(no subject)

[somedaybitch]

an interesting discussion in the comments regarding the Democrats trying to retroactively tax the oil industry.

ex post facto illegal?

honestly, people. you don't get to tax someone because you perceive that they made too much money. define "too much"? GE's profit margin was the same. why aren't you going after them?

you don't get to pick on the oil industry because they piss you off and you think it's a valid defacto way for you to get at Bush.

retroactively taxing the oil industry is not going to lower the price of oil, which, i'm sorry, is NOT HIGH. is it higher than i paid 5 years ago? sure. but it's still lower than most of the planet, and it's even lower than 6 months ago. let the market work, and for fuck's sake go back to economics school, will ya?

Comments

[adafrog.livejournal.com]

Although, being in a place where there is price fixing and gouging-that hasn't quite been proven yet, so it's still allowed to go on-I think that taxing those assholes is a fine thing to do, thanks.

[somedaybitch.livejournal.com]

and you're arguing for it because you personally perceive they're assholes, therefore they deserve it. that's punitive and it's illegal. it's also unconstitutional. and if they can do it to the oil industry, they can do it to everyone else.

there lies communism, sister. Comrade Bob has too much, so let's take it from him and give it to the People.

over my dead body.

[adafrog.livejournal.com]

Yah, I know, I don't really want them to do it, but it makes me mad. And as for proving it, God only knows.

[somedaybitch.livejournal.com]

yeah, but what's making you mad? that the oil industry makes a lot of money? if they work for it, they deserve it. the rich getting richer doesn't impact anyone but the rich.

or that there's a perception that they make that money thru illegal means? in which case, yeah, corruption should make you mad, but there's plenty of it out there, so again, why single out the oil industry. that's dangerous work. people die doing it.and the execs that don't do the field work aren't any different than any other industry's execs.

[adafrog.livejournal.com]

Nope, I have no problem with people getting money that they earn. Not at all. What I opbject to is taking advantage of a captive audience, and market forces. There's nothing we can do as a community because it's buy the gas, or don't drive, which is not possible here by any means. And no, it's not technically illegal, but it's skirting pretty close to monopoly, IMO. I still remember the crap with Ma Bell.
But this is why I don't debate, because I can never remember specifics. Here's an article that explains our situation a lot better-http://www.amarillo.com/stories/090207/new_8257643.shtml
I still don't actually agree with taxing them, BTW.

[somedaybitch.livejournal.com]

it isn't a monopoly, though. there's plenty of competition. and while i don't doubt that there are unscrupulous dudes, what i object to is the Dems thinking it's a solution to "high" prices, and that it's clearly and obviously punitive.

[somedaybitch.livejournal.com]

Although, being in a place where there is price fixing and gouging-that hasn't quite been proven yet, so it's still allowed to go on-

then make a case for it. prove that they're doing something illegal.

we don't get to find a different way to punish someone because we think they're doing something illegal. that's called corruption, and it's just as wrong as whatever we perceive somebody else is doing.

[wishkey.livejournal.com]

That's like asking for alimony when you broke off the engagement, and later found out your ex-intended just won the lottery. Makes my head hurt!

[somedaybitch.livejournal.com]

totally.

[arthurfrdent.livejournal.com]

The only thing I can put a finer point on is this: "retroactively taxing the oil industry is not going to lower the price of oil"...

no one has pointed out directly that Big Oil is going to take this punishment tax... and pass it along to their customers...

the very people, PRESUMABLY, that have been wronged. Do idiot legislators SIMPLY NOT THINK OF THIS?

add that to the fact that the entire pricing structure of oil has so many players, and is so complex, that nailing one specific group doesn't change anything.

there is one thing that will, though. I find it likely that 50 years hence we will be driving plug-in hybrids, if not full plugins. Cars fueled by electic companies that are highly regulated. This is because that infrastructure is already built, but will need expansion, vs. fuel cell tech, which isn't built yet. In any case the market makeup of how we fuel transport will totally change, right along with the fuel. For better or worse, big oil is going to have to change too... or go extinct.

[somedaybitch.livejournal.com]

and they know that. they know it's evolve or die, probably better than anyone else. i mean, where do people think a lot of these alternative energy ideas came from?

market forces have been pushing the industry for decades. if you're supply is in jeopardy you'd better have a plan b.

[itsazoo.livejournal.com]

"if you're supply is in jeopardy you'd better have a plan b."

Yes. Make a lot of money as quickly as you can, sock most of it off-shore, and when wells begin to come up dry, you'll be sitting pretty, retired and sipping a fruity drink purchased from the drinks cart on a golf course somewhere warm.

Zoom------------->

I have trouble with any company which shows a huge profit, GE or anyone. I suppose if the stockholders are happy. I don't think profits like that will last forever. Can't you see, though, that the American public, so used to lower petrol prices, would view huge petroleum profits with a gimlet eye and suspect the companies are making these profits out of the pockets of drivers who, in some cases, have no other choice but to buy gasoline in order to keep their jobs. Unfortunately, at least around here, public transpo is mediocre at best. The St. louis region hasn't any, what do you call it when they legislate against wildly expanding towns willy nilly with no planning? Sometimes we have to drive a far distance, like you guys do in California. It's not like in Europe where you can ride a train for an hour and be in another country or go everywhere by Tube and bus.

Our car in Scotland got 40-something miles to the gallon combo city and highway. How come we can't do that? If the car companies made really efficient cars ar reasonable prices, we could thumb our noses at the petroleum campanies. Herein lies a problem: Americans love their big cars and use them as status symbols (to compensate for small penises? LOL) They will pay whatever it takes to fill their behemoth SUV while complaining bitterly about the price.

Whew. I guess I feel that id Big Oil can explain how they made Big Profits, and show that it's not made by price fixing or gouging or something, it's ok (she says reluctantly) GE should show too, though they're diversified.

Oh, hell, forget it. I don't know for sure what I;m talking about. It's just how I feel about any company that makes a huge profit. It seems suspicious to me.

[somedaybitch.livejournal.com]

they're making big profits by taking big risks. and their profit margins haven't gotten any larger.

it's like i told doc, you don't get to punish big oil because for whatever reason, valid or otherwise, you don't like them.

They will pay whatever it takes to fill their behemoth SUV while complaining bitterly about the price.

see, and i think that's a cliche. i see just as many of my kind of car as any other. and we have the absolute lowest gas prices anywhere on the planet, so honestly, i don't know what everyone's on about. California has some of the highest prices anywhere in the US and they're still not as high as people are acting like they are.

The St. louis region hasn't any, what do you call it when they legislate against wildly expanding towns willy nilly with no planning? Sometimes we have to drive a far distance, like you guys do in California.

except that's not big oil's fault, is it? there's no causality there. they're related, in that both issues are about transpo and fuel consumption but neither one *caused* the other. that's local government doing a crap job.

it's like people bitching cuz Bill Gates is a gazillionaire when there are poor people in the world. Gates could give away every penny he had and it would have no impact whatsofucking ever on poverty. or, he could keep making money and keep donating bazillions to philanthropic causes, and starting scholarships for poor kids to go to school and stuff like that.