No two words bring as much anger to the average American as the words, "Big Oil". After all, about 7 in 10 Americans blame oil companies for rising costs, and gas prices are perhaps the most noticable rising costs we incur due to the fact they are displayed for all to see on a daily basis. This is despite the fact that inflation is effecting everything else, but simply is not as noticable to the public. As I said in another thread, an ounce of gold buys about as much oil as it did in 1961.
President Obama has recently come out declaing that Congress should do away with oil subsidies in an attempt to play off this contempt, but is it sincere? After all, if Obama were successful in doing away with government subsidies, prices at the pumps would undoubtidly go up, thus endangering his election bid in 2012 as well as "hurting" those at the gas pump. The benefit? The benefit would only be $2 billion a year to the federal government. Is this really what President Obama is after? After all, it is not even a drop in the bucket in terms of the deficit. In fact, Congress just voted down Obama's proposed budget 414-0, including all democrats within the House becuase it did nothing to address the fiscal problems of the country.
Conversly, we have those in the GOP who oppose this. Apparently, conservatives stand in the way of corporate welfare. Is this what the conservative movement has become? Is it only in favor of corporate welfare and not social welfare?
In conclusion, the tiny income generated from ending the oil subsidy, as well as the fact deomcrats had two years to pass something through, tells me that Obama's recent ploy has zero sincerity. He is merely playing the American public like the fiddle they have become knowing that no such action by a GOP Congress will occur. If it did happen, his election chances in 2012 would vanish.
Originally posted by whodeyRight you are!! Those damn Liberals don't seem to understand that the only way to make AMERICA energy independent is to DRILL BABY DRILL! While we're at it, let's give MORE American tax dollars to our beloved oil companies (because, after all...80 billion in profits a year is just not enough!) Why if it were up to me I'd have oil wells gushing in every national park, national forest, and off every coast in the world, I'd give big oil additional tax breaks, and eliminate every enviornmential law on the books. To hell with clean air, clean water, and clean soil. Now get American back in it's rightful place as that great shining city on the hill, and start drilling!!!😠😠😠:
No two words bring as much anger to the average American as the words, "Big Oil". After all, about 7 in 10 Americans blame oil companies for rising costs, and gas prices are perhaps the most noticable rising costs we incur due to the fact they are displayed for all to see on a daily basis. This is despite the fact that inflation is effecting everything else y a GOP Congress will occur. If it did happen, his election chances in 2012 would vanish.
Originally posted by bill718Calm down bill, all I'm saying is that inflation is driving the cost of fuel. So stop the stimulus's's's's's's's.......s.
Right you are!! Those damn Liberals don't seem to understand that the only way to make AMERICA energy independent is to DRILL BABY DRILL! While we're at it, let's give MORE American tax dollars to our beloved oil companies (because, after all...80 billion in profits a year is just not enough!) Why if it were up to me I'd have oil wells gushing in every natio ...[text shortened]... n it's rightful place as that great shining city on the hill, and start drilling!!!😠😠😠:
For what it is worth, this is a hilarious clip.
http://wwwyoutube.com/watch?v=OrA9zj94NuU
I just love Maxine Waters!! You can see Congressmen snickering in the background like teenagers, but I don't think it's that funny. I just wonder if oil companies will be demonized enough for this to happen.
Originally posted by whodeyHey Whodey??? I'm an independent contractor, where's MY subsidy?? Why does big oil get them and other business's don't??
Just out of curiosity, does anyone think that ending Big Oil subsidies will:
1. Decrease prices at the pump?
2. Significanty increase governemnt revenue?
3. Lead to other corporate subsidies being cut?
Originally posted by whodeyNo, I don't think eliminating the subsidies will do much to lower prices, but I also don't have any reason--supported by scientific studies, at least--to think that doing so will raise prices, either. Which leads me to the second point you raise--no, it won't increase government revenue "significantly," but two billion dollars is still two billion dollars is still two billion dollars, is still nearly four times the amount of the Solyndra loan about which conservatives make such a big fuss, is still 2000 NPRs and 2000 presidential tour buses (http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-august-18-2011/world-of-class-warfare---the-poor-s-free-ride-is-over).
Just out of curiosity, does anyone think that ending Big Oil subsidies will:
1. Decrease prices at the pump?
2. Significanty increase governemnt revenue?
3. Lead to other corporate subsidies being cut?
Originally posted by bill718You are not a major corporate entity that lobbies Congress, therefore, they have no interest in giving you perks since they don't get any from you.
Hey Whodey??? I'm an independent contractor, where's MY subsidy?? Why does big oil get them and other business's don't??
Originally posted by wittywonkaSo take 2 billion dollars from "Big Oil" and prices don't go up? Hmmm? Also, you seem to indicate that prices might lower at the pumps. No offense, but are you on crack? How exactly does that work?
No, I don't think eliminating the subsidies will do much to lower prices, but I also don't have any reason--supported by scientific studies, at least--to think that doing so will raise prices, either. Which leads me to the second point you raise--no, it won't increase government revenue "significantly," but two billion dollars is still two billion dollar ...[text shortened]... lyshow.com/watch/thu-august-18-2011/world-of-class-warfare---the-poor-s-free-ride-is-over).
I'm in agreement that government has no business in corporate welfare, however, why only target "Big Oil"? In addition, why not do it when you have the votes to pass the legislation verses doing it after the 2010 election when Obama knows it has a snow balls chance to pass? As it stands, it is pure demogogary on the part of Obama bringing this up now. The optimal time to do it was during the BP spill, but then, BP was one of his biggest contributors in the 2008 election.
Originally posted by whodeyhttp://mediamatters.org/research/201203060003
So take 2 billion dollars from "Big Oil" and prices don't go up? Hmmm? Also, you seem to indicate that prices might lower at the pumps. No offense, but are you on crack? How exactly does that work?
Gasoline prices are a function of world oil prices and refining margins. The oil companies are quick to point out that they are not to blame for oil prices because the price is set in the world market, or which they are a small share. That is all true. But one implication of that is that the incremental change in production that might result from changing oil subsidies will have no impact on world oil prices, and therefore no impact on gasoline prices.
Michael Canes, a distinguished fellow at the Logistics Management Institute and former chief economist of the American Petroleum Institute wrote in an email to Media Matters that ending subsidies to oil companies would have "very little" effect on oil prices. He went on to say that there could be "Some small effect if at the margin domestic production is adversely affected, but I suspect that effect would be very small indeed."
"The impact would be extremely small," said Stephen Brown, a professor of economics at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Brown co-wrote a study in 2009 arguing that if the subsidies were cut, the average person would spend, at most, just over $2 more each year on petroleum products.
[...]
From the beginning, the Treasury Department has said the President's proposal would raise prices at the pump by less than a cent per gallon at most. Brown's study, produced for the non-partisan think tank Resources for the Future, came up with similar results. Even the American Petroleum Institute, which opposes cutting the subsidies, said in a press release on Monday that eliminating them wouldn't affect gas prices.
Etc, etc, etc.
Originally posted by wittywonkaMedia Matters? Does it really?
http://mediamatters.org/research/201203060003
Gasoline prices are a function of world oil prices and refining margins. The oil companies are quick to point out that they are not to blame for oil prices because the price is set in the world market, or which they are a small share. That is all true. But one implication of that is that the increme e on Monday that eliminating them wouldn't affect gas prices.
Etc, etc, etc.
All I know is an ounce of gold buys as much oil today as it did in 1961 due to government inflation of the dollar.
yada, yada, yada.
Originally posted by whodeyThe link is to a page of external sources, whodey, including the Associated Press, a UC-Berkeley professor, a professional oil industry analyst, an API economist, ProPublica, Time, an energy information firm director, and a Moody's economist, among others.
Media Matters? Does it really?
All I know is an ounce of gold buys as much oil today as it did in 1961 due to government inflation of the dollar.
yada, yada, yada.
Originally posted by wittywonkaWow. The Associated State press and a UC-Lefteley professor and even Time.moveon.org? Impressive.
The link is to a page of external sources, whodey, including the Associated Press, a UC-Berkeley professor, a professional oil industry analyst, an API economist, ProPublica, Time, an energy information firm director, and a Moody's economist, among others.
Originally posted by whodeyThe inflation-adjusted gold price is vastly higher now than it was in 1961.
Media Matters? Does it really?
All I know is an ounce of gold buys as much oil today as it did in 1961 due to government inflation of the dollar.
yada, yada, yada.
Here's a thought. If some paranoid raving lunatics tell you something, perhaps it is a good idea to verify if it's actually true before you believe it.