Exxon's Profits - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-28-2006, 04:23 PM   #31
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,496
Local Time: 07:33 PM
[q]A gas tax is regressive, so the poor get hit the hardest. (Which makes a $100 check more valuable to those who struggle the most).[/q]



eh ... well, i think it affects the middle class more than anyone else, especially those in the suburbs with more than one car (like how i grew up). the truly poor don't have cars, they rely on public transportation (at least the urban poor), and the rural poor tend to consume less gas than their middle-class compatriots anyway because they don't own 3 SUVs.

are we penalizing those in remote and rural areas. maybe. but then they can give back their grotesque farm subsidies and overrepresentation in the Senate.

the only real reason people are freaked out about gas prices and gas taxes is that you actually see them. how much has the price of Starbucks gone up since 2000? your cell phone plan? the price of a movie ticket?
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 04-28-2006, 06:24 PM   #32
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
randhail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Outside Providence
Posts: 3,557
Local Time: 07:33 PM
speaking about that wonderful $100 rebate check:

"It could be one of the dumbest ideas of the year," said Jerry Taylor, a senior fellow at the conservative Cato Institute. "I haven't looked at all of the ideas yet, but it's got to be right up there."

Taylor pointed out that as proposed, the rebate would go only to people who paid federal income tax last year, meaning it would be no help at all to the millions of low-income Americans who pay no income taxes but arguably suffer the most in times of rising fuel prices. About 100 million taxpayers would qualify for the rebate, which would be limited to filers with incomes under $150,000 for couples or about $100,000 for singles. It would cost more than $10 billion

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12521259/
__________________

__________________
randhail is offline  
Old 04-28-2006, 06:29 PM   #33
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 04:33 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by randhail
speaking about that wonderful $100 rebate check:

"It could be one of the dumbest ideas of the year," said Jerry Taylor, a senior fellow at the conservative Cato Institute. "I haven't looked at all of the ideas yet, but it's got to be right up there."

It would cost more than $10 billion

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12521259/
$10 billion is cheap

to sway the Nov. 2006
elections.

Especially, if the dumb f*cks who cash the checks and vote GOP
get stuck with the tab.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 04-28-2006, 07:17 PM   #34
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 12:33 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
yay capitalism and yay the oil industry.
I agree with that and so does U2!

Vertigo Tour current GROSS total not including the 10 shows yet to be played:

$333,206,884

Most of that is pure profit for the 5 lads from Dublin.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 04-28-2006, 07:20 PM   #35
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,496
Local Time: 07:33 PM
it's going to take a lot more than $100 to get me to approve drilling in the arctic.

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 04-28-2006, 07:23 PM   #36
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 12:33 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by ntalwar


Yes, but oil prices are manipulated and controlled by the big oil companies on the NYMEX and IPE markets. Unlike other goods and services we consume, oil prices are not determined as much by demand and supply. Oil refineries sit idle to help boost the profit margins of the companies. The oil companies have figured out the "sweet spot" of oil prices that maximize their profits, and they keep the price in that range. Right now, that range for the summer is between $70 and $75 a barrel because they know that people drive more in the summertime. Oil was $58 only a couple of months ago.
The global energy market decides the price. Much of the increased prices of oil over the past few years have been caused by rising demand in China and India.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 04-28-2006, 07:26 PM   #37
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 12:33 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Maggie1

Alternative energies and conservation are, in my opinion, the best way to get back at the oil companies and protect our environment. Drilling for more oil will only continue to fill the pockets of oil execs.
Find an alternative source of energy that is cheaper and more efficient than oil and you can put the oil companies out of business. You'll also be able to make vast sums of money, as business's worldwide start to switch to your form of energy.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 04-28-2006, 09:33 PM   #38
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
ntalwar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,900
Local Time: 07:33 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2


The global energy market decides the price. Much of the increased prices of oil over the past few years have been caused by rising demand in China and India.
That is a partial reason, and the one that is given as an excuse by oil companies. Although I don't agree often with Steve Forbes, he has stated that the oil market is a speculative bubble and that the true price of oil (based on demand/supply) should be $30-35 per barrel. Keep in mind that the exchanges that determine the price of oil are in New York and London, and investors and speculators are prevalent.

The oil market is an oligopoly with collusion among the few oil firms. This keeps prices artificially high. China and India are much less able to afford $75 oil than the US.

Switching to alternative energies looks good on paper. So far hydrogen is the only somewhat realistic option, and it is at least 50 years away. Iceland recently passed a resolution to go to hydrogen by 2050, and that is considered somewhat unrealistic. Iceland is pretty advanced in terms of energy use - e.g. they use geothermal power a lot. However, hydrogen production and distribution has a high barrier to entry. The same company that is selling you gasoline today will be selling you hydrogen in 50 years. ExxonMobil and the other energy companies are not stupid. They are already prepositioned to maintain their huge profits when hydrogen comes on line.
__________________
ntalwar is offline  
Old 04-28-2006, 10:35 PM   #39
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Se7en's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: all around in the dark - everywhere
Posts: 3,531
Local Time: 07:33 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511

eh ... well, i think it affects the middle class more than anyone else, especially those in the suburbs with more than one car (like how i grew up). the truly poor don't have cars, they rely on public transportation (at least the urban poor), and the rural poor tend to consume less gas than their middle-class compatriots anyway because they don't own 3 SUVs.

are we penalizing those in remote and rural areas. maybe. but then they can give back their grotesque farm subsidies and overrepresentation in the Senate.

the only real reason people are freaked out about gas prices and gas taxes is that you actually see them. how much has the price of Starbucks gone up since 2000? your cell phone plan? the price of a movie ticket?
raise gas prices another $2 per gallon and see how many hard working people can't afford to get to work. i saw a report on the local news yesterday about people pawning their valuables in order to get where they need to go. to some extent people do drive gas guzzlers or are wasteful in general, but there are A LOT of people who drive little sedans to work and don't have a public transit option. i could not take a bus or train to work, even if i lived downtown. we do need to change our habits and start introducing new fuel alternatives but slapping a huge tax on gas and then laughing at those who can't get to work seems cruel and irresponsible.
__________________
Se7en is offline  
Old 04-28-2006, 11:20 PM   #40
ONE
love, blood, life
 
MrBrau1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Verplexed in Vermont
Posts: 10,436
Local Time: 07:33 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by randhail


Amen to that. More drilling and refineries is like putting a band aid on a severed artery.

Alternative energies is a dagger to the bastards killing the Earth right now.


The only way alt enery will get serious mass consideration and acceptance is if gasoline continues to climb in price.

In the meantime:

__________________
"If you needed my autograph, I'd give it to you." Bob Dylan
MrBrau1 is offline  
Old 04-28-2006, 11:33 PM   #41
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
ntalwar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,900
Local Time: 07:33 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by MrBrau1
[B]



The only way alt enery will get serious mass consideration and acceptance is if gasoline continues to climb in price.
Alternative energy will have the benefit of conserving the Earth's natural resources, but it may not save you any money. ExxonMobil is an energy company, not an oil company. This industry has a very high barrier to entry. It (and its few competitors) do and will buy patents or companies related to alternative energy. They will then charge you the same amount for the alt. energy that they did for gasoline.
__________________
ntalwar is offline  
Old 04-28-2006, 11:42 PM   #42
ONE
love, blood, life
 
MrBrau1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Verplexed in Vermont
Posts: 10,436
Local Time: 07:33 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by ntalwar


Alternative energy will have the benefit of conserving the Earth's natural resources, but it may not save you any money. ExxonMobil is an energy company, not an oil company. This industry has a very high barrier to entry. It (and its few competitors) do and will buy patents or companies related to alternative energy. They will then charge you the same amount for the alt. energy that they did for gasoline.
Very true.

But there are political upsides that excite me.
__________________
"If you needed my autograph, I'd give it to you." Bob Dylan
MrBrau1 is offline  
Old 04-29-2006, 07:19 PM   #43
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 12:33 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by ntalwar


That is a partial reason, and the one that is given as an excuse by oil companies. Although I don't agree often with Steve Forbes, he has stated that the oil market is a speculative bubble and that the true price of oil (based on demand/supply) should be $30-35 per barrel. Keep in mind that the exchanges that determine the price of oil are in New York and London, and investors and speculators are prevalent.

The oil market is an oligopoly with collusion among the few oil firms. This keeps prices artificially high. China and India are much less able to afford $75 oil than the US.

Switching to alternative energies looks good on paper. So far hydrogen is the only somewhat realistic option, and it is at least 50 years away. Iceland recently passed a resolution to go to hydrogen by 2050, and that is considered somewhat unrealistic. Iceland is pretty advanced in terms of energy use - e.g. they use geothermal power a lot. However, hydrogen production and distribution has a high barrier to entry. The same company that is selling you gasoline today will be selling you hydrogen in 50 years. ExxonMobil and the other energy companies are not stupid. They are already prepositioned to maintain their huge profits when hydrogen comes on line.
When you have a certain level of productive capacity combined with unexpected GDP growth in certain parts of the world in this industrial age, your going to get a rise in oil price. Just 7 years ago, you go buy gasoline in the United States for less than 99 cents per gallon. If the Oil Companies really had so much control, there is no way that prices would have dropped to that point in 1999. In addition, when you adjust for inflation, the price of gas in the United States at 3 dollars now, is less than it was in the decades after World War II.

As far as affording current oil prices, the United States has done just fine the past three months with GDP economic growth at a robust 4.8%! China annual GDP growth last year was nearly 10%!
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 04-29-2006, 08:04 PM   #44
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,295
Local Time: 07:33 PM
After Dubya invades Iran, it'll be great! The gas prices will go down just like after Iraq!

Oh, wait...
__________________
anitram is offline  
Old 04-29-2006, 08:10 PM   #45
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 10:33 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by anitram
After Dubya invades Iran, it'll be great! The gas prices will go down just like after Iraq!

Oh, wait...
I imagine that the nuclear reprisal after they vaporise a few million Jews will be what drives the prices up.
__________________

__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com