demand as well as the increase in competition.

apparently it's all in the nuance - so you need to phrase this perfectly or it doesn't count

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[billvon 2,402]

> You can balance a budget by reducing spending.

Agreed 100%. But we have to do that FIRST. THEN we can talk about eliminating taxes. We've been doing the opposite for so long that our debt is now crushing us.

>your "distinction" is just an opportunity . . . .

Sorry for that approach.

BUSH SUCKS! He's a former oilman whose companies kept failing; that's why we have high oil prices. And the only way to reduce gas prices is to impeach him!

How's that?

[base428 1]

Forget drilling in Alaska and taxing oil companies (the most absurd Democratic concept yet). Rather, get in line to buy an electric or extended-range electric vehicle at a cost of about 2 cents/mile to drive. Problem solved.

I applaud the oil companies and their record profits. If you don't like $4.25/gallon gas, then do something about it. Put a deposit down on an electric car, car pool to work, ride your bike, work at home. Times change and we must adapt.

(c)2010 Vertical Visions. No unauthorized duplication permitted. <==For the media only

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

>BUSH SUCKS! He's a former oilman whose companies kept failing; that's why we have high oil prices. And the only way to reduce gas prices is to impeach him!

How's that?

it's nice. but, we have enough of that approach that I prefer you being thoughtful

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

BUSH SUCKS! ...
How's that?

Finally, a clear and unambiguous social position from billvon!

We are all engines of karma

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Forget drilling in Alaska and taxing oil companies (the most absurd Democratic concept yet). Rather, get in line to buy an electric or extended-range electric vehicle at a cost of about 2 cents/mile to drive. Problem solved.

I applaud the oil companies and their record profits. If you don't like $4.25/gallon gas, then do something about it. Put a deposit down on an electric car, car pool to work, ride your bike, work at home. Times change and we must adapt.

[idrankwhat 0]

Here's a good example of what Obama may have had in mind. It's a news article that basically puts Republicans for big oil and against conservation and alternative energy.
Whether that's a fair summary or not could be up for debate but there's no doubt that's what it looks like.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080610/ap_on_go_co/congress_oil_profits_13

[StreetScooby 5]

Shocking what the Democrats are trying to do.

We are all engines of karma

[kallend 1,632]

Quote

I like to think of "Drill more" as a soundbite to mean - change the infrastructure, develop alternate energy, actually go drill more oil, eliminate subsidies and restrictions, simplify the tax penalties, open the free market to more than just oil, stop blocking production of nuclear plant construction, etc

.

YOU may like to think that, but I'll bet a few million rednecks think it actually means "Drill more".

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

I'll bet a few million rednecks think it actually means "Drill more".

as long as it's just those pesky 'rednecks'

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Shocking what the Democrats are trying to do.

If you're "shocked", you're alone.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Shocking what the Democrats are trying to do.

If you're "shocked", you're alone.

I think it's more "Casablanca" shocked...

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[azdiver 0]

McCain's plan for billion dollar tax breaks for oil companies - worse( please explain, are u talking about his plan to lift the tax for the summer? or has he come up with new one?)

light travels faster than sound, that's why some people appear to be bright until you hear them speak

[billvon 2,402]

>are u talking about his plan to lift the tax for the summer?

That's one of them, estimated at about $10 billion - and economists agree that the oil companies will get most of that.

The other is a proposed corporate tax cut that will result in a $3.8 billion a year tax cut for Exxon Mobil, Chevron, Conoco, Valero and Marathon.

[azdiver 0]

will have to look into the the 3.8 a year, my understanding of the other was lifting the tax at the pump, how would this benifit the oil co? it would lower the price we pay, the loser would be the gov. shouldnt impact the oil co. either way, unless they hiked the price to make up the diff. of the tax.

light travels faster than sound, that's why some people appear to be bright until you hear them speak

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

...shouldnt impact the oil co. either way, unless they hiked the price to make up the diff. of the tax.

You answered your own question.
Besides, even if somehow we were able to be certain that that didn't happen, what do you think the chances are that congress would repeal the break, after Labor Day and right before an election?
If everyone switched to these you'd probably see a drop in gas prices. Maybe not a whole lot but you'd already have tripled your gas mileage.

[billvon 2,402]

>my understanding of the other was lifting the tax at the pump, how
>would this benifit the oil co?

Let's say gas stops at $4.50 a gallon.

Tax break comes along; consumers might see 18 cents savings at the pump. Well, oil companies set gasoline prices, and they know that consumers will pay $4.50 a gallon. They have no incentive to reduce it much. So they reduce prices (after taxes) to $4.40 a gallon, say "Hey! CHEAP GAS! Come quick, before it goes up again!" They are the big heroes and they sell more gas - at a HIGHER profit to them. (They are now making (18-10) = 8 cents more a gallon.)

Now the tax holiday ends. They raise the price from $4.40 to (4.40+.18) = $4.58. "Not our fault! Congress raised the tax on you. We wish we could keep it at the lower price, but with the tax increase and all . . ." They are the victims and they get some good press - AND they are now making more money, AND the prices at the pump are higher than they would have been otherwise.

And if you think that the gas companies would be the good guys and turn down a few billion in extra profit for their shareholders - you don't understand how public companies operate.