PDA

View Full Version : Government Remains Biggest Oil Profiteer



James 3528
05-01-2006, 10:37 PM
Government Remains Biggest Oil Profiteer
By Thomas Bray

Republicans from George Bush on down caved last week to the latest round of hysteria by agreeing, among other ideas, to yet another investigation of gasoline prices. Never mind that every time the matter has been reviewed, the verdict has been the same: market forces account for virtually all of the supposed "gouging."

Not that one need have warm fuzzy feelings towards the oil companies and their extremely well paid executives. As the founder of economics, Adam Smith, observed in 1776, "People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public."

But Smith went on to point out that the best antidote to such tendencies is competition, not regulation - which, he noted, usually winds up making government part of the conspiracy. And in any case evidence is strong that competition is not lacking, at least in that part of the oil business that hasn't been nationalized by foreign governments.

"From 1986 to 2003, using 2004 dollars, the real national annual average price for gasoline, including taxes, generally has been below $2 per gallon," noted the Federal Trade Commission in a 2005 report absolving the industry of collusion. "By contrast, between 1919 and 1985, real national annual average retail gasoline prices were above $2 per gallon more often than not."

In other words, gasoline prices were lower than at any time since 1919 for much of recent history. Some conspiracy! Maybe somebody should have been investigating consumers for "gouging" the oil companies.

And just who is the profiteer here? While the average profit on the sale of a gallon of gasoline is nine cents, the average state and federal tax on that same gallon of gasoline is about 45 cents (and 52 cents in Michigan). And if we must have an investigation, how about investigating the extent to which government regulations drive up prices and block new production?

As usual, Washington politicians are eager to ride the latest "oil crisis" to fame and glory, proposing all sorts of inane ideas to deal with it. At the core of most of them is the populist notion that profit is a four-letter word - and never mind that the profits of many other industries, including banking and food and beverages, are far heftier than in the oil industry.

I once heard management guru Peter Drucker remark, with his usual drollery, that profit is "whatever government lets a company keep." But most folks have a vastly inflated view of corporate profits. One regular survey of Americans found that the majority believes that the average corporate profit is between 30 percent and 40 percent of sales, while the real figure is closer to four percent.

Washington should cool its carburetors. The pursuit of profit is one of the main engines of Western progress and prosperity. And as people in my neck of the woods are fast learning, it is only out of profit that we can afford to pay for a comfortable retirement. As profits in the steel, airline and auto industries erode or even vanish, so do pensions and health care benefits, not to mention jobs.

If oil really is running out - of which there is little sign, since world reserves keep increasing -- profit provides the surest possible motive for finding or inventing new sources of energy.

tonys
05-02-2006, 05:49 AM
how do the governments of Europe justify 8 $/gal (equiv)?

how about,
if you want to drive - pay,
and for the MOFOs who cant afford it - TAKE A FREAK'n BUS!

James 3528
05-02-2006, 06:12 AM
You should be force fed Ritalin or pithed like a lab frog about to be gutted.

tonys
05-02-2006, 06:37 AM
if you want to debate -
step-up jimbo.


any shrapnel stuck in the pea-brain, mostly plenum space head?

James 3528
05-02-2006, 06:42 AM
Originally posted by tonys
if you want to debate -
step-up jimbo.


any shrapnel stuck in the pea-brain, mostly plenum space head?



Are you_

going to -

debate like



this, Topac?

The atomic weight of jello on Saturday morning ?

tonys
05-02-2006, 06:49 AM
Are you_
Always_
Angry?

James 3528
05-02-2006, 06:54 AM
Are(

you?

tonys
05-02-2006, 06:59 AM
no, not at all.

let's review the 2nd and 3rd posts on this thread.

it's typical behavior - no?

James 3528
05-02-2006, 07:10 AM
Let's review your 1743 post?

Why?

homeownerplus
05-02-2006, 01:45 PM
Now James when John K. was running for office he promised a $0.50 gas tax off the bat to help the unfortunate. Would you blame him for raising gas prices? I wouldn't want you to flip flop now! If the left wing whacos in congress would let Bush do what he wants to do ie drill for our own oil instead of paying our enemies for it we would be much better off. Go write your congrassman!!!

geerair
05-02-2006, 02:41 PM
Originally posted by homeownerplus
If the left wing whacos in congress would let Bush do what he wants to do ie drill for our own oil instead of paying our enemies for it we would be much better off. Go write your congrassman!!! Poor, poor, pitiful Republicans. They own Congress and the Whitehouse and you whine that the powerless left-wing is stopping Bush?

Cry me a river.






I would remind you that it was Bush's brother Jeb who squealed like a schoolgirl when drilling off the Florida coast was proposed.

James 3528
05-02-2006, 02:48 PM
We have a nuke plant on the way in Georgia, unless Jimmy Carter has it killed like he did the expansion of Kings Bay.

The Alaskan oil deal was killed by Bill Clinton after the senate and House approved it.

geerair
05-02-2006, 02:54 PM
Originally posted by James 3528
We have a nuke plant on the way in Georgia, unless Jimmy Carter has it killed like he did the expansion of Kings Bay.

The Alaskan oil deal was killed by Bill Clinton after the senate and House approved it. And how does this have any relevence to Bush not getting his way?

skrewt
05-02-2006, 02:58 PM
Originally posted by geerair

Originally posted by homeownerplus
If the left wing whacos in congress would let Bush do what he wants to do ie drill for our own oil instead of paying our enemies for it we would be much better off. Go write your congrassman!!! Poor, poor, pitiful Republicans. They own Congress and the Whitehouse and you whine that the powerless left-wing is stopping Bush?

Cry me a river.






I would remind you that it was Bush's brother Jeb who squealed like a schoolgirl when drilling off the Florida coast was proposed.

He squealed like a school girl because the left-wing terrorist environmental groups had his nuts in a vise.

James 3528
05-02-2006, 03:07 PM
Originally posted by geerair

Originally posted by James 3528
We have a nuke plant on the way in Georgia, unless Jimmy Carter has it killed like he did the expansion of Kings Bay.

The Alaskan oil deal was killed by Bill Clinton after the senate and House approved it. And how does this have any relevence to Bush not getting his way?

It has relevance in the way that was before mentioned. There was public out cry against the drilling near the Florida shore. Jeb did the will of the people in his state. Clinton on the other had vetoed a bill that passed the senate and house.

Carter who was a past Governor of Georgia and one of the worst I might add along with President went against the will of the people in his state and lobbied the base closure committee against them, costing his state billions and going against the wishes of the Navy.


This concept may be too deep for a socialist.

geerair
05-02-2006, 08:46 PM
Originally posted by James 3528
It has relevance in the way that was before mentioned. There was public out cry against the drilling near the Florida shore. Jeb did the will of the people in his state. Ah, I see. According to a Zogby Poll 55% oppose drilling in the ANWAR. Will of the people.


Clinton on the other had vetoed a bill that passed the senate and house.Will of the people.








Carter who was a past Governor of Georgia and one of the worst I might add along with President went against the will of the people in his state and lobbied the base closure committee against them, costing his state billions and going against the wishes of the Navy.what does this have to do with oil drilling?

MadeinUSA
05-02-2006, 11:00 PM
Originally posted by geerair

Originally posted by James 3528
Clinton on the other had vetoed a bill that passed the senate and house.Will of the people.The will of the people was the congressmen who represent them voting for the bill. Clintonian went against the representitives who represent the will of the people, junior.

Clinton went AGAINST the will of the people.

geerair
05-02-2006, 11:09 PM
Originally posted by madeinusa
The will of the people was the congressmen who represent them voting for the bill. Clintonian went against the representitives who represent the will of the people, junior.

Clinton went AGAINST the will of the people.What a pitifully naive sap you are believing that congressmen actually represent the will of their constiutents rather than their own self interest and the interest of their political party.

What color is the sun in the world you live in?

MadeinUSA
05-02-2006, 11:30 PM
Originally posted by geerair

Originally posted by madeinusa
The will of the people was the congressmen who represent them voting for the bill. Clintonian went against the representitives who represent the will of the people, junior.

Clinton went AGAINST the will of the people.What a pitifully naive sap you are believing that congressmen actually represent the will of their constiutents rather than their own self interest and the interest of their political party. You two faced idiot. Here you post about the constitution and the rights the people have based on the constitution on another thread, and now here you say the people do not have any representation which is all based off the constitution.

You really are inherently dumb aren’t you?

geerair
05-02-2006, 11:43 PM
Originally posted by madeinusa
You two faced idiot. Here you post about the constitution and the rights the people have based on the constitution on another thread, and now here you say the people do not have any representation which is all based off the constitution.They do indeed have representation, where did I say they didn't.

Your mistake is assuming that the will of the people trumps the self interest of the politician and his party.

You are just what politicians love; a naive, uninformed zombie.

MadeinUSA
05-03-2006, 12:04 AM
Originally posted by geerair

Originally posted by madeinusa
You two faced idiot. Here you post about the constitution and the rights the people have based on the constitution on another thread, and now here you say the people do not have any representation which is all based off the constitution.They do indeed have representation, where did I say they didn't.
[i]Originally posted by geerair
What a...naive sap you are believing that congressmen actually represent the will of their constiutents [/B]


You are just what politicians love; a naive, uninformed zombie. You truly are delusional aren't you?

geerair
05-03-2006, 12:32 AM
Originally posted by madeinusa

You truly are delusional aren't you?Nope, I am a realist.