[ClorrerVeks]

Robert, true or false, while making the record profits due to the rising prices Oil execs got some of the highest retirement packages in history.

Reino, true or false, anyone with an ounce of common sense was free to share in these profits by simply purchasing shares of stock in the profitable corporations? I know I did

[Xavier_Spinner_Wheels]

Reino, true or false, anyone with an ounce of common sense was free to share in these profits by simply purchasing shares of stock in the profitable corporations? I know I did

Answer my question first, and I promise to answer yours.

[StitsVobsaith]

Let me get this straight, you guys want higher oil prices?
Are you like, looking at the whole picture here???

I don't think that's what they want, Hank.

What they want is to cripple an industry upon which our country is dependent for our economic success. If they can succeed in making the cost of energy higher, they will succeed in hurting the American economy. THAT is what they want. Higher oil prices is merely their means to attain that desired end.

[ClorrerVeks]

Answer my question first, and I promise to answer yours.

If the CEO's of these companies were able to turn a healthy profit for their companies then I hope they got good retirement packages. They deserve it for doing a successful job.

[annouhMus]

Progress?

So you think Congress passing a bill (that wont make it out of committe in the Senate) penalizing a specific industry for managing to make a profit is progress?

Wow....just wow....

What happens when someone decides that the industry you're in is "making too much money"?

The Reps should never have given the tax break to start with.

[ClorrerVeks]

Taxes result in dead weight too, you don't seem to understand, you're paying for that gas no matter what. The only difference is that if you pay at the pump price elasticity forces some of the cost onto the company.

There is no such thing as forcing a cost back onto a company. Because every single cent that any buisness makes comes from the sales of its goods to the consumer. Thus no matter where you force the cost, in the end it is paid for by the consumer.

[Seiblybiozy]

Taxes result in dead weight too, you don't seem to understand, you're paying for that gas no matter what. The only difference is that if you pay at the pump price elasticity forces some of the cost onto the company.

I understand, but I also know that consumers would not spend as much as gas prices go up.
Not to mention the families who would be forced to pay more for fuel and home heating up front instead of the smaller percentage taking from them in tax.

[ClorrerVeks]

The Repus should never have given the tax break to start with.

The Dems should stay away from things they obviously don't understand, well I guess thats pretty much everything

[annouhMus]

The Dems should stay away from things they obviously don't understand, well I guess thats pretty much everything

Apparently you are out of luck in this case, and "Properly". (and I have a hunch there will be much more in this vein. ) HEH HEH.

[StitsVobsaith]

The Dems should stay away from things they obviously don't understand, well I guess thats pretty much everything

I agree. The Dems exhibit retrograde Socialist/Marxist Theory when it comes to economics, and they exhibit cowardly Cut N' Run Theory when it comes to national defense.

But surely they must understand something?? They seem to understand the use of propaganda and personal attack, for example. They used both (successfully, unfortunately) to win the latest election.

[ClorrerVeks]

I agree. The Dems exhibit retrograde Socialist/Marxist Theory when it comes to economics, and they exhibit cowardly Cut N' Run Theory when it comes to national defense.

But surely they must understand something?? They seem to understand the use of propaganda and personal attack, for example. They used both (successfully, unfortunately) to win the latest election.

I guess you could say that they understand pandering to the economically ignorant to win votes.

[Jeffery]

I understand, but I also know that consumers would not spend as much as gas prices go up.

They'll change there habits, they may purchase things online they may make fewer trips. Likely all that will happen is that the way they pay taxes will all just be switched around.

Not to mention the families who would be forced to pay more for fuel and home heating up front instead of the smaller percentage taking from them in tax. They either get it taken out of their paycheck every month, or they pay for it every month, either way they'll end up paying less total if we leave gas and oil prices up to the market. Perhaps not much less, but less all the same.

If you artificially suppress the price of oil you will increase the demand for the systems which use it. The entire economics relies on the fact that when supply decreases relative to demand for a particular product price will go up and that will stimulate new growth in other fields as replacements, or new sources of drilling.

Now the republicans who are supposed to be all for the free market are fucking with it because there buddies at Exxon-Mobil told them to do so.

[Jeffery]

I guess you could say that they understand pandering to the economically ignorant to win votes.

Simply claiming that "WERE REPUBLICANS WE KNOW ECONOMICS" doesn't mean that you do, really I have yet to see you present an economic argument other then your little partisan diatribe about how your understanding of economics is so superior that you can violate basic principles of it.

Please tell me,

1.) How does subsidizing oil industries create a free lunch

2.) Where is the proof that demand for gas and oil is perfectly inelastic

3.) Why Artificially Suppressing the Price of Gas and Oil is a good idea when it will merely slow the adoption of alternative technologies

[Seiblybiozy]

They'll change there habits, they may purchase things online they may make fewer trips. Likely all that will happen is that the way they pay taxes will all just be switched around.



They either get it taken out of their paycheck every month, or they pay for it every month, either way they'll end up paying less total if we leave gas and oil prices up to the market. Perhaps not much less, but less all the same.

If you artificially suppress the price of oil you will increase the demand for the systems which use it. The entire economics relies on the fact that when supply decreases relative to demand for a particular product price will go up and that will stimulate new growth in other fields as replacements, or new sources of drilling.


Now the republicans who are supposed to be all for the free market are fucking with it because there buddies at Exxon-Mobil told them to do so.

I don't know ??????

One of the problems is that we are discussing assumptions. We would need to know how much oil and gas prices would be effected to make a clear decision/argument. Unfortunately, the oil companies would sway info to their benefit.

[Xavier_Spinner_Wheels]

If the CEO's of these companies were able to turn a healthy profit for their companies then I hope they got good retirement packages. They deserve it for doing a successful job.

Earlier you asked if any American could have purchased stock in oil. No not all Americans, but yes a vast majority of Americans could have purchased stock.

As for your comment about the C.E.O.'s. Technically the CEO's didn't do anything right? Market forces and all that. So why did the CEO's get huge bonuses for their performance? They had no control over sky high oil prices. Unless of course we take into account the closed door meetings that oil execs had with members of the White House.

[Jeffery]

I don't know ??????

One of the problems is that we are discussing assumptions. We would need to know how much oil and gas prices would be effected to make a clear decision/argument. Unfortunately, the oil companies would sway info to their benefit.

I propose a simple idea, that whatever the true elasticity of demand is for oil/gas its something less then infinity. In other words if there is an increase in price there is some decrease in quantity demanded.

Because of this, not all increases in cost can be passed on to the consumer. I'll accept that the demand is inelastic even though it is not perfectly inelastic and the bulk of the cost may be passed on to the consumer. But as it is, through subsidizing the oil companies we ensure that all of the cost is passed on. Therefore simply looking at the scheme presented here, its bad for the taxpayer and good for the oil companies.

If the demand is in fact perfectly inelastic (everything could be passed on to the consumer/increases in price don't affect demand) then it wouldn't matter because there would be no impact on the habits of people by changing around whether they pay the tax for gas or with income tax.

[Seiblybiozy]

Just heard on Fox that oil prices are on the rise.
The reason is oil supply is dropping......Interesting !

[JTS_tv]

How does this have anything to do with oil supply?

[Seiblybiozy]

How does this have anything to do with oil supply?

It doesn't, I was just making a remark about the damn oil prices going up..
Sounds very fishy too me...

[ClorrerVeks]

Simply claiming that "WERE REPUBLICANS WE KNOW ECONOMICS" doesn't mean that you do, really I have yet to see you present an economic argument other then your little partisan diatribe about how your understanding of economics is so superior that you can violate basic principles of it.

Please tell me,

1.) How does subsidizing oil industries create a free lunch

There is a difference between a tax break and a subsidy. A subsidy implies that the government is GIVING, a tax break means that the government is TAKING less. But you knew that since you arn't economically ignorant.

2.) Where is the proof that demand for gas and oil is perfectly inelastic I don't recall stating that it was, however you stated in an earlier post that people can simply change their driving habit to avoid increased fuel prices. However your statement has a GIANT hole in it. Goods are brought to market how (transported by things that use gas) resources are brought to a factory how (transported by things that use gas). No matter if the individual consumer reduces his personal habits, increased oil and gas prices will be reflecte in every single good purchased by the consumer and that price will be added to every time that good has to be transported. But you knew that because, you know economics, right

3.) Why Artificially Suppressing the Price of Gas and Oil is a good idea when it will merely slow the adoption of alternative technologies By taxing a good less you are in no way artificially surpressing any price, in fact by taxing a buisness more you are artificially increasing the price of the goods they produce. But I'm sure you knew that already.