A Democratic Theme beginning to emerge.

[Balta1701]

Yes, that may be true - but as a percentage of "profits" they are not getting anymore then other industries.  And furthermore, THEY (oil companies) DO NOT SET THE PRICES!

 

I'll tell you who is setting the price.  That assbag from Iran.  Every time he opens his mouth, oil goes up AGAIN.  Saudi Arabia ain't saying anything.  Iran is loving it.  And the Democrats LOVE this because it gives them another talking point about how bad Bush is... even though their party is largely responsible for blocking any new refineries, etc.

For there to actually be new refineries built, the oil companies would actually have to want to build new refineries, instead of trying to shut them down (while still profitable, btw.)

[kapkomet]

For there to actually be new refineries built, the oil companies would actually have to want to build new refineries, instead of trying to shut them down (while still profitable, btw.)

Why are they trying to shut them down? Because it's rapidly reaching the point on these 35 and 40 year old refineries that they soon will start breaking down to the point where they are HIGHLY unprofitable.

 

The refiners don't make that much money.

[Balta1701]

Why are they trying to shut them down?  Because it's rapidly reaching the point on these 35 and 40 year old refineries that they soon will start breaking down to the point where they are HIGHLY unprofitable.

 

The refiners don't make that much money.

True to a point but only on the age issue...but I can't think of any other reason why oil companies might want refining capacity to stay low, can you?

 

Seriously, it's really quite amazing how those refineries always seem to need service at the exact moment that will lead to the largest increases in prices.

[mr_genius]

Friday, the Chicago Trib reported that just 6 in 100 Chicago Public H.S. freshmen will go on to get a college degree. Also, 67% of Chicago 4th graders test below grade level in reading. The Fed spends 53 billion on public education every year. A good place to start would be to blow up the Dept. of Education. The only remaining element should be a national test, written in English, that qualifies you to move out of 4th, 8th and 12th grade.

 

Not going to happen. Teachers unions are one the Dems biggest supporters, they won't allow changes to the education system (no matter how bad the system is).

 

Most of chicago's public school teachers couldn't pass a basic math exam, but they sure could tell you why Bush is the most evil person to ever live.

[NorthSideSox72]

Fed state and local taxes from gasoline is over 1 trillion dollars and I believe closer to 2 Trillion dollars over the same time span. I will try to find a source.

Please do. Since the entire federal budget is between one and two trillion dollars, I find it very hard to believe that gas tax receipts alone are that much.

[samclemens]

Friday, the Chicago Trib reported that just 6 in 100 Chicago Public H.S. freshmen will go on to get a college degree. Also, 67% of Chicago 4th graders test below grade level in reading. The Fed spends 53 billion on public education every year. A good place to start would be to blow up the Dept. of Education. The only remaining element should be a national test, written in English, that qualifies you to move out of 4th, 8th and 12th grade.

 

on a positive note, i probably wont be competing for a job with anyone from the metro chicago area anytime in the next ten years or so. sweet!

[NorthSideSox72]

Yes, that may be true - but as a percentage of "profits" they are not getting anymore then other industries.  And furthermore, THEY (oil companies) DO NOT SET THE PRICES!

 

I'll tell you who is setting the price.  That assbag from Iran.  Every time he opens his mouth, oil goes up AGAIN.  Saudi Arabia ain't saying anything.  Iran is loving it.  And the Democrats LOVE this because it gives them another talking point about how bad Bush is... even though their party is largely responsible for blocking any new refineries, etc.

Kap-

 

I think you have seen my posts enough to know that I was not saying the oil companies are evil for making profits, even huge ones. I was trying to put some perpective on things in response to Chuck's post.

 

What does frustrate me about the oil companies is, for one, their strangle hold on patents for alternative energy technologies. Usually I could care less about protectionist business and patents, but in this case, it becomes a national security and national economic issue. They need to s**t or get off the pot. I also hate that they have Congress in their back pocket and get all kinds of subsidies, but that is more the fault of Congress and this (and former) presidential administrations.

[Cknolls]

I honestly could give less of a damn what the unions would think of it.  Unions are important presences, but not because businesses have to cave to them.  They are just a check against poor standards and treatment.

 

The unions representing many of the gov't workers are dealing in jobs that are REALLY easy to fill with someone new.  We aren't talking about highly specialized skilled labor here.

 

I agree. But have you read up on th Air traffic controllers union lately. Our buddy Slick Willy gave them collective bargaing rights. JACKASS. Watch how they rape the taxpayer.

[Cknolls]

Please do.  Since the entire federal budget is between one and two trillion dollars, I find it very hard to believe that gas tax receipts alone are that much.

 

 

1.34 trillion dollars over 20 years. pretty staggering. I have the source at work. Will post it tomorrow.

[Cerbaho-WG]

I agree. But have you read up on th Air traffic controllers union lately. Our buddy Slick Willy gave them collective bargaing rights. JACKASS. Watch how they rape the taxpayer.

 

lol unions are bad lol price floors lol

 

Seriously, do you even bother backing up any of your arguments or do you just spout simpleton one liners to appease the people who agree with your views?

 

As for the OP, Rahm Emmanuel has the idea about right. The problem is that you'd need some pretty big subsidies like the EU is doing to spur alternative fuel research (like 11 billion euros to fund the ITER fusion power plant research). But that would never fly here because a lot of people would b**** and moan about how their tax dollars are spent on a super fancy toy that makes plasma reactions. God forbid it's a start that's more feasible than hydrogen power (fusion more likely than fuel cells, makes my head spin, too).

 

As for the tax debate, you can debate back and forth for ages about whether taxes spur whatever kind of growth from the government, but there's no way in hell you can finance anything with such low tax rates. Especially cutting taxes from the upper echelon of the tax bracket. I'm not advocating 33% tax rates like you see in Scandanavia, but an increase is needed, as well as some f***ing responsibility from both sides of the aisle to curb spending, especially military spending.

[Balta1701]

1.34 trillion dollars over 20 years. pretty staggering. I have the source at work. Will post it tomorrow.

Over 20 years? Wow, that's remarkable in that it's vastly lower than I would have expected over the last 2 decades.

[kapkomet]

Kap-

 

I think you have seen my posts enough to know that I was not saying the oil companies are evil for making profits, even huge ones.  I was trying to put some perpective on things in response to Chuck's post.

 

What does frustrate me about the oil companies is, for one, their strangle hold on patents for alternative energy technologies.  Usually I could care less about protectionist business and patents, but in this case, it becomes a national security and national economic issue.  They need to s**t or get off the pot.  I also hate that they have Congress in their back pocket and get all kinds of subsidies, but that is more the fault of Congress and this (and former) presidential administrations.

Congress needs to set the table to incentivize their development. Until that happens, it's going no-where.

[Cknolls]

October 26, 2005

 

State and Federal Treasuries "Profit" More from Gasoline Sales than U.S. Oil Industry

 

by Scott A. Hodge and Jonathan Williams

 

 

High gas prices and strong oil company earnings have generated a rash of new tax proposals in recent months. Some lawmakers have called for new “windfall profits” taxes—similar to the one signed into federal law in 1980 by President Jimmy Carter—that would tax the profits of major oil companies at a rate of 50 percent. Meanwhile, many commentators have voiced support for the idea of increasing gas taxes to keep the price of gasoline at post-Katrina highs, thereby reducing gas consumption.

 

However, often ignored in this debate is the fact that oil industry profits are highly cyclical, making them just as prone to “busts” as to “booms.” Additionally, tax collections on the production and import of gasoline by state and federal governments are already near historic highs. In fact, in recent decades governments have collected far more revenue from gasoline taxes than the largest U.S. oil companies have collectively earned in domestic profits. (Click here for previous analysis of state, local and federal gas taxes.)

 

According to data compiled by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Energy Information Administration, the domestic profits of the 25 largest oil companies in the U.S. have been highly volatile since the late 1970s.

 

As illustrated in Figure 1, between 1977 and 1985, the oil industry recorded relatively high profits—averaging nearly $33 billion per year, after adjusting for inflation. These good times were followed by ten years of relatively flat profits, averaging just $12.3 billion per year. In 1996, profits began to rise again but have been anything but stable, ranging from $9 billion to nearly $42 billion per year. Between 1977 and 2004, the industry’s domestic profits totaled $643 billion, after adjusting for inflation.

 

Figure 1. State and Federal Taxes on Gasoline Production and Imports Exceed Oil Industry Profits in Most Years

 

 

Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Energy Information Administration

 

In contrast, federal and state taxes on gasoline production and imports have been climbing steadily since the late 1970s and now total roughly $58.4 billion. Due in part to substantial hikes in the federal gasoline excise tax in 1983, 1990, and 1993, annual tax revenues have continued to grow. Since 1977, governments collected more than $1.34 trillion, after adjusting for inflation, in gasoline tax revenues—more than twice the amount of domestic profits earned by major U.S. oil companies during the same period.

 

As illustrated in Table 1, since 1977, there have been only three years (1980, 1981, and 1982) in which domestic oil industry profits exceeded government gas tax collections. In the remaining years, gasoline tax collections consistently exceeded oil industry profits, reaching a peak in 1995 when gas tax collections outpaced industry profits by a factor of 7.3.

 

Table 1. State and Federal Gasoline Taxes Compared to Major U.S. Oil Companies’ Domestic Profits, 1977-2004 (figures in billions of 2004 dollars)

 

Year

Oil Profits

Federal Taxes

State Taxes

Total Taxes

 

1977

$26.8

$13.7

$29.0

$42.7

 

1978

$27.5

$13.0

$28.1

$41.1

 

1979

$34.9

$11.4

$25.2

$36.7

 

1980

$41.0

$9.4

$22.0

$31.4

 

1981

$41.4

$8.5

$21.0

$29.5

 

1982

$35.8

$8.0

$20.6

$28.6

 

1983

$30.2

$15.0

$22.0

$37.0

 

1984

$28.7

$16.2

$23.5

$39.6

 

1985

$29.3

$15.6

$24.6

$40.2

 

1986

$9.0

$15.9

$25.7

$41.5

 

1987

$14.0

$15.0

$27.4

$42.4

 

1988

$16.9

$15.6

$28.1

$43.8

 

1989

$14.5

$14.5

$28.3

$42.8

 

1990

$18.6

$14.5

$29.1

$43.5

 

1991

$11.0

$21.1

$29.7

$50.8

 

1992

$10.1

$20.9

$30.8

$51.7

 

1993

$10.6

$20.9

$31.4

$52.3

 

1994

$10.8

$27.1

$32.1

$59.3

 

1995

$7.9

$26.3

$31.9

$58.1

 

1996

$18.9

$26.8

$32.0

$58.9

 

1997

$18.8

$26.0

$32.6

$58.6

 

1998

$9.0

$27.1

$33.1

$60.3

 

1999

$16.8

$26.5

$33.6

$60.1

 

2000

$34.9

$25.7

$33.3

$59.0

 

2001

$35.1

$24.9

$33.6

$58.5

 

2002

$16.2

$24.5

$33.9

$58.4

 

2003

$31.7

$24.6

$33.4

$58.0

 

2004

$42.6

$24.2

$34.2

$58.4

 

Total

$643.0

$533.0

$810.1

$1,343.1

 

 

 

Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Energy Information Administration

[NorthSideSox72]

1.34 trillion dollars over 20 years. pretty staggering. I have the source at work. Will post it tomorrow.

That makes a little more sense. 1.34T over 20 years is roughly 67B per year, which is still bigger than I thought it would be. But you stated 2T as if it were for a single year, which didn't make sense to me. 67B a year is indeed quite a bit.

 

Maybe the feds should use some of that 67 billion a year to incentivize energy companies to develop alternative sources of energy, as Kap suggested.

[kapkomet]

I heard on the news this morning that the gov't is suggesting reducing tax breaks on "research" - as a 'penalty' for the high profits.

 

WAKE UP, GOVERNMENT IDIOTS! THEY WILL NOT SPEND THEIR OWN MONEY IF THEY DON'T HAVE INCENTIVE TO DO SO!!!!

[NorthSideSox72]

I heard on the news this morning that the gov't is suggesting reducing tax breaks on "research" - as a 'penalty' for the high profits.

 

WAKE UP, GOVERNMENT IDIOTS!  THEY WILL NOT SPEND THEIR OWN MONEY IF THEY DON'T HAVE INCENTIVE TO DO SO!!!!

Well I'd have to agree, that is pretty idiotic.

[Cknolls]

That makes a little more sense.  1.34T over 20 years is roughly 67B per year, which is still bigger than I thought it would be.  But you stated 2T as if it were for a single year, which didn't make sense to me.  67B a year is indeed quite a bit.

 

Maybe the feds should use some of that 67 billion a year to incentivize energy companies to develop alternative sources of energy, as Kap suggested.

I concur whole-heartedly.

[Balta1701]

I heard on the news this morning that the gov't is suggesting reducing tax breaks on "research" - as a 'penalty' for the high profits.

 

WAKE UP, GOVERNMENT IDIOTS!  THEY WILL NOT SPEND THEIR OWN MONEY IF THEY DON'T HAVE INCENTIVE TO DO SO!!!!

Of course, some would counter by saying that there's enormous incentives for energy companies to invest their own dollars in "research"; the profits of those companies in the future.

[NorthSideSox72]

Of course, some would counter by saying that there's enormous incentives for energy companies to invest their own dollars in "research"; the profits of those companies in the future.

But you and I and others here all know that won't happen, because big profits now are better than big profits later. Oil = now, alternative energy = later.

[Rex Kickass]

The proposal you heard was a temporary 60 day repeal of the Federal Gas Tax which would be funded by a matching temporary 60 day rollback of gas company tax incentives.

 

It was introduced by Senator Menendez, of my state in New Jersey. And given that these companies are getting record profits from record high prices, it seems appropriate that maybe huge tax breaks aren't necessary for a couple months.

[NorthSideSox72]

The proposal you heard was a temporary 60 day repeal of the Federal Gas Tax which would be funded by a matching temporary 60 day rollback of gas company tax incentives.

 

It was introduced by Senator Menendez, of my state in New Jersey. And given that these companies are getting record profits from record high prices, it seems appropriate that maybe huge tax breaks aren't necessary for a couple months.

Except that we need to push them into research, somehow. What is your suggestion?

[Rex Kickass]

It's a temporary rollback. 60 days.

[kapkomet]

And that accomplishes what?

 

Absolutely nothing.

 

That will be just in time for hurricane season, where we'll be paying $4.00 per gallon on the "threat" of a storm, and $5.00 per gallon if one hits.

[Rex Kickass]

It would give some immediate relief and help prices rise more evenly than a shock for consumers who it hurts most.

[kapkomet]

It would give some immediate relief and help prices rise more evenly than a shock for consumers who it hurts most.

Bulls***. These people do not control the prices. THE MARKET GUYS ON NYMEX DO! Why is it that it seems like no one gets that?

 

The 'talk' is just that, 'talk'. Chucky Schumer needs to STFU when he is talking about "BIG OIL" being the one who is causing this. THEY AREN'T!! But it's all rhetoric and bulls***, including the spew from GWB today. That's the weakest he's looked, EVER, IMO. f***ing moron needs to lead instead of playing with the political pigs.