There are several things that Obama won't tell you when he intends to increase taxes for oil companies.
1) For all the profits that oil companies have reaped, the government has made over twice the amount in profit from oil related taxation.
This is obvious enough that I'd have thought no one would need Obama to explain it to them: for all the extra tax that the government has collected from the oil companies' recent windfall, it has lost a comparable amount of tax income from the millions and millions of other corporations and small businesses who are having to write off a much greater portion of their revenues as fuel expenses.
2) Increasing taxes on oil companies will undoubtedly have a negative effect on the U.S. economy and the people of the U.S. as a whole.
In the short term, perhaps. And if the money collected were to be squandered on, oh say, welfare programs, drive-thru abortion clinics, northbound carpool lanes across the Mexican border, kindergarten condom dispensers ... (just pick the made-for-radio liberal-hate line you love most) then I would probably agree with you completely.
If on the other hand that money is used to offset incentives and subsidies given to industries that accelerate the development of green energy solutions and getting them to mass-production (again, the oil companies are invited to this party too!), then in the long run that's a net positive.
We have the technology and brain power to put the energy revolution into full swing. The only thing we've lacked—and still lack, in some quarters—is the political will to devote the resources necessary to make it happen.
Yeah, well I hate to break it to you, but speculation is a part of commodity trading. If there's been a lapse in oversight, then it certainly should be corrected.
You're right, of course it is. And most economists will tell you that a healthy, but not excessive, dose of regulation is a necessary part of speculation. It's a balance that has to be kept, and in this particular case the pendulum swung too far toward deregulation for too long (a specific exception for
electronic overseas trading? Senators meet the intarwebs
), and we're bearing the brunt of that lapse as a result.
You seem to be okay with a degree of socialism, Poker, and we'll just have to agree to disagree on that front. I personally can't stomach the thought of "punishing" corporations for making too much money. What about all of the retirement and mutual funds that have benefited from oil company profits? The government's job is not to make sure that outcomes are equal, just that the playing field is level and that competition takes place. Their attempts at social engineering always seem to backfire and fail miserably.
Well I rather abhor the idea of welfare states and such, though I do like certain services paid for by taxes—I'd just as soon not privatize my local police and fire departments or federal military, for example. But free markets are at the very heart of what economic success America has had over the last hundred years.
I just think that "free market, no exceptions" is a flawed philosophy—while it works wonderfully 99-99.99% of the time, there arise unique cases where the system breaks down, and it's the duty of government to step in to restore stability. Failure to do so is what led us over the precipice in 1929, the 70s, and countless other times in history, all over the world. Over the last six years or so a negligent U.S. Congress allowed futures trading to go unchecked, and the runaway speculation that ensued has subsequently enabled oil companies to suck billions of dollars out of our economy, leaving average Americans, through no fault of their own, far poorer than they used to be. That does strike me as an injustice, and it's not "social engineering" to seek to rectify that injustice. Fixing the broken laws that allowed this to happen in the first place, along with temporarily taxing oil companies at a heavier rate as they rake the benefits, and using those funds to accelerate the next-generation energy solutions we need to make our nation more secure are IMO all very fair and prudent measures to take.
Why is it the responsibility of oil companies to invest money in alternate energy? Why not the automobile industry? Why not candle makers? Construction companies? They all benefit from petroleum.
Aside from the mention of autos, I don't follow. Those industries are all consumers of petroleum; hence they're the ones being gouged. Even the auto industry is in dire straits obviously with everyone cutting back on the profit-margin guzzlers.
I certainly don't mind allocating a portion of my taxes to go towards energy evolvement. Perhaps the legislators should have done that instead of filling every bill with earmarks.
I'll raise a glass to you on that.
At the end of the day, the reality is this: we can either get busy setting ourselves on the path to clean energy, or stay rooted in our ideologies by gobbling up whatever the market gives us. The revolution is going to happen eventually either way, the question is how proactive are we going to be about doing what's necessary to turn that corner sooner rather than later, and making sure that the transition is a stable one.
I'm getting as
as everyone else probably already did long ago lol, so I'm going to try to retire from the thread for the most part. I think I learned a thing or two along the way, so thanks hal and others for keeping the conversation intelligent and thoughtful. :tup: