Story Comments
Posted by: Beau7890 1 year, 6 months ago
This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.
-
Neutral
Beau78901 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There's a difference between knowing in advance it may not have the votes and posturing.
I've heard quite a few Republicans out here say the Democrats in Congress don't even try to do anything. Now they've tried to pass legislation to help with the cost of gas, and the Republicans blocked it.
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 3) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply
loading ...
-
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned48 Replies
-
Neutral
Beau78901 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Sigh. Do I have to explain this again?
If you haven't noticed, the government has been spending WAY more than it takes in since Bush was elected.
Taxes pay for the government's expenditures.
You neocons will never figure that out, will you?
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 5) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
Neutral
Lurch1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Libs conveniently ignores that it is typically the govt that leads early investment in new technologies, such as the Internets (sic) or the drugs we take to get and hopefully stay healthy.
And he like all cons thinks that fiscal accountability starts the day a Dem enters the WH and ends the day the Dem leaves office.
They have no idea how to pay for their unfunded spending in Iraq or anywhere else for that matter, except to steal it from our children and grand-children because they are too young to protect their own interests. Republicans are just cowards when it comes down to the truth, particularly about taxation and fiscal responsibility.
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 6) (recursion depth : 4) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned15 Replies
-
Neutral
Tangent0011 year, 6 months ago
loading ...
-
Neutral
Bopi3651 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
All of this is absolute BS
Check the facts, the oil companies are using their windfall profits to buy back stock, they spend just enough on new exploration and just enough on alternative energy development to make themselves look legit and use the vast majority to help themselves go private in order to keep more of their profits.
We are giving them 20 billion in tax breaks and they are using the money to make themselves richer.
Nothing new here.
idiot puks
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 9) (recursion depth : 7) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
-
Neutral
thatsjustme1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Actually, the government needs to support alternative fuel research. The oil industry is a huge beast, we can kill it by not using it at all. Oh, and save some of our natural habitats and wildlife to boot.
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 11) (recursion depth : 9) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
Locky12Comment removed: Spammer, Abusive
-
-
Neutral
BigBadJohn6661 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Drill! Let's drill in the Dakotas, off the California shelf, in Alaska. Let's get the oil-- OUR OIL ON OUR LAND to fulfill our needs. We know it's there, and if congress doesn't act soon, there'll be a revolt.
Yes, now if only we could get the Dumbocrats to agree to this.
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 11) (recursion depth : 9) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
Neutral
Bopi3651 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Thats right consume ,spend ,drill, consume,spend some more
I've got a full size pickup that needs fillin
eeeeyyyyhaaaa
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 12) (recursion depth : 10) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
Neutral
DropkickaLib1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Actually, GM will have the all electric Volt available in the next couple of years. More efficient vehicles are coming, we just need affordable oil in the meantime.
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 13) (recursion depth : 11) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
Neutral
thatsjustme1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Sell your darned pickup and buy a horse. Trust me, in the long run atleast you can reuse the fuel you fed the horse...what you put in the tank of that truck, not so much.
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 13) (recursion depth : 11) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
-
Neutral
thatsjustme1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Uh, NOT!!! You can't go poking holes in the earth and pulling out every last drop of fossil fuel left in it. Leave it there, help us help ourselves. (Stop feeding the beast) You can not possibly think that you can make anything better by allowing the consumption of oil to maintain at its previous rate. I realize the the Earth is this huge ball that just floats around in outer space like a rock. But, did any of you who support drilling think about the fact that WE LIVE ON IT. Did any of you calculate the damage that is being done to the earth by sucking out all of the oil. Well, it is damaging. And not just to polar bears and other wildlife either, to us. The whole point of technology is to invent better ways of doing things. Henry Ford got us all off on the right foot. Now its time to see what the left foot can do.
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 12) (recursion depth : 10) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
loading ...
-
-
-
Locky12Comment removed: Spammer, Abusive
-
-
-
-
-
Neutral
injest1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Lib
"What taxing oil companies has to do with Iraq"
Tangent001
"What does oil have to do with Iraq? What, are you trying to be ironic?"
Tangent001, if your going to use the bouncing ball method of reading you have to be careful to note where the ball bounces least ya miss something like
"What taxing oil companies"
Tangent001
"What does (taxing ) oil have to do with Iraq?
Nothing.
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 9) (recursion depth : 7) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
-
Neutral
amazed1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I gave you that positive too early, libs. I agree with the gist of what you're saying, but there's really no need to be so nasty saying it!
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 8) (recursion depth : 6) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
Neutral
Beau78901 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
libsR:
The example I'm answering here is WAY up above this comment.
But you said "Private firms like Pfizer develop drugs." in responding to Lurch's comment that "it is typically the government that leads early investment in new technologies."
The government funds research Pfizer uses. (Though Pfizer gets to keep most of its profits.)
In other words, it "leads early investment in new technologies."
Get it?
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 8) (recursion depth : 6) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
-
Neutral
injest1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Lurch
"Libs conveniently ignores that it is typically the govt that leads early investment in new technologies,"
News flash Lurch, Gasoline is NOT a NEW TECHNOLOGY.
When ya consider Fed taxes on gas, whatever that early investment was, its been paid back in droves.
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 7) (recursion depth : 5) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
-
Neutral
injest1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"If you haven't noticed, the government has been spending WAY more than it takes in since Bush was elected."
Ya nailed it! BTW that's always been true.
There has never been a "surplus". And a "projected surplus" is pie in the sky.
In fact tween you and me I project we will have a combined income of 60 billion!
Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys.
P. J. O'Rourke
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 6) (recursion depth : 4) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
-
Neutral
ETproductions1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
LibsRfunny wrote: "News Flash: Taxes INCREASE prices and stifle investment"
Shallow analysis as usual. The legislation only imposed a windfall tax on excess profits NOT invested toward energy independence. This was good legislation. Combine it with domestic production increases and it would be excellent legislation.
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 5) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
Neutral
nostalgia1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Didn't we already try a windfall profits tax on oil companies when Carter was president?
How did that work out?
I find it somewhat ironic that Congress planned a "25 percent tax on any "unreasonable" profits of the five largest U.S. oil companies"
Now Congress thinks they have the right to determine what is "unreasonable"?
State and Federal Treasuries "Profit" More from Gasoline Sales than US Oil Industry
Since 1977, governments collected more than $1.34 trillion, after adjusting for inflation, in gas tax revenue; more than twice the amount of domestic profits earned by major US oil companies during the same period.
http://www.theneweditor.com/index.php?/archives...
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 6) (recursion depth : 4) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
Neutral
stephen-johnson1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Didn't we already try a windfall profits tax on oil companies when Carter was president?
How did that work out?"
Like everything else Carter did - dismally.
Look for another attempt for a windfall tax on oil companies if Obama is elected and the Democrats extend their majority. Along with a whole slew of other taxes that will cripple the economy and tank the markets.
History repeats itself because we never learn from it.
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 7) (recursion depth : 5) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
Neutral
ETproductions1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I'm old enough to remember what that was all about. The oil crisis of the 70s was brought on by the Arab Oil embargo. It had NOTHING to do with US tax policies.
Here's the history. http://www.ccds.charlotte.nc.us/History/MidEast...
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 8) (recursion depth : 6) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
Neutral
Klarissa1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
ET - also, Carter let the national oil reserves drop way down. Bush has them up to 97%. Our defense against an oil embargo.
Let's set up drilling in Alaska, it will take 10 years, paid for with oil company profits. If we don't need it, fine. However, the threat of having it available would keep the prices in line.
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 9) (recursion depth : 7) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
Neutral
ETproductions1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Bush isn't facing the Arab Oil Embargo.
But I completely agree we should use what resources we have here while at the same time pushing HARD for alternatives. The current impasse seems to be that the right says the only way is to drill our way out of the problem while the left insists that we can only windmill our way out. Both are wrong.
We have 3% of the world's oil supply, but currently consume 25% of the world's oil supply. Therefore, 3/4 of every dollar in tax cuts on oil go offshore, mainly enriching people who would like to destroy us.
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 10) (recursion depth : 8) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
-
Neutral
nostalgia1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
President Carter signed into law the Crude Oil Windfall Profit Tax Act, which established excise taxes as high as 70% on the difference between the market-determined price of oil and a (lower) price set by law. The tax was dropped in 1987, but according to the Congressional Research Service, almost $80 billion was drained from the industry's income statements while it was in effect.
Money that could have been invested in new oil and gas production and to expand refining capacity was diverted to Washington. It should come as no surprise that oil production fell. In fact, 1.6 billion fewer barrels of crude oil were produced in the United States from 1980 to 1987 than would have been produced otherwise. American dependence on foreign oil rose apace.
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 9) (recursion depth : 7) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
Neutral
nostalgia1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
However tempting it may be for populist politicians to meddle in energy markets, almost anything Congress does will only make a bad situation worse. Oil and gas production is a risky business, as Katrina and Rita demonstrated so vividly.
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp...
ET
Congress can't even remember their own history
They meet Einstein's definition of insanity
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 10) (recursion depth : 8) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
Neutral
stephen-johnson1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
From your article:
"Despite the industry's above-average risk exposure, Big Oil is not extraordinarily profitable. According to Business Week and Oil Daily, average industry earnings were 7.7 cents per dollar of sales in the second quarter of 2005, also a time of relatively high gas prices. During that same quarter, by comparison, banks earned 19.6 cents; pharmaceuticals 18.6; software and related services 17; semiconductors 14.6; household and personal products 11.3; insurance 10.7; telecommunications 9.6; food, beverage and tobacco 9.4; and real estate 8.9. The corresponding figure for U.S. industry as a whole was 7.9 cents per dollar of sales."
Whenever the media demagogues the "excess profits" of the oil companies, they never put it into context by citing the revenues those profits are made on or the taxes that the oil comppanies pay.
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 11) (recursion depth : 9) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
Neutral
walden31 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I smell a switcheroo. Kind of like now that the national debt is out of hand and unmanageable, instead of talking about it in $'s let's play a switcheroo and compare it to % of GDP.
People keep your eye on the ball, "Exxon also had its most profitable quarter ever. It said Friday that net income rose 14 percent..." and "...it beat its own record for the highest profits ever recorded by any company..."
People, this is what matters. Don't be distracted.
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 12) (recursion depth : 10) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
Neutral
stephen-johnson1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://money.cnn.com/2008/02/01/news/companies/...
Exxon earned $11.66 billion in the fourth quarter of 2007 on revenues of $116.64 billion. That comes out to profit margin of 10% - an improvement over its historic profit margin of 7.7%, but still not earth shattering.
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 13) (recursion depth : 11) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
Neutral
walden31 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Largest profits EVER recorded by ANY business in the history of man.
Do you fail to see the stark and blinding contrast between that and regular Americans hurting at the pump?
It would be like you starving, stop, wait for it, think about starving or watching your wife and kids waste away to skin and bones like Auschwitz survivors. Think about it. Everyone is hungry and starving, getting thinner like on the show Survivor. You salivate at memories of TicTacs. Got it? Now you smell the smoke from your neighbor's BBQ steak and lobster. Are you gonna think that they deserve it while your darling, beloved wife starves to death?
People are worried about being able to afford to commute to work.
Just like Washington, DC and the corporate profiteers you have an enormous disconnect.
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 14) (recursion depth : 12) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
Neutral
stephen-johnson1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Based on the largest REVENUES of any business known to man. In case you didn't know, lots of people buy gas
Like I said before, the oil profit picture is never put into perspective by the politicians and their lap dog media accomplices. They're too busy salivating over the possibility of getting more money for their harebrained schemes.
"Do you fail to see the stark and blinding contrast between that and regular Americans hurting at the pump?"
Truth be told, the same politicians who condemn oil companies for their excess profits don't have a problem collecting 3-4 times the profit total from taxes on oil. And those politicians who are in the hip pocket of the environmentalists would like to see us pay $8 a gallon for gas, like they do in "enlightened" Europe. Global warming, you know.
I see that the Italians are looking to restart their nuclear power program. But don't try it here.
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 15) (recursion depth : 13) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
loading ...
-
-
-
-
Neutral
amazed1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Walden -- using the ROI (return on investment) is NOT the deceptive form of reporting oil's profit, using absolute dollars is.
If I invest $100 and in return, I receive $10,000, that is a return on investment of 10000% -- truly obscene, but 10K is not such a great deal of money, so the more common reaction would be "wow, aren't you lucky".
But if I invest $100,000,000,000,000 and I get a return of 1,000,000,000,000, that is a huge amount of money -- wow, I wish I had that -- must have done something really shady or really gouged everyone to end up with so much money, but THAT is a return on investment of 1%, truly pathetic. Now, while the oil companies profit margins are not THAT low, they are lower than most other industries -- therefore, as much as I also hate paying $65 bucks to fill my Camry, I can't really accuse them of gouging.
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 13) (recursion depth : 11) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
Neutral
amazed1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
In fact, they may very well become hard-pressed to get investors, because, if one can invest their money and get 15% or they can invest and get only 7% -- where are they going to go.
Now, I am not crying for the oil companies, and any corporate welfare should be eliminated, but the windfall profits tax is a loser that has already been shown to be a loser.
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 14) (recursion depth : 12) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
Neutral
walden31 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It's the 21st century equivalent of the company store. You know, 'St. Peter don't you take me. You know I can't go. I owe my soul to ExxonMobil.'
They're larger than all the countries in the world except for the largest 24.
In a time of war and recession, when people are suffering, going hungry and losing their homes and jobs. I think that socially responsible corporations would give a bit back. They've gotten rich on the backs of the American people for generations. They can give back. They should give back.
I don't know my history well enough, but I bet Big Oil wasn't allowed to earn "historic" profits during WWII.
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 14) (recursion depth : 12) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
Neutral
stephen-johnson1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"They've gotten rich on the backs of the American people for generations. They can give back. They should give back."
If you're a shareholder of the oil companies and millions of Americans are, either directly or indirectly - the oil companies ARE giving back.
Too bad the same can't be said about politicians and their taxes. Proposals to cancel the fedreal gasoline tax went over like a lead balloon
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 15) (recursion depth : 13) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
Neutral
stephen-johnson1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2005/10...
With BP, Exxon-Mobil, and Shell reporting record profits, the Tax Foundation reminds us in its latest Fiscal Fact that the biggest beneficiaries of gasoline sales are federal and state governments, not the oil industry:
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%. 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
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 16) (recursion depth : 14) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
Neutral
stephen-johnson1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
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....
Quote: The government collects far more in taxes on every gallon of gasoline than the oil companies collect in profits. If oil company profits are "obscene," as some politicians claim, are the government's taxes PG-13?
~Thomas Sowell
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 17) (recursion depth : 15) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Neutral
saintetienne1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"President Carter signed into law the Crude Oil Windfall Profit Tax Act, which established excise taxes as high as 70% on the difference between the market-determined price of oil and a (lower) price set by law. The tax was dropped in 1987, but according to the Congressional Research Service, almost $80 billion was drained from the industry's income statements while it was in effect."
Jimmy Carter, like FDR in the 1930's, sold the United States down the river.
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 10) (recursion depth : 8) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
-
Neutral
stephen-johnson1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"I'm old enough to remember what that was all about. The oil crisis of the 70s was brought on by the Arab Oil embargo. It had NOTHING to do with US tax policies."
http://money.propeller.com/story/2008/06/10/rep...
I said that Carter signed a windfall profit tax bill on oil companies, which he did in 1980. Your comment is irrelevant. Pay closer attention next time.
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 9) (recursion depth : 7) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
-
-
-
sailrComment removed: Retracted by user
-
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned1 Reply
-
Neutral
thatsjustme1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I agree. The more you tax the poor and middle class on fuel, the less they will be able to spend on other things. The economy slows to a crawl and next thing you know, we're all screwed. NO MORE TAXES!!!! PENALIZE THEM
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 7) (recursion depth : 5) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
-
Neutral
injest1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Shallow analysis as usual. The legislation only imposed a windfall tax on excess profits NOT invested toward energy independence."
Shallow? excess profits? What are excess profits? AS a percentage of Net?
Why is that left out?
Ultimately, who pays ALL taxes?
"NOT invested toward energy independence"
Why would Oil companies have to invest in energy independence?
Their in the oil game, they produce and deliver petroleum products.
If energy independence is the goal wouldn't that best be done by folks who are not in the oil game?
Like the government, oops sorry oil is a cash cow for government.
What is stopping folks who want to develop alternative energy, energy independence from starting a co and doing it?
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 6) (recursion depth : 4) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
-
Neutral
rightfromwrong1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
the oil companies still receive subsidies...tax the b'stards.
Everyone thinks it is the oil cartel but they have not raised their prices in more than 1.5yr
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 5) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
Neutral
MRCOFFEECAKE1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
So what is your brilliant explanation for why the economy is in the shiiiter now?
Or do you, as did the entire Bush administration and most Republicans deny that we were in a recession right through the
literal defense in mid-April.
Yeah, they denied it because "technically" the economy had not had 2 consecutive quarters with a drop in GNP..
So how do you "technically" pay for $5 gas if you're a trucker, avoid real foreclosures and buy real food??
The problem is that you blame the democrats fro trying ANYTHING and laud the Republicans for doing NOTHING..
They may BOTH be wrong, but would you rather sink on a Titanic with a captain who keeps insisting that it's just the water getting higher, not the ship getting lower, or would you rather try something, even if it ma not work?
I already know your answer. I know your captain@!
He's laughing at you in his gold plated dinghy!
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 5) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
-
Neutral
Lurch1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The cons are going to beyatch no matter what. Remember during Clinton, they whined about BC when Clinton attacked the terrorists, then they whined about BC again when the Republicans cut the balls out of his anti-terror bill.
Reality does not faze these people for a moment, it is purely an issue of party over country for them.
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 4) (recursion depth : 2) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
Neutral
antibrainwasher1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Republican first, ruling class first, american second. Liberals are the enemy. Or more generally, Americans are the enemy.
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 5) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
loading ...
-
doggammitComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
-
-
Neutral
injest1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Headline:
Senate GOP blocks windfall taxes on Big Oil
Truth:
Senate GOP blocks windfall taxes on All Americans
"The Democratic energy package would have imposed a 25 percent tax on any "unreasonable" profits"
Define "unreasonable" profits. Is it 1% of gross sales?
1% above net? 5% above net
"of the five largest U.S. oil companies, which together made $36 billion during the first three months of the year."
$36 billion without context, net or gross, this is a meaningless number.
"Obama, in a statement, said Republicans had "turned a blind eye to the plight of America's working families" by refusing to take up the energy legislation. Obama has supported additional taxes on the oil companies."
And who does Obama think is going to PAY additional taxes on the oil companies?
Ultimately it's you and me.
(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 4) (recursion depth : 2) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)Reply loading ...
-
People Who Liked This Comment (17)
Ratskii
joey-evans
Pretko
uncle-dave
ETproductions
Aidenag
jovial
wasntme
juvel
Dionys
GWHayduke
expursuit
RussianThreats
cowboygrandpaPeople Who Didn't Like This Comment (7)
Klarissa
normallysilent
protoham
DropkickaLibSubmit a Story
Advertisement
Real Estate Info
Dropping This Article
No one has dropped this story.
AOL Money Links
- Cheap Stocks
- DJIA
- Earnings
- Financial Crisis
- Investing
- Market News
- Stock Charts
- Stock Prices
- Stock Quotes
- Black Friday Deals
- Black Friday Sales
- Debt Management
- Finance Calculators
- Insurance
- Loans
- Mortgage Calculators
- Mortgages
- Personal Finance
- Recession
- Refinancing
- Retirement
- Stocks to Buy
- Stocks to Sell
- Taxes
Groups Watching This
No groups are watching this story. Why not share it with your groups?
Categories
Also Submitted By
No one else has submitted this story.
Post Reply
You are not signed in to Propeller.com. Please sign in to post a reply.