Oil and gas prices: rockets and feathers

#26
#26
lawgator1 said:
What's wrong with saying both? Why can't it be the case that we are being victimized by the inefficiency and ego of Congress while at the same time we are being victimized by the greed of oil companies?
Click to expand...

the problem with the oil companies greed is that during the 90's when gas and oil was 80-90 cents a gallon, oil companies were going under left and right (except for the big ones, but they too were hurting to make a proffit). you didn't here anyone then screaming at big oil, you didn't hear anyone in congress calling for a bailout. it was a supply and demand issues as is today. as being victimized, it's probably about 75-80% chance it's more of the government's inaction and and politicing than the oil companie's greed.
 
#27
#27
TennTradition said:
The NIMBY sentiment does make it difficult to build a refinery..but I'm not sure the companies want to invest in refineries right now...their raw product is worth too much.
Click to expand...

Why would you not want to build new plants in any industry that replaces 40 year old technology with more efficient (and therefore more profitable) current technology?
 
#28
#28
KentheOrange said:
Well, as of 1/1/08 US refineries were operating at 98% of capacity and our imports of gasoline have gone up 3.4 times in the past 10 years.

The main reason for only one new refinery in the last 25 years in the lower 48 is local organizations with the attitude of "not in our backyard."
Click to expand...

It looks to me that we have been holding steady at or under 90% of capacity for a while...including 1/1/08. Am I failing to interpret this information correctly?

U.S. Weekly Percent Utilization of Refinery Operable Capacity (%)
 
#29
#29
KentheOrange said:
Why would you not want to build new plants in any industry that replaces 40 year old technology with more efficient (and therefore more profitable) current technology?
Click to expand...

If I were a company, I would prefer to make my capital investment in something that has a cheap input and an expensive product. That isn't the case right now with oil, so I don't see the investments being made. It would certainly help to get more efficient equipment...but it's all about the capital and I think these companies would rather place it elsewhere right now..such as exploration. I'm not in the business, so maybe I'm wrong...
 
#30
#30
lawgator1 said:
What's wrong with saying both? Why can't it be the case that we are being victimized by the inefficiency and ego of Congress while at the same time we are being victimized by the greed of oil companies?
Click to expand...

You really need to do a little research on net profit % by industry. You will be surprised.
 
#31
#31
#33
#33
KentheOrange said:
You really need to do a little research on net profit % by industry. You will be surprised.
Click to expand...


What makes you think I don't already know that? I do and am unimpressed with it. Who said that the principle of economies of scale justifies any profit number, no matter how huge, just because the economy of your business is bigger than the average bear's?
 
#34
#34
lawgator1 said:
What makes you think I don't already know that? I do and am unimpressed with it. Who said that the principle of economies of scale justifies any profit number, no matter how huge, just because the economy of your business is bigger than the average bear's?
Click to expand...


damn socialist. :)
 
#35
#35
lawgator1 said:
What makes you think I don't already know that? I do and am unimpressed with it. Who said that the principle of economies of scale justifies any profit number, no matter how huge, just because the economy of your business is bigger than the average bear's?
Click to expand...

So you are of the persuasion that you(or someone else) is the one that should set these arbitrary numbers as to how much is "too much"?
 
#36
#36
lawgator1 said:
What makes you think I don't already know that? I do and am unimpressed with it. Who said that the principle of economies of scale justifies any profit number, no matter how huge, just because the economy of your business is bigger than the average bear's?
Click to expand...
the freaking capitalist system did and it's steeped in risk vs. return. You don't have to be impressed. If you hate it badly enough, there are plenty out there in Europe that fit your arbitrary parameter rule. Let me know if you need luggage or PODS.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#37
#37
lawgator1 said:
What makes you think I don't already know that? I do and am unimpressed with it. Who said that the principle of economies of scale justifies any profit number, no matter how huge, just because the economy of your business is bigger than the average bear's?
Click to expand...

i do agree that this theory becuase margins in the oil industry are low that it means they aren't making excess profit is rather silly. margins for walmart and costco are very low too but they seem to be doing ok. i don't agree that these companies should be penalized merle because they are very profitable. show me they manipulated the oil price and i'm on board, but i don't see it.
 
#38
#38
This is why LG and the rest love Obama...he is going to get the evilness that is greed:

Obama's focused on economic issues. He said that oil giant Exxon-Mobil "makes in 30 seconds what the typical Ohio worker makes in a year."
Click to expand...
 
#39
#39
allvol123 said:
So you are of the persuasion that you(or someone else) is the one that should set these arbitrary numbers as to how much is "too much"?
Click to expand...


You miss my point. I am saying that I do not accept that the reason their profits are "okay" is because of the economies of scale argument. Just as I cannot assign an arbitrary number as to max profit for them, neither can you defend their profits on some other-industry profit margin, mutiplied by the larger capitalization of the oil industry.

What I am saying is that the American people, who are struggling to make ends meet, seeing record foreclosures in their area, watching as their main nest egg (home value) dwindles while their 401k plummets, paying more and more for milk and bread -- they aren't sitting there going "its okay with me because by gosh they had to invest a zillion to get to that profit."

While Joe Six Pack wonders if he can send his kids ot college, save for retirement, pay for health care, or even pay his mortgage, you aren't going to be able to do much to persudae him that a profit rate of $50 billion a year is reasonable.


BigPapaVol said:
the freaking capitalist system did and it's steeped in risk vs. return. You don't have to be impressed. If you hate it badly enough, there are plenty out there in Europe that fit your arbitrary parameter rule. Let me know if you need luggage or PODS.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

See above. I'm not saying anyone gets to set the number. What I am saying is that average people don't accept the argument that you can justify mammoth returns based on big risk in light of what those returns are causing in the day to day economy, one already wrecked by other problems.


droski said:
i do agree that this theory becuase margins in the oil industry are low that it means they aren't making excess profit is rather silly. margins for walmart and costco are very low too but they seem to be doing ok. i don't agree that these companies should be penalized merle because they are very profitable. show me they manipulated the oil price and i'm on board, but i don't see it.
Click to expand...


Reasonable. But again part of the problem is that everyone blames someone else. The oil producers blame the speculators. The gas retailers blame the wholesalers. The wholesalers blame the refineries. Walmart blames transportation costs. Truckers blame retailers.

Everyone can justify an increase in their own prices because there's always someone else up the line that they can point to. In the meantime, the people actually shelling out the final dollar in the system are told that they are going to have to scale back and suffer, lose their homes and jobs, etc., because someone else raised prices on the guy they buy from.
 
#40
#40
lawgator1 said:
Reasonable. But again part of the problem is that everyone blames someone else. The oil producers blame the speculators. The gas retailers blame the wholesalers. The wholesalers blame the refineries. Walmart blames transportation costs. Truckers blame retailers.

Everyone can justify an increase in their own prices because there's always someone else up the line that they can point to. In the meantime, the people actually shelling out the final dollar in the system are told that they are going to have to scale back and suffer, lose their homes and jobs, etc., because someone else raised prices on the guy they buy from.
Click to expand...


fine, but the question is what does an excess profit tax do exactly? how does that help in any way? and i go back to the fact that the oil price was very low for 10 years. once again if they could control the oil price why didn't they do anything 10 years ago when they were all going out of business?
 
#41
#41
Obama and his supporters like to point out Exxon Mobil's "record" profit. Particularly last quarter's 11.7 billion. What they conveniently, and purposefully ignore, is the fact that in the same quarter, Exxon Mobile paid over 33 billion in taxes directly to the Federal treasury. That's more taxes paid over three months than over 50% of US households pay in an entire year.

damn socialists indeed.
 
#42
#42
lawgator1 said:
What I am saying is that the American people, who are struggling to make ends meet, seeing record foreclosures in their area, watching as their main nest egg (home value) dwindles while their 401k plummets, paying more and more for milk and bread -- they aren't sitting there going "its okay with me because by gosh they had to invest a zillion to get to that profit."
.
Click to expand...


A bunch of fluff. Large numbers of poor struggling people are always going to want the rich guy to "pay" for his ills. We really don't need to organize our societal and or governmental philosphies around how unsuccessful people think.
 
#43
#43
droski said:
fine, but the question is what does an excess profit tax do exactly? how does that help in any way? and i go back to the fact that the oil price was very low for 10 years. once again if they could control the oil price why didn't they do anything 10 years ago when they were all going out of business?
Click to expand...


What does the tax do? Well, if Obama says he's going to tax the oil companies and give the struggling masses $1,000 a household, I'd say is goes a long way toward getting him elected.


allvol123 said:
A bunch of fluff. Large numbers of poor struggling people are always going to want the rich guy to "pay" for his ills. We really don't need to organize our societal and or governmental philosphies around how unsuccessful people think.
Click to expand...


You problem is this: the larger the number of unsuccessful people there are (who trace their lack of success to Big Oil and their friends in the current administration), the larger the number of votes for Obama in November.

You can argue all you want that people shouldn't vote for him because a WPT is a bad idea. But if enough unsuccessful people out there disagree with you, you lose.
 
#44
#44
lawgator1 said:
You problem is this: the larger the number of unsuccessful people there are (who trace their lack of success to Big Oil and their friends in the current administration), the larger the number of votes for Obama in November.

You can argue all you want that people shouldn't vote for him because a WPT is a bad idea. But if enough unsuccessful people out there disagree with you, you lose.
Click to expand...

Oh you are correct, that is a problem.
 
#45
#45
lawgator1 said:
What does the tax do? Well, if Obama says he's going to tax the oil companies and give the struggling masses $1,000 a household, I'd say is goes a long way toward getting him elected.
Click to expand...

so basically, you're ok with a politician "buying" an election.
 
#46
#46
lawgator1 said:
What does the tax do? Well, if Obama says he's going to tax the oil companies and give the struggling masses $1,000 a household, I'd say is goes a long way toward getting him elected.
Click to expand...

great for them but what about the rest of us that are going to have to deal with the consquences i.e. higher gas prices.
 
#47
#47
droski said:
great for them but what about the rest of us that are going to have to deal with the consquences i.e. higher gas prices.
Click to expand...

Ummm....don't you get it? If you are still struggling, then you'll get a $2,000 rebate. Learn you some Ecobamics kid.
 
#48
#48
MG1968 said:
so basically, you're ok with a politician "buying" an election.
Click to expand...


All politicians buy elections. McCain saying he wants to drill off the coast so as to reduce gas prices is "buying" the election just as much as would be Obama for saying he'd instute a WPT and rebate, or Reagan for saying he would adopt tax cuts, or Bush for proposals before the election for tax relief.



droski said:
great for them but what about the rest of us that are going to have to deal with the consquences i.e. higher gas prices.
Click to expand...


Again, you can only say they'd be higher than they otherwise would have been. You cannot argue that the WPT adopted one day means an automatic price rise the next. As long as Joe gets his check, he's going to figure gas will be close to $3.50 or $4 anyway.


allvol123 said:
Ummm....don't you get it? If you are still struggling, then you'll get a $2,000 rebate. Learn you some Ecobamics kid.
Click to expand...


Correct.
 
#49
#49
lawgator1 said:
All politicians buy elections. McCain saying he wants to drill off the coast so as to reduce gas prices is "buying" the election just as much as would be Obama for saying he'd instute a WPT and rebate, or Reagan for saying he would adopt tax cuts, or Bush for proposals before the election for tax relief.
Click to expand...

At some point we have to distinguish between good policy and bad policy. The WPT is bad policy and is worsened if it is truely a cynical attempt to get votes. Removing the federal ban on offshore drilling is good or at least neutral policy regardless if it is pandering or not.
 
#50
#50
oh, and taxing a business and then doling that money out to "the people" is not a rebate, it's a redistributionist scheme that would make Karl Marx proud, if clamoring for more.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top