A 2-Cent Profit for Exxon on a Gallon of Gas?

[red states rule]

So much for the Dems and liberal media attacking the profits of "Big Oil". I have always said government makes more off the sale of a gallon of gas in taxes than the oil companies do in profit

Once again the facts back me up and sink the left's talking points


http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-wsoMz4L_mGo/TbiUGJn_tjI/AAAAAAAAPP8/pqaRujV0kls/s400/gastax.jpg



http://www.dailymarkets.com/economy/2011/04/27/gasoline-taxes-vs-exxon-profit-per-gallon/


and

http://www.exxonmobilperspectives.com/2011/04/27/gas-prices-and-industry-earnings-a-few-things-to-think-about/

[J.T]

exxon as a source?

[ConHog]

exxon as a source?

MOST unbiased sources agree that the average profit per gallon of gasoline is between 3 and 5 cents. Now that's ALL oil companies , not just Exxon. The average state tax is 37 cents a gallon, the feds get 28 cents a gallon.

Pretty easy to see who's making the most money here.

[OCA]

MOST unbiased sources agree that the average profit per gallon of gasoline is between 3 and 5 cents. Now that's ALL oil companies , not just Exxon. The average state tax is 37 cents a gallon, the feds get 28 cents a gallon.

Pretty easy to see who's making the most money here.

Lets say its 3 cents profit per gallon, how many gallons per day do you think Exxon sells? Is somebody fucking retarded here?

Thats 10's if not hundreds of millions per day.

[OCA]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/01/business/01oil.html?_r=1

[red states rule]

MOST unbiased sources agree that the average profit per gallon of gasoline is between 3 and 5 cents. Now that's ALL oil companies , not just Exxon. The average state tax is 37 cents a gallon, the feds get 28 cents a gallon.

Pretty easy to see who's making the most money here.


It is amazing how some will whine about the proft margin of Exxon (and ignore the amount in taxes that is collected from that profit) and ignore how much in taxes are included in the cost of a gallo of gas

Bottom line in, nd has always been, the government makes more off the sale of a gallon of gas than Exxon does

There will be people who will ignre this fact, will bitch and whine about the evil oil company - and not disprove who makes the most money

[OCA]

It is amazing how some will whine about the proft margin of Exxon (and ignore the amount in taxes that is collected from that profit) and ignore how much in taxes are included in the cost of a gallo of gas

Bottom line in, nd has always been, the government makes more off the sale of a gallon of gas than Exxon does

There will be people who will ignre this fact, will bitch and whine about the evil oil company - and not disprove who makes the most money

Its not the government who sets the price of a gallon though old man, if everytime a wildcatter stubs his toe on an oil rig big oil didn't take that opportunity to anally rape the American people and raise gas prices the government wouldn't profit as much either.

Your attempt to excuse big oil tells where your loyalties lie and it ain't with your own kind.

Hint hint..............big oil execs don't care if RSR is dead or alive.

Wall Street Journal(conservative) calls for gas tax raise:http://www.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/mankiw/files/Raise_the_Gas_Tax.pdf

[red states rule]

exxon as a source?

It is hard to understand why some idiots have it in for oil companies. Everyone depends on them for their energy needs, yet the hate that is expressed towards them whenever the price at the pump goes up a nickle defies logic

Of course any tax increase leveled at oil companies will be passed on to us at the pump. Which makes sense since the fools who openly show their contempt for oil companies need public anger to support their irrational hate




"Today, oil and gas companies account for roughly 7-8 percent of the country's gross domestic product; they employ over 9 million people and have invested over $2 trillion in capital improvements over the last decade. U.S. crude production in May 2011 was 5.3 million barrels per day out of the 19.5 million barrels the country used daily. The country operates 1,836 drilling rigs currently with an all-time high marc of 4500 set in 1988. ...

"Liberals like to demonize key industries by calling them "Big," as in Big Oil, Big Pharmaceuticals, Big Banks. But ... [s]ix percent ($533 billion in payroll) of all labor income in the United States and 5.3 percent of all jobs are either directly tied to or support the oil and gas business. Some of the supporting industries include services, wholesale and retail trade, finance, insurance, real estate, rental and leasing, manufacturing, transportation and warehousing, information, construction, agriculture, utilities and mining. The jobs are well-paying, technical positions, too."

"[D]espite everything the Obama administration has done to slow down domestic development of oil and gas resources, the oil and gas sector is one of the fastest growing job markets in a very anemic job market. While other sectors are shredding jobs, oil and gas is hot." ~ John Ransom in Who Is Big Oil?

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/elisabethmeinecke/2011/07/25/the_democrats_demonize_it,_but_who_really_is_big_o il

[OCA]

It is hard to understand why some idiots have it in for oil companies. Everyone depends on them for their energy needs, yet the hate that is expressed towards them whenever the price at the pump goes up a nickle defies logic

Of course any tax increase leveled at oil companies will be passed on to us at the pump. Which makes sense since the fools who openly show their contempt for oil companies need public anger to support their irrational hate

9 billion, thats billion with a b, profit in the 4th quarter of 2010, all on the backs of hard working, tax paying Americans....................and you wonder why there is anger? Other than the speculators on Wall St. there is no reason gas should be at 3.50 a gallon, well other than big oil greed.

It doesn't defy logic, you just aren't logical.

[ConHog]

Lets say its 3 cents profit per gallon, how many gallons per day do you think Exxon sells? Is somebody fucking retarded here?

Thats 10's if not hundreds of millions per day.

So what should the oil companies do, say okay after $X of oil are sold we won't take our 3 cents per gallon profit anymore? I mean seriously, your faulting companies for having a popular product?

The fault isn't with the oil companies, nor is it with the government really. The fault lies with the oil speculators, they are the ones making the HUGE money. And they aren't even providing jack shit for that money. I'd make speculating illegal. But that's just me.

[red states rule]

So what should the oil companies do, say okay after $X of oil are sold we won't take our 3 cents per gallon profit anymore? I mean seriously, your faulting companies for having a popular product?

The fault isn't with the oil companies, nor is it with the government really. The fault lies with the oil speculators, they are the ones making the HUGE money. And they aren't even providing jack shit for that money. I'd make speculating illegal. But that's just me.

and you listen to the trolls whine about the legal profit of a US company while they ignore the taxes the government takes in thanks to those companies

In 2009.........





That said, Uncle Sam gets his money in other ways. Including sales taxes and duties, Exxon recorded $7.7 billion in U.S. tax costs last year, and paid even more overseas. Its grand total in global taxes for the year? A whopping $78.6 billion. The company's effective income tax rate was a hefty 47%, its highest in three years.

http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2010/news/1004/gallery.top_5_tax_bills/2.html




I wonder what these trolls use to power their cars?

[OCA]

So what should the oil companies do, say okay after $X of oil are sold we won't take our 3 cents per gallon profit anymore? I mean seriously, your faulting companies for having a popular product?

The fault isn't with the oil companies, nor is it with the government really. The fault lies with the oil speculators, they are the ones making the HUGE money. And they aren't even providing jack shit for that money. I'd make speculating illegal. But that's just me.

Fault lies with both big oil and with speculators.

[DragonStryk72]

Its not the government who sets the price of a gallon though old man, if everytime a wildcatter stubs his toe on an oil rig big oil didn't take that opportunity to anally rape the American people and raise gas prices the government wouldn't profit as much either.

Your attempt to excuse big oil tells where your loyalties lie and it ain't with your own kind.

Hint hint..............big oil execs don't care if RSR is dead or alive.

Wall Street Journal(conservative) calls for gas tax raise:http://www.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/mankiw/files/Raise_the_Gas_Tax.pdf

Wait, wait wait, so the oil companies pricing they get around .5% profit margin is too much profit? How many mom and pops make a far greater profit margin? to be fair, shouldn't we be stripping them of those excess profits, by your standards?

[OCA]

Wait, wait wait, so the oil companies pricing they get around .5% profit margin is too much profit? How many mom and pops make a far greater profit margin? to be fair, shouldn't we be stripping them of those excess profits, by your standards?

No, we should not but mom and pops don't raise prices everytime someone slips and fall in the store.................big oil does.

[red states rule]

Wait, wait wait, so the oil companies pricing they get around .5% profit margin is too much profit? How many mom and pops make a far greater profit margin? to be fair, shouldn't we be stripping them of those excess profits, by your standards?

Remember Hillary said she wanted to take the profits of oil companies and invest in "green" energy?

It would not surprise me if some trolls would support such action by the government

or what oil companies have to do to find the oil, then drill for it and get it out of the ground, refine it, then deliver it to the distributer - their profit margin is very reasonable

[DragonStryk72]

No, we should not but mom and pops don't raise prices everytime someone slips and fall in the store.................big oil does.

Oh you mean like when there's an enormous decade long conflict that has cost thousands of lives? Yeah, they should just operate at a loss for a decade, cause it serves them right.:rolleyes: Not like it would cost anyone jobs, or anything, cause companies never lay workers off when they're operating in the red.

[ConHog]

Remember Hillary said she wanted to take the profits of oil companies and invest in "green" energy?

It would not surprise me if some trolls would support such action by the government

or what oil companies have to do to find the oil, then drill for it and get it out of the ground, refine it, then deliver it to the distributer - their profit margin is very reasonable

I think what a LOT of people fail to think about is the fact that its not uncommon for an oil company to risk millions of dollars on a drill site only to come up empty. It happens more often than people realize , oil companies of course have to recoup these losses somewhere, and at the same time they MUST continue exploring new sites in order to keep having a product to sell.

Big risks, big rewards. You take that away and they have no incentive to even look anymore.

How do YOU feel about speculation?

[red states rule]

Oh you mean like when there's an enormous decade long conflict that has cost thousands of lives? Yeah, they should just operate at a loss for a decade, cause it serves them right.:rolleyes: Not like it would cost anyone jobs, or anything, cause companies never lay workers off when they're operating in the red.


Like some feel with health care, perhaps some fools think they should give their product away

Here is what makes up the cost of a gallon of gas

and what a shocker - the cost of crude is the biggest factor in the price at the pump follwoed by TAXES!!!!!!



http://www.exxonmobilperspectives.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Gasoline-price-breakdown.png

[J.T]

Bottom line in, nd has always been, the government makes more off the sale of a gallon of gas than Exxon does

The government's not making any money. Those taxes are a drop in the bucket compared to what the government spends on invasions, occupations, and bombings to protect the oil industry's product and resources.

[Mr. P]

http://www.exxonmobilperspectives.com/2011/04/27/gas-prices-and-industry-earnings-a-few-things-to-think-about/earnings-by-industry/

Click to enlarge graph...

So, many are bent because Exxon makes a few cents per/gal of gas? Focus grasshoppers!

Why not target Anheuser-Bush along with Eli-Lilly, Dell, Microsoft, HP and all the rest of the successful bastard CAPITALIST!

Wait, you did elect a buffoon that seems to be focused on killing success, didn't you? How's that workin for ya? Dontcha just love them shovel ready jobs? :laugh:

[red states rule]

http://www.exxonmobilperspectives.com/2011/04/27/gas-prices-and-industry-earnings-a-few-things-to-think-about/earnings-by-industry/

Click to enlarge graph...

So, many are bent because Exxon makes a few cents per/gal of gas? Focus grasshoppers!

Why not target Anheuser-Bush along with Eli-Lilly, Dell, Microsoft, HP and all the rest of the successful bastard CAPITALIST!

Wait, you did elect a buffoon that seems to be focused on killing success, didn't you? How's that workin for ya? Dontcha just love them shovel ready jobs? :laugh:



Where is the outrage over the profit margin for "Big Beverage"?


http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2009/08/health-insurance-industry-ranks-86-by.html


http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_otfwl2zc6Qc/SoMLoWBKM4I/AAAAAAAAK4g/wKdZyg5LxQ0/s1600/profits.bmp

[logroller]

No, we should not but mom and pops don't raise prices everytime someone slips and fall in the store.................big oil does.

Oh really? Let's break down how the cost profit chain works. Someone slips and falls, sues and wins, a party pays, insurance in the mom and pop example, and mom and pop get a bump in the insurance premium and they eat that cost??? Not likely. In the case of big oil, they're self-insured, so they pay out of pocket for such claims, a cost which they plan on and cover through retained profits. Yes oil exploration and production is more dangerous than retail, so they pay out more for safety and injury, but it is the consumer who demands the product-- what's that saying about making an omelet.


I think what a LOT of people fail to think about is the fact that its not uncommon for an oil company to risk millions of dollars on a drill site only to come up empty. It happens more often than people realize , oil companies of course have to recoup these losses somewhere, and at the same time they MUST continue exploring new sites in order to keep having a product to sell.

Big risks, big rewards. You take that away and they have no incentive to even look anymore.

How do YOU feel about speculation?

Speculation or price manipulation? I know oil companies stop pumping productive wells to preserve both their reserves and profit margin; while, at the same time, lobbying govt and the public sentiment(through higher pump costs) for more drilling permits. As infuriating as it is to pay more, I can't very well blame them for protecting their assets--It's just business. Again, it's the consumer who's to blame for lack of change. Everybody bitches about higher costs at the pump; yet when prices go down we just use more, driving the price back up ad the cycle continues...

If you want to beat govt and big oil, you have to beat them at their own game, through changing consumption habits-- not through more burdensome costs like moratoriums and green tax incentives; long-term that has the exact opposite effect of the desired lower fuel cost. It's really not complicated, if you increase the cost, anywhere on anybody, the price goes up. Of course environmental cost need be considered, and well-regulated speculation is necessary, but taking money from one to give to another is beset with collision between regulator and the regulated. And if there is to be collusion, I would prefer it be between consumer and govt, rather than supplier and govt. Hence, I prefer higher pump tax, which I can see, rather than the under-the-table dealings I am not privy to.

[ConHog]

Oh really? Let's break down how the cost profit chain works. Someone slips and falls, sues and wins, a party pays, insurance in the mom and pop example, and mom and pop get a bump in the insurance premium and they eat that cost??? Not likely. In the case of big oil, they're self-insured, so they pay out of pocket for such claims, a cost which they plan on and cover through retained profits. Yes oil exploration and production is more dangerous than retail, so they pay out more for safety and injury, but it is the consumer who demands the product-- what's that saying about making an omelet.



Speculation or price manipulation? I know oil companies stop pumping productive wells to preserve both their reserves and profit margin; while, at the same time, lobbying govt and the public sentiment(through higher pump costs) for more drilling permits. As infuriating as it is to pay more, I can't very well blame them for protecting their assets--It's just business. Again, it's the consumer who's to blame for lack of change. Everybody bitches about higher costs at the pump; yet when prices go down we just use more, driving the price back up ad the cycle continues...

If you want to beat govt and big oil, you have to beat them at their own game, through changing consumption habits-- not through more burdensome costs like moratoriums and green tax incentives; long-term that has the exact opposite effect of the desired lower fuel cost. It's really not complicated, if you increase the cost, anywhere on anybody, the price goes up. Of course environmental cost need be considered, and well-regulated speculation is necessary, but taking money from one to give to another is beset with collision between regulator and the regulated. And if there is to be collusion, I would prefer it be between consumer and govt, rather than supplier and govt. Hence, I prefer higher pump tax, which I can see, rather than the under-the-table dealings I am not privy to.


I was speaking of speculating. It just amazes me that they are essentially nothing but bookies, and it's legal. It should not be. They do nothing but artificially inflate the price of oil by manufacturing claims that we are about to run out.

[logroller]

I was speaking of speculating. It just amazes me that they are essentially nothing but bookies, and it's legal. It should not be. They do nothing but artificially inflate the price of oil by manufacturing claims that we are about to run out.
Blame the middle man huh? . Sure they add costs, but they also provide for a more stablemarkets, not in terms of price, but supply. This stability began when std oil bought up all the small time producers and struck deals with shipping modes, which in turn led to trustbusting, then coordinated sales strategies through speculation markets, then deregulation, then more book-cooking... all the while govt and business got richer and bigger. The underlying goal is to have the best of both worlds, whereby many people are buying and selling a product which is best supplied through few players. It really does work, where we fail is in our regulatory scheme, as the means of regulation is challenged by regulators being in the pocket of the few rather than the many. To fix the problem we need to have a VAT rather than income tax and eliminate corporations' ability to lobby and support candidates. A value added tax offers the best fiduciary self-regulation. Instead we punish those who make money, and, more heinously, encourage them to cook their books with creative acct practices which go unaudited thx to the aforementioned lobbying affordable only to the major players. We should have a govt of and for the People; that's who should be represented, not superPACs. All this knee-jerk big oil blame shit is fruitless, they have what we demand-- simple as that. What we need is a govt of the people and not business, they do perfectly well on their own.

[red states rule]

http://www.exxonmobilperspectives.com/2011/04/27/gas-prices-and-industry-earnings-a-few-things-to-think-about/earnings-by-industry/

Click to enlarge graph...

So, many are bent because Exxon makes a few cents per/gal of gas? Focus grasshoppers!

Why not target Anheuser-Bush along with Eli-Lilly, Dell, Microsoft, HP and all the rest of the successful bastard CAPITALIST!

Wait, you did elect a buffoon that seems to be focused on killing success, didn't you? How's that workin for ya? Dontcha just love them shovel ready jobs? :laugh:

Please do not cloud this thread with a bunch of facts Mr P!

[ConHog]

Blame the middle man huh? . Sure they add costs, but they also provide for a more stablemarkets, not in terms of price, but supply. This stability began when std oil bought up all the small time producers and struck deals with shipping modes, which in turn led to trustbusting, then coordinated sales strategies through speculation markets, then deregulation, then more book-cooking... all the while govt and business got richer and bigger. The underlying goal is to have the best of both worlds, whereby many people are buying and selling a product which is best supplied through few players. It really does work, where we fail is in our regulatory scheme, as the means of regulation is challenged by regulators being in the pocket of the few rather than the many. To fix the problem we need to have a VAT rather than income tax and eliminate corporations' ability to lobby and support candidates. A value added tax offers the best fiduciary self-regulation. Instead we punish those who make money, and, more heinously, encourage them to cook their books with creative acct practices which go unaudited thx to the aforementioned lobbying affordable only to the major players. We should have a govt of and for the People; that's who should be represented, not superPACs. All this knee-jerk big oil blame shit is fruitless, they have what we demand-- simple as that. What we need is a govt of the people and not business, they do perfectly well on their own.

No, wait. I think you misunderstood who I was talking about. I'm not talking about the oil speculator who is out looking for oil. I'm talking about the commodity brokers who are essentially just betting on whether oil will go up or not. Certainly the people who are out in the field risking everything drilling holes looking for oil deserve to make a profit.

[red states rule]

No, wait. I think you misunderstood who I was talking about. I'm not talking about the oil speculator who is out looking for oil. I'm talking about the commodity brokers who are essentially just betting on whether oil will go up or not. Certainly the people who are out in the field risking everything drilling holes looking for oil deserve to make a profit.

Yoiu mean people like George Soros?

[fj1200]

Great, another evil speculators thread.

6 Myths About Oil Speculators (http://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/flowchart/2008/06/27/6-myths-about-oil-speculators)

Speculators are inherently bad for the economy. There's no doubt that speculators are out to make money, by buying a commodity like oil (or gold, or real estate) when they think the price is likely to rise and they'll be able to sell for a profit. But they also help sustain the market for buyers and sellers and provide ways for individuals and businesses to offset risks.
...
There's a Speculator Star Chamber somewhere. Global markets are so abstruse to ordinary folks that it's easy to imagine a cabal of evil geniuses pulling the levers from some fortified complex in London or Geneva. But that's the Hollywood version. "The market is so competitive that that's nonsense," says Bob Hodrick, a finance professor at Columbia Business School...


Speculators are super-rich market manipulators. Certainly some are super-rich, including investors in sovereign wealth funds from Middle Eastern and Asian nations. But new data show that many oil speculators these days may be big pension and index funds that invest on behalf of ordinary working Americans. These huge investment funds have typically invested in equities, but in recent years they've been adding commodities—including oil—to their portfolios as a way to diversify.
...
The government tracks speculators and knows who they are. Part of the reason nobody's really sure what effect speculators have on the oil markets is a lack of information. Exchanges like the New York Mercantile Exchange track the activities of their members, but even then, a trader could be a speculator one day, buying oil or futures contracts, and a seller the next day:...


Speculators are creating a huge bubble in oil. We've just seen a bubble pop in the housing market, with home values now plummeting...
But in the oil markets, there is in fact growing demand because of strong Asian economies. And supply is fairly fixed for now, since adding more oil to the market means finding new sources and spending billions to extract it, not just opening a spigot a little wider. "There are pretty strong fundamentals behind this run-up," says Sarah Emerson, another analyst at Energy Security Analysis. Speculators may be pushing oil prices somewhat higher than they would otherwise be—but a bust similar to housing or tech stocks seems unlikely.
Speculators should be banned. Few, if any, economists or energy analysts advocate this. In fact, some fairly modest regulatory changes could bring greater transparency to oil markets and force them to operate more like stock and bond markets. Buying a contract for oil futures, for instance, typically requires the buyer to put down less than 10 percent of the value of the contract; the rest can be borrowed. That allows buyers to roll up big stakes with relatively little cash. Raising the "margin requirement" to 50 percent, the usual threshold for stocks, would cool demand for oil futures, while still keeping the speculators in business. And maybe get the witch hunters off their case.

You can speculate up AND down, and every buyer must eventually be a seller.

Speculators not to blame for oil spike: BOC

Financial speculators have long been blamed for skyrocketing oil prices over much of the past decade, however a new study from the Bank of Canada says price increases have been driven largely by energy-hungry emerging markets and a stagnant supply chain.Ron Alquist and Olivier Gervais, researchers with economics department of the Bank of Canada, said while the timing matches up between financial firms boosting their positions in oil futures markets and a spike in oil prices between 2003 and 2008, there is little evidence to prove that one actually caused the other.
“Financial speculation seems to have played a modest role. There is no empirical evidence to suggest a strong relationship between the positions of speculators and price changes,” the researchers said in a report. “Overall, the available evidence points to global demand and supply conditions.”
...
Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Speculators+blame+spike/5053308/story.html?id=5053308#ixzz1VC8SuVut

Personally I blame the Fed's easy money policy that's been in effect since 2001. Besides if you blame oil speculators for the runup in oil then you need to blame them for the runup in price in practically every other basic commodity market, corn, copper, lumber, etc.. I posted a link awhile back in another thread that showed prices for the past 10 years.

[fj1200]

Lets say its 3 cents profit per gallon, how many gallons per day do you think Exxon sells? Is somebody fucking retarded here?

Thats 10's if not hundreds of millions per day.

Do you not understand profit margin? The government collects more in taxes with zero risk than oil companies make in profit who make massive investments.


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/01/business/01oil.html?_r=1

And?

[ConHog]

Yoiu mean people like George Soros?

And all the other Wal Street pricks.

[fj1200]

And all the other Wal Street pricks.

Are you going to blame all the pricks for the runup in your gold prices too?

[ConHog]

Are you going to blame all the pricks for the runup in your gold prices too?

Surely you acknowledge that those are two entirely different things.


But yes, they are still pricks.

[fj1200]

Surely you acknowledge that those are two entirely different things.

But yes, they are still pricks.

No, one is even referred to as black gold. ;) They are base commodities and both subject to inflationary/deflationary Fed policies, they are both used by "speculators" as a hedge against inflation. Airlines, et al "speculate" by buying contracts that lock in today's prices for planning tomorrow, farmers sell forward their crops to lock in today's prices, citizens "speculate" by buying gold as a hedge against poor Fed policy and, recently, abysmal Government actions. Virtually every commodity has been subject to a running up of prices over the past 10 years, are they all the fault of "prickish speculators"?

[ConHog]

No, one is even referred to as black gold. ;) They are base commodities and both subject to inflationary/deflationary Fed policies, they are both used by "speculators" as a hedge against inflation. Airlines, et al "speculate" by buying contracts that lock in today's prices for planning tomorrow, farmers sell forward their crops to lock in today's prices, citizens "speculate" by buying gold as a hedge against poor Fed policy and, recently, abysmal Government actions. Virtually every commodity has been subject to a running up of prices over the past 10 years, are they all the fault of "prickish speculators"?

I would say yes. Prices should be set by the companies that actually produce such goods, not some assholes sitting in ivory towers trading futures like they are baseball cards.

[fj1200]

I would say yes. Prices should be set by the companies that actually produce such goods, not some assholes sitting in ivory towers trading futures like they are baseball cards.

:rolleyes: The market determines the price through the actions of producers, consumers, etc. Do you praise speculators when the price goes down?

Copper "speculators":
http://www.mongabay.com/images/commodities/charts/copper.html
Aluminum "speculators":
http://www.mongabay.com/images/commodities/charts/aluminum.html
Wheat "speculators":
http://www.mongabay.com/images/commodities/charts/wheat.html
Soybean "speculators":
http://www.mongabay.com/images/commodities/charts/soybean.html

All of those have two things in common, they are commodities and are subject to inflation, too much money chasing too few goods.

[ConHog]

:rolleyes: The market determines the price through the actions of producers, consumers, etc. Do you praise speculators when the price goes down?

Copper "speculators":
http://www.mongabay.com/images/commodities/charts/copper.html
Aluminum "speculators":
http://www.mongabay.com/images/commodities/charts/aluminum.html
Wheat "speculators":
http://www.mongabay.com/images/commodities/charts/wheat.html
Soybean "speculators":
http://www.mongabay.com/images/commodities/charts/soybean.html

All of those have two things in common, they are commodities and are subject to inflation, too much money chasing too few goods.



No, I don't praise them when prices, on RARE occasions, go down. I think they are bad for the economy period.

[fj1200]

No, I don't praise them when prices, on RARE occasions, go down. I think they are bad for the economy period.

But they're doing you a favor and something you agree with. Do you really blame speculators in ALL of those cases?

[ConHog]

But they're doing you a favor and something you agree with. Do you really blame speculators in ALL of those cases?

I think they are an unnecessary part of the system who does more harm than good.

Agree to disagree?

[fj1200]

I think they are an unnecessary part of the system who does more harm than good.

Agree to disagree?

But, but, but... I think you're wrong. :cool:

:salute:

[ConHog]

But, but, but... I think you're wrong. :cool:

:salute:

And I KNOW you are wrong, but obviously as hard headed as I am, so why bother trying to convince you otherwise. It's not like us arguing over it would change anything, and you're not OCA etc etc so I don't feel the need to argue with your just to be arguing.

:laugh:

IOW - I respect your right to be wrong.

[fj1200]

But I'm the one backing up my position and also the class to NOT say:


IOW - I respect your right to be wrong.

:laugh:

[KartRacerBoy]

Has anyone else noticed that the complaint centers around STATE taxes, not federal, compared to profit margin? The revenue is dispersed amount 50 states while profits center in the corporation.

But oil company total profits are still huge, and ExxonMobil legally avoided all US corporate income taxes last year. Income taxes, both corporate and personal, need to be changed to simple, tiered tax rates with no deductions both type of entities. No deductions. Make it revenue neutral for both.

I will also say that JT had a point many posts back (this pains me). The conflicts in the Middle East are only important to the US becz of oil. Otherwise we'd largely let them kill each other cz we have zero strategic interest. However, this isn't just a subsidy to oil companies. It is also a subsidy to consumers. So how about this as a political compromise?

Let's open up drilling in the US but with sufficient regulations to prevent another Gulf oil spill that takes forever to plug and tax oil so that the industry has a pool of spill fighting tech waiting in hand along the coasts to respond to any spill (since there clearly weren't enough dedicated resources to clean up the Gulf spill). If we eliminate the politcal bastard child of CAFE, this tax on gas also tend to drive people towards more fuel efficient vehicles.

And as to ConHog's point on speculating, I agree with him. Prices are RARELY flexible downward so the benefits of speculation are limited, IMO. However, I see no realistic way to regulate or eliminate speculating either on a national or worldwide basis. Which means fj is kinda right, too.

[red states rule]

Has anyone else noticed that the complaint centers around STATE taxes, not federal, compared to profit margin? The revenue is dispersed amount 50 states while profits center in the corporation.

But oil company total profits are still huge, and ExxonMobil legally avoided all US corporate income taxes last year. Income taxes, both corporate and personal, need to be changed to simple, tiered tax rates with no deductions both type of entities. No deductions. Make it revenue neutral for both.

I will also say that JT had a point many posts back (this pains me). The conflicts in the Middle East are only important to the US becz of oil. Otherwise we'd largely let them kill each other cz we have zero strategic interest. However, this isn't just a subsidy to oil companies. It is also a subsidy to consumers. So how about this as a political compromise?

Let's open up drilling in the US but with sufficient regulations to prevent another Gulf oil spill that takes forever to plug and tax oil so that the industry has a pool of spill fighting tech waiting in hand along the coasts to respond to any spill (since there clearly weren't enough dedicated resources to clean up the Gulf spill). If we eliminate the politcal bastard child of CAFE, this tax on gas also tend to drive people towards more fuel efficient vehicles.

And as to ConHog's point on speculating, I agree with him. Prices are RARELY flexible downward so the benefits of speculation are limited, IMO. However, I see no realistic way to regulate or eliminate speculating either on a national or worldwide basis. Which means fj is kinda right, too.

Did you happen to miss the amount of taxes Exxon paid - maybe not "income taxes" but they still sent the government a large amount of thier profit

Of course any increase in taxes and any cost of additional regulation will simply be paid by the folks pulling up to pump gas at an Exxon gas station

[KartRacerBoy]

Did you happen to miss the amount of taxes Exxon paid - maybe not "income taxes" but they still sent the government a large amount of thier profit

Of course any increase in taxes and any cost of additional regulation will simply be paid by the folks pulling up to pump gas at an Exxon gas station

I agree that from any oil company's perspective, taxes are taxes. Lost profit is lost profit, but cut a tax by 40 cents and profit will not go up by 40 cents. I was just pointing out how the taxes are distributed.

Actually, for companies like Exxon, etc (oligopolies), the economics prove (counterintuitively) that not all taxes on their products are passed to consumers. In a purely competitive market, 100% of taxes are passed to consumer, but as markets become less competitive, less of the taxes are passed to consumers and more absorbed by the corporation and taken out of profit margin. But if your govt policy goal is to decrease gas usage, you don't care how the cost of the tax is distributed. If it serves national goals to drive down gas usage, use the most economically efficient policy (ie, not CAFE standards for cars).

[fj1200]

Has anyone else noticed that the complaint centers around STATE taxes, not federal, compared to profit margin? The revenue is dispersed amount 50 states while profits center in the corporation.

I think one of the graphs did break down Federal vs. State (averages iirc) and both outweighing corporate.


But oil company total profits are still huge, and ExxonMobil legally avoided all US corporate income taxes last year. Income taxes, both corporate and personal, need to be changed to simple, tiered tax rates with no deductions both type of entities. No deductions. Make it revenue neutral for both.

Oil COMPANIES are huge and hence their profit will be huge. Profit margin is the relevant measure.


Let's open up drilling in the US but with sufficient regulations to prevent another Gulf oil spill that takes forever to plug and tax oil so that the industry has a pool of spill fighting tech waiting in hand along the coasts to respond to any spill (since there clearly weren't enough dedicated resources to clean up the Gulf spill). If we eliminate the politcal bastard child of CAFE, this tax on gas also tend to drive people towards more fuel efficient vehicles.

Makes sense economically but not politically.


And as to ConHog's point on speculating, I agree with him. Prices are RARELY flexible downward so the benefits of speculation are limited, IMO. However, I see no realistic way to regulate or eliminate speculating either on a national or worldwide basis. Which means fj is kinda right, too.

That's because inflation is NEVER flexible downward. Speculation is neutral, for every buyer there is a seller and for every speculative "buy" there will be a speculative "sell." Do you remember the first oil trade over $100? The guy wanted to be the first to break the barrier and then the price went right back to its market level; the guy took a loss on the contract to be the first.

Check out the graph and the spot prices from '78 to '98... that's a whole lot of price flexibility downward.

http://www.mongabay.com/images/commodities/charts/crude_oil.html

[KartRacerBoy]

fj, if you EVER complain about sentence by sentence post parsing, I will hunt you down and dye your hair carrot top red.

And Carrot Top is only more muscularly defined becz the bastard uses steroids. :laugh:

[fj1200]

fj,

Yes?


if you EVER

I have NEVER.


complain about sentence by sentence post parsing,

Sometimes it is necessary to do so.


I will hunt you down

No need, I will freely give you my address.


and dye your hair carrot top red.

That might be a nice change.


And Carrot Top is only more muscularly defined becz the bastard uses steroids. :laugh:

You should use some then, you could use the definition. :P

[KartRacerBoy]

I say again. Quote fucker! :laugh:

And PM me that address...