WOW! What the.....holy......WOW! Arggghhhhh. Seriously. Seriously. Oh my HECK! (you know you've lived in UT too long when you start saying things like oh my heck) Seriously. OK. Welcome to the Socialist States Of America. I have said it before, I will say it again. I am scared. I am really scared for the future of our country. She isn't the first person to suggest such a thing. In just a few months our country is going to choose a new president, and look who we have to choose from. Nice. It scares me. It really does.
So this is what I'm thinkin'. Since when did it become illegal for a company to make a profit? Oil companies are actually making less profit now than they used to. So let's just pretend here. Let's say that my dear sweet hubby, his company starts doing really well and he is in high demand. He finishes concrete floors, by the way. So lets say that he is in high demand and all of a sudden the supply of acid stain starts to run low. People still want him to come do their floors. But those same people who are demanding that he come do their floors, they have put restrictions on where he can go to look for new acid stain. So since demand is high and supply is low and the options open for him to get new stain are becoming more costly, he raises his price too. Well the governing regime sees this and decides to take over his company and his profits. Yeah, I wanna live in a country where that kind of stuff happens.
Did you know that 50 miles off the Florida Keys Cuba and China are drilling for oil? And other countries are looking at setting up rigs in the Gulf Of Mexico? Why don't we just drill for oil there ourselves? Or why don't we drill in Alaska where there is an abundance of oil? Because those are no drill zones established by congress. Here is a quote from a press conference with President Bush in April:
I've repeatedly submitted proposals to help address these problems. Yet time after time, Congress chose to block them. One of the main reasons for high gas prices is that global oil production is not keeping up with growing demand. Members of Congress have been vocal about foreign governments increasing their oil production; yet Congress has been just as vocal in opposition to efforts to expand our production here at home.
They repeatedly blocked environmentally safe exploration in ANWR. The Department of Energy estimates that ANWR could allow America to produce about a million additional barrels of oil every day, which translates to about 27 millions of gallons of gasoline and diesel every day. That would be about a 20-percent increase of oil -- crude oil production over U.S. levels, and it would likely mean lower gas prices. And yet such efforts to explore in ANWR have been consistently blocked.
Another reason for high gas prices is the lack of refining capacity. It's been more than 30 years since America built its last new refinery. Yet in this area, too, Congress has repeatedly blocked efforts to expand capacity and build more refineries.
And now, here is a pretty picture for you to look at:
So, one more thing about the little video up at the top. You know how I have said before that I think that main stream media is slanted and biased? Well, usually when you Google some newsworthy political topic the first few things to come up are for websites like The New York Times or The Washington Post or CNN or something like that. Try googling "Maxine Waters Socializing Oil" (or better yet, click on that blue googling word). It pulls up things like Youtube or various blogs. Hmmmm.......wonder why that is?
17 comments:
Interesting thinkin thursday. I am wondering where you got your information on oil companies making less profit. I have never heard that before.
I was just looking at that graph again and it is pretty deceiving because there is no mention of Bush on the second half.
It should say Bush and Democratic Congress, shouldn't it? The first half does say Bush and Republican Congress. Bush is still part of the equation.
That is one of the deceptive media practices I think you are talking about. Only this time on the other side of the aisle.
By the way, I am just trying to point out that it happens on both sides.
http://money.cnn.com/2007/02/01/news/companies/exxon/index.htm
Allyson, You really really need to do your research. You truly have no idea what you are talking about and it is just sad.
Maybe you should do your research. This article is 9 months more current than yours.
And if you are going to insult me, why aren't you brave enough to tell me who you are?
http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2007-11-01-307693091_x.htm
And I only have about 2 minutes to be here, then I will be unavailable for several days, so I am gonna make this quick. Yes, I am sure you haven't heard this before because, well, ya know, that whole last paragraph and all.
And you are right about the graph. I honestly found that at the last minute and threw it in there without paying much attention to detail.
HOWEVER, I will point out that I found that graph on someone's blog and NOT from a main stream media source.
What I have a problem with is the fact that the government wants to take over the oil companies. Oil companies make 8.6% profit. Why doesn't the government go after other industries like Google or Microsoft or the Entertainment industry where they have about a 20% margin of profit? No, I don't want to pay $4 a gallon for gas. I also don't want to pay $20 for a DVD, but I pay it. What's the difference. It's called capitalism and last time I checked, it was all good and legal.
You forgot to mention that the oil companies pay more in taxes every year than the bottom 75% of all taxpayers put together. The government makes more off of oil than the people that find, refine, and ship it. And by the way, the graph shows Bush with control of a republican congress verses when he lost power to a democrat controlled congress and the coresponding cost increase when it happened -just amaturishly done.
Just google oil + record profits. You will find much more current arcticles... Wonder why that is?
I googled it. And I found a bunch of articles talking about 2006 and 2007. Here is an article from the New York times from just a few weeks ago, talking about 1st quarter profits for this year.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/14/business/14refine.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
And thank you for being much more polite this time.
I just have 1 more thing to say, and then I will be gone all weekend. What difference does it make if the oil companies profits are up or down? If you had a business you would want to be making as much profit as possible, wouldn't you? Supply and demand is taught in what grade? It's been so long I can't even remember. What are the oil companies doing that's so bad or illegal that the government needs to come in and take over their company? If they can come in and take over the oil companies, what is to stop them from taking over any company that they see making big revenue? It's not right.
It has been done before and it didn't work. It is done in other countries and you couldn't pay me enough to live in those countries.
If the government starts capping profits, the stock for oil companies is going to go down. Way down, who wants to own stock where there is a limit to profits? What's that going to do for our economy? What kind of people own stock in oil companies? Regular old people like you and me. We have oil in our portfolio. What's that going to do to my retirement?
If the oil companies can't make a decent profit they are going to stop looking for alternative ways to produce oil, because the money won't be there for that. Then what happens when we run out of oil here? Especially if congress won't let us drill for oil here in our country where it sitting untapped in abundance. What happens then? We become even more dependant on other countries, who we happen to not get along with very well. Then things really get bad because oil companies can't make a profit on oil they don't produce.
13 years ago Bill Clinton vetoed a bill to allow oil companies to explore and drill in ANWR (Arctic National Wildlife Refuge). One of the reasons was because they said that it wouldn't produce oil for 10 years. Well, it would be nice right about now to have some of that oil, wouldn't it?
They have the technology now to drill for oil in ANWR and do it without disturbing the refuge. But congress still won't allow it. If you want more info you can read here:
http://www.anwr.org/
For real though, I have to go. Have a good weekend.
Do you just listen to Rush and Glen? I was just wondering?
I have a problem with the oil situation, and these high oil prices. That even though it is legal, is it moral? This is going to devastate our U.S. economy. How can a person who makes minimum wage pay $4.00 for gas? People can live without concrete staining, we cannot live without oil. Not just yet.
DANG IT! I have a showing at my house is 40 minutes and I am trying to do laundry and pack, I don't have time for this.
I can see you are back to being insulting. I don't like to argue with people who argue by insulting the person they are arguing with, instead of arguing points.
I am sorry you have a problem with the oil situation. I am sorry that someone has something you want and won't give it to you for the price you want them to give it to you for. Is that really immoral?
You don't think congress blocking oil companies from drilling at home is going to devastae our economy?
You think people can really live without concrete staining? What kind of people are THEY? I was trying to make a point that if it was your business and government was trying to come in and take it over, it wouldn't be fair.
Sorry,I was not trying to be insulting places that are to be drilled are pristine places for wildlife. Anwar,does not have enough sufficient oil for the potential damage that it could possibly cause to wildlife. Like leaving a good planet for our grandchildren, great-grandchildren, etc.
The Bush administration is not interested in conservation, only getting a quick solution.
Oh, by the way, Maxine Watters is an IDIOT!!!
Ally,
I just want you to know none of that was me. That person (whoever it is) doesn't make a valid argument and seems their emotions took over a little. I only say that because they are hiding behind their anonymonity. If I knew who it was I would be nicer. I do not have to hide behind my beliefs or arguments.
By the way, both you are quoting older articles. How about going directly to Exxon's 2008 first quarter earnings which were just posted the beginning of May 2008: http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/080501/20080501005652.html?.v=1
This is quote taken directly from Exxonmobil's chairman Rex Tillerson about the first quarter of 2008:
"ExxonMobil's first quarter net income was a record $10,890 million, up 17% from the first quarter of 2007."
Also, I am not sure who besides Maxine Watters (she is crazy) is talking about the government taking over the oil companies. I haven't heard it but then again, I rarely watch or read the news any more.
I do understand the need for government oversight and regulation of the oil industry just as it is needed in the insurance, drug, etc. industries.
Oh man, I didn't look at the comments on this one before. I would have liked to get in on the action. Allyson, even though I may not agree with you, I'd never purposefully try to be rude to you (hope I haven't been when I've disagreed with you in the past). Anonymous, not showing your true identity is being a chicken. And why come to be rude? There's a way to tactfully disagree.
I've had yucky commenters in the past. They really get me down. Sorry you had to deal with that, Allyson...
Wow that was some interesting comment reading, yep, I read the entire thing. I can't vote on your side bar because my computer has issues. I wanted to say that I enjoy reading your opinion on issues. It can be annoying when one person is rude, but it is your blog and your views, and they don't have to read it.
Post a Comment