Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

Oil Tax Windfall

Recs

6

June 13, 2008 – Comments (7)

This is good, Obama wants to implement an oil windfall tax to distribute to the people...

And then McCain's corporate cuts and the costs are mentioned as well. 

I fail to see how a tax increase that is then redistributed balances the budget.

Also, the free market really needs to do its work on oil prices.  The degree of wasteful vehicles and that it was allowed with no intervention or concern for the well being of our gaia-planet is beyond criminal. The increase in energy costs are only now resulting in responsible energy consumption.  I never wanted a larger vehicle, yet I was driven to seriously consider it because of the degree the massive vehicles with one person block the driving view and the safety of being in a smaller vehicle surrounded by energy pigs.  It is disgusting to ever have contemplation for a larger vehicle for that kind of reason.

Interesting to me is that more mature and populated countries (Europe) have more job protection type of laws (less free trade).  I suspect that this because they've had to go through business cycles with more limited resources and have not been able to leverage wealth on exploitation the way the US has.   When I think free-trade policies through they just seem like a way to avoid paying a fair share of taxes.  Every part of the economy ought to be paying it's share of the economic burden we all bear and free-trade just seems like the scam of the century to divert equitable tax responsibility.

7 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On June 13, 2008 at 10:28 AM, joeykid13 wrote:

I don't see how it is fair, right or legal to penalize a publicly owned company by taxing them for being too successful.  If the Government is jealous about the success of Exxon-Mobil, then maybe when XOM exceeds certain growth targets they (XOM...not the Government) should implement a "Special Windfall Dividend" and pay out a special one time dividend to their shareholders.  This way, the shareholders get rewarded, and the government ultimately still gets taxes on the shareholder gains.  XOM has announced that they are pulling out of the retail gas business all together over this flap.  Obama and the Democrats just forced them to significantly reduce the competition in the retail gas market...which will result in a disaster for the American Consumer.  Don't Drink Obama's Kool-Aid.

Report this comment
#2) On June 13, 2008 at 10:31 AM, Gemini846 (46.06) wrote:

I've decided that the Dems are smarter than I originally thought.

A windfall tax on oil companies is basically the same thing as a backdoor gas tax. Nobody would get elected raising the price of gas $2/gal on a tax, but they might if they can "get the greedy oil companies" (who will raise prices to compensate for the tax).

I'm all for raising gas taxes to pay for more mass transit and clean energy (not ethanol subsidies). Build a functioning train and bus system where I live that people could ride for $2 a day and people would shed at least 1 car instead of commute solo at $6 gas.

Right now It would take me an hour and a half to make it the 3 miles to work on the bus. So ya, I drive. I'd ride my bike, but there are no bike lanes so its just not safe.

Report this comment
#3) On June 13, 2008 at 11:03 AM, madcowmonkey (< 20) wrote:

Why doesn't anybody ever talk about the subsidies the oil companies received in the past?

U.S. Oil Subsidies Need to Go ( oil+subsidiesgas+prices,) 

excerpt:

In February the House passed the Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act, or H.R. 5351, which would repeal the $18 billion in tax breaks for multinational oil companies. The bill would create tax breaks for producers of renewable energy, fuel, and electricity. The bill needs Senate approval.

During a speech while the House debated the bill, U.S. Rep. Jay Inslee (D-WA) said, "We're wrapped around the axle of oil because of these tax subsidies. It's time to change course. We're ready to launch a rocket of clean-energy innovation in this country, but opponents of these clean-energy investments are putting a hold on the countdown. We're about two seconds away from having a burst of economic growth in this county. If they allow these tax breaks to expire, it'll strangle the birth of new industries."

The push is for clean energy. Not coal, oil, and other projects. If it is a push for clean energy, why are the other countries reverting back to coal and how come I feel like we are dragging our feet on solar?

Ahhhhh. The confusion:) I love it. 

Report this comment
#4) On June 13, 2008 at 11:12 AM, WileyChannell (< 20) wrote:

Wiley Channell June 13, 2008

Congress and legislators should stay in the business of government and quit trying to regulate the business world. we have a need to determine what assets such as oil reserves or sources which belong to the United States and go about tending to our store let the oil companies have a free market place to buy and sell hard goods. the government need not regulate what someone should our could buy or sell from a price perspective.

Having said the above then I am compelled to quickly add it is government business to regulate or set the standards by which business might be conducted on a fair and square level playing field. Let's say a duly regulated and licensed utility company has a need to go into the market place and buy oil. There should not be allowed that some faction of government such as the regulator of the commodities trading not have the right to say hold on stud you speculator that is buying paper only will not have the right to bid up the price of the oil as opposed to the hard goods buyer the utility company.

Government action should be swift and positive to cease all commodity trading on oil futures until such time as supply and demand of the end user coffers are satisfied and thus regulated as per a rartioning system.

Concurrent with a commodity trading in oil there should be imposed a no unrefined oil will leave the shores of the United States without fair buy and sell to hard use entities of the American consumer.

Hard times call for hard decisions and hard times is just over the hill without sensible management of assets such as the natural resources of a country.

Wars through out the history of the world have been fought because of one and only one thing."Needs being met for the interest of the country."  Countries have always went to war to supply needs either real or perceived by the people leading the country.

Going into Kuwait and Iraq was noble sounding and for a former Marine I had hoped it was for patriotic and humane reasons but it appears that the interest for the need of protecting oil assets may have been the enabling factor. If we wanted to have war to achieve oil flow then let's get the oil flowing and get on with the business at hand.

Pussy footing around without a clear cut purpose for finalizing an action is hogwash.

Report this comment
#5) On June 13, 2008 at 11:34 AM, madcowmonkey (< 20) wrote:

WileyChannell- In my personal opinion, the amount of money that we used for the war and how much we will be paying for it after it is all said and done, we could have put into place multiple energy solutions that were clean and done away the need for oil. 

When oil is an afterthought, because we used our brains instead of our dinero, what will these oil producing countries turn to. Some have already started to get into the solar program and we are still trying to get our hands on cheaper oil.

I say it is time that we stop burning natural resources and start using the noodle and money to produce a energy that we do not have to rely on other countries shipping over to us. 

Report this comment
#6) On June 13, 2008 at 9:57 PM, mgiv (97.65) wrote:

Actually what I believe should happen is zero tax for public corporations but much higher dividend tax with laws in place to catch loop holes.  If we tax more then we need to get more for it.  The problem in the states is that for the richest (atleast now) country in the world, I don't get diddley swat for the tax I pay.

Report this comment
#7) On June 14, 2008 at 9:21 AM, dwot (45.74) wrote:

I'm staying out of this one, expect to say that clearly there is a free ride happening as taxes do not cover expenses at many different levels of government and this has to be fixed.

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement