It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Republicans block measure s.3044 in attempt to investigate gas gouging

page: 3
14
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 12 2010 @ 09:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by NorEaster
Screw you people. It can't mean that much to you if you won't even bother to get the facts correct.


Its getting hard fighting the good fight, alot of these people are willingly ignorant, and even when the truth is shown, they will argue with it. I think it just boils down to these are the kind of people that "have to win" - they will keep arguing even when they know they lost, just because they cant admit personal "defeat", when in reality the "defeat" should be a glorious enlightening moment.




posted on Nov, 12 2010 @ 09:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by NorEaster
Screw you people. It can't mean that much to you if you won't even bother to get the facts correct.


Its getting hard fighting the good fight, alot of these people are willingly ignorant, and even when the truth is shown, they will argue with it. I think it just boils down to these are the kind of people that "have to win" - they will keep arguing even when they know they lost, just because they cant admit personal "defeat", when in reality the "defeat" should be a glorious enlightening moment.



posted on Nov, 12 2010 @ 03:46 PM
link   
reply to post by aching_knuckles
 



Yeh, exactly, within the US. Yknow, companies like BP that are basically running roughshod over our country, basically for free.


Free, huh? wiki.answers.com...

www.bp.com...

- From the last link:


The effective tax rate on replacement cost profit or loss for the third quarter and nine months was -16% and 33% respectively, compared with 29% and 33% a year ago. The effective tax rates for 2010 were impacted by the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, resulting in a particularly unusual rate for the third quarter. Excluding these impacts, the effective tax rate for the third quarter was 25% and for the nine months was 31%. The full-year effective tax rate, excluding the impact of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, is expected to be around 31%.


And, just so you know - that tax gets passed on to you; taxes are an operating cost, not a penalty - increasing taxes increases operating cost and results in higher prices for you. This is not rocket science.

Now - what this bill -really- would have impacted would be natural gas. People tend to get pretty pissed when their heating bill goes up when it is cold outside.


Why do you think BP is selling the idea "We are responsible, we will be here" so much? Because nothing COMPELS them to be here except HUGE PROFITS, and the fact that they know we arent gonna mess with them.


Yes, the moment you fill out an employment form with a corporation you immediately lose all sense of self following installation of the "corporate drone" device. Everyone in the company only sees numbers and profits and neglects all concepts of responsibility.


See gigantic oil spill in gulf that no one got arrested for, much less personally fined. Poor Tony lost his job (with a golden parachute) and will drift away into obscurity, or more likely, another high paying CEO job for another oil company.


Jesus - did your mother drop-kick you every time you spilled the milk as a kid, or something? When handling liquids - they tend to spill; it happens. No system is perfect. The CEO of BP did -nothing- wrong, at least with regards to the oil spill (you don't get to be CEO without a few skeletons in the closet). People just like to flip out and point fingers.

Accidents happen. Get over it and clean it up, learn our lesson, go home - go to sleep. The next day will come, and it will be okay.


If you even believe what you wrote right there.......cmon, so if there is litigation possible, youre telling me the oversight committee is going to waste its time prosecuting thousands of small cases across the country, instead of the huge cases that affect EVERY citizen?


Have you paid attention to anything the government has ever been in charge of? They pick their battles. A large corporation can afford to litigate, and will simply on the premise of litigating. Institutions like the IRS intimidate individuals and small companies while being almost powerless against larger corporations. Large corporations generate billions in revenue for the government, and the combined effect of litigation and reduced tax revenue (due to changes in business practice) would end up reducing government revenue substantially.

Besides - we've already covered the issues of oil futures - which are the primary issue that affects all citizens.


Actually youre probably right, because if the law got passed, the companies would probably just pay for republicans to fill the oversight positions.


Could you possibly tint your glasses any further?

In general, the oil companies are just that - oil companies. They are so consumed with their normal day-to-day operations that they don't have the time or resources to participate in gouging schemes. Take up a factory job like a real blue-collar worker and you'll quickly see how there isn't time in the day for managers and executives to plan that far a.. They are constantly running around and cleaning up after mistakes, trying to get a stalled line back up and running before GM starts calling and asking for parts, dealing with "oh #" scenarios, etc. Factory managers and executives have the best stories at the dinner table dealing with what went wrong and how it was eventually solved.

The gouging is in oil futures. People buy oil on paper (as I would buy stock in a company) and hold on to it until the price rose to a favorable amount. Third parties. That wasn't "big oil" - "big oil" doesn't profit from oil futures - people buy them when oil is lower in price and sell them for a profit that the oil companies never see.


And the most ridiculous things I have read on this thread regard the Bush administration - it was a widely known and reported fact, here in america and around the world, even pre-bush presidency that he was a "texas oil man", and would be favorable to Big Oil. The only place I see this disputed is here (and other oil threads!).


You don't come from a powerful lineage like the Bush family and not have associations with large corporations - including oil companies. Just like many in my family have associations with metallurgical industries in this region - you don't come from my family and not have those ties to that industry that started back when my family first got here from Germany.

Bush was favorable to business, in general. His policies were not always the best, but they were certainly not the worst. Someone who demonizes corporations, such as yourself, would never see an "understanding" of business as good - but as corrupt and evil.

The rest of us realized that corporations make stuff and provide jobs. They aren't Mother Theresa, but they aren't demonic, either. They are another entity that provides a necessary function within society - just as government does.



posted on Nov, 12 2010 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by abecedarian
 


Check the date of the post. The prices WERE that high.



posted on Nov, 12 2010 @ 06:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aim64C
reply to post by aching_knuckles
 


And, just so you know - that tax gets passed on to you; taxes are an operating cost, not a penalty - increasing taxes increases operating cost and results in higher prices for you. This is not rocket science.

........................................

Yes, the moment you fill out an employment form with a corporation you immediately lose all sense of self following installation of the "corporate drone" device. Everyone in the company only sees numbers and profits and neglects all concepts of responsibility.


Your sarcastic second quote seems to belie your first quote. If they did feel any responsibility toward people, maybe the taxes wouldnt be passed on to us, maybe they could fleece us a little less, take a little less profit, no? Why do profits have to increase every single quarter, do you see how that is not sustainable?

So which is it, is it only about the bottom line and numbers, or do they throw us poor plebes a bone? They stick the knife in further, then twist. Its been proven over, and over, and over again.



posted on Nov, 12 2010 @ 06:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aim64C
reply to post by aching_knuckles
 



Yeh, exactly, within the US. Yknow, companies like BP that are basically running roughshod over our country, basically for free.


Free, huh? wiki.answers.com...

www.bp.com...

- From the last link:


The effective tax rate on replacement cost profit or loss for the third quarter and nine months was -16% and 33% respectively, compared with 29% and 33% a year ago. The effective tax rates for 2010 were impacted by the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, resulting in a particularly unusual rate for the third quarter. Excluding these impacts, the effective tax rate for the third quarter was 25% and for the nine months was 31%. The full-year effective tax rate, excluding the impact of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, is expected to be around 31%.



That interesting you decide to use that as an example, which shows third quarter, they have a negative tax rate due to a loss, not a profit that quarter, so technically, according to BPs own charts, they werent taxed in the third quarter??!

Still, if a company makes THIRTEEN BILLION a YEAR exploiting our resources, Im of the opinion that they can give up a third of that for the common good of the people that they are gouging daily, dont you?



posted on Nov, 12 2010 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aim64C
reply to post by aching_knuckles

Someone who demonizes corporations, such as yourself, would never see an "understanding" of business as good - but as corrupt and evil.

The rest of us realized that corporations make stuff and provide jobs. They aren't Mother Theresa, but they aren't demonic, either. They are another entity that provides a necessary function within society - just as government does.


Nice attempt to try and smear me as some sort of crazy loon. Corporations provide jobs? In case you havent noticed, now might not be the best time to try and push that argument....



posted on Nov, 12 2010 @ 07:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by ..5..
reply to post by abecedarian
 


Check the date of the post. The prices WERE that high.


No they weren't. The highest 'average' price was 4.61 per gallon and considering in LA premium is rarely more than 30 cents more expensive than unleaded regular, that average would put premium at 4.75 to 4.80.

I currently live, and at the time worked around the Los Angeles area up to Monterey. The only time gas was even near 5 per gallon was paying full service on a credit card.



posted on Nov, 12 2010 @ 07:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by just great

There have been some recent attempts to blame democrats for the high gas prices.
I have also read here that the Democrats have achieved next to nothing in these past two years. Well here is an example of the democrats trying to address the gas pricing
issue -

This bill would have allowed an investigation to address , questionable market influence , supply and demand, Tax sheltering and the whole nine yards...
All but 6 of our red friends voted against everyone with a car that is not a billionaire!

This bill was an attempt to remedy the current prices - this bill was an attempt to
protect the AMERICAN CITIZEN against the current profiteering that is running rampant.
Republican and Democrat would have benefited from this in the long run. I must mention this bill was not an attempt to , socialize or heavily regulate. This bill was
the only official way to address the issue of possible(red), probable (blue) ENRON Style
wrong doing's - todays prices are $5.13 for premium in Los Angeles.

Unfortunately Senator Obama was elsewhere and Mccain voted NAY -


Official: A bill to provide energy price relief and hold oil companies and other entities accountable for their actions with regard to high energy prices, and for other purposes. as introduced.
Short: Petroleum Consumer Price Gouging Protection Act as introduced.
Short: NOPEC as introduced.
Short: No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels Act of 2008 as introduced.
Short: Consumer-First Energy Act of 2008 as introduced.

This BILL had 0 AMENDMENTS

I will provide a link to the votes -

www.senate.gov...

I have been dredging the votes since 06 and this a very common political tactic to
point to Democratic inaction. I have done some very rough math and I think the independently minded person would see a clear trend of blocking by wasting time
with open debate. If you don't believe me that is fine, however don't be blind and ignorant just because of your party affiliation. Check out senate.gov and see where the time and energy is going.

Also I have provided a link to a video with the big five OIL Senate Judiciary Cmte. hearing on Rising Crude Oil Prices.

I remember tuning in on cspan to watch this,,, You will be amazed to hear what comes from mouth of John Hofmeister, president and U.S. country chairman, Shell Oil Co( the only honest one of the five) -
paraphrased - he said that if you take out the market speculation and the geo political
concerns that oil can (without speculation) be produced, shipped at about 40 - 60 dollars a barrel -

all the other members cited 130 - 170 a barrel !

bottom video of the four

www.c-span.org...

This video is over three hours but maybe some of you would like to see these men
you defend (free market ).
understand the issue a little better...

In closing I remember the CA energy crisis horse crap, FOX NEWS took the same stance with that issue as well. Do your own research and you might find that this is not magic, rather it is strategic, intentional requiring some level of blocking at the political level.

Heres the eight year gas trend -thanks GW

www.swivel.com...

Fire Away Wood shacks

P.S gov. Wallace Was a democrat -- you got me




I got two sentences into your post, before being compelled to reply.

You do in fact realize it was the Democrats wanting to add even higher tax prices to oil barrels?

Just saying...

This is the usual tactics used by BOTH parties, once one is removed from the majority they attempt to push through a bill they know hasn't got a chance and they themselves don't want passed, but they do it anyways HOPING people like you, will see it and think they are something they aren't.

Both parties are responsible for what the United States is currently in, they are both as much to blame as you or me, for voting those idiots into another term.

Don't be a sheep and pick a side, remain independent and vote for those you agree with, I don't understand the moronic actions of some, who bitch and moan over where America is .ed, yet THEY'RE the ones to blame.


edit on 12-11-2010 by Gakus because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2010 @ 07:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gakus
I got two sentences into your post, before being compelled to reply.

You do in fact realize it was the Democrats wanting to add even higher tax prices to oil barrels?

Just saying...



You're not the first to point that out.

edit on 11/12/2010 by abecedarian because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2010 @ 08:58 PM
link   
reply to post by aching_knuckles
 



Your sarcastic second quote seems to belie your first quote. If they did feel any responsibility toward people, maybe the taxes wouldnt be passed on to us, maybe they could fleece us a little less, take a little less profit, no? Why do profits have to increase every single quarter, do you see how that is not sustainable?


Taxes on corporations exceed standard profit margins. Highly competitive markets usually only see about 2-3% profit. Raising the tax even 1-2% would require repricing to make the business worth operating. Lesser competitive markets make about as high as 5% profit, and only the most powerful market influences with government regulations preventing practical start-up competition can achieve 10% profit margins.

With taxes as high as 33% in the case of oil - it is impossible to increase taxes without increasing operating costs and therefor increasing the price of the product. In highly competitive markets, businesses are already running as lean as possible making products as cost-effectively as they can while competing with market prices and turning a profit worth the risk and trouble of operation.

As for profits, they do not "increase each quarter" - while exact profit margins are impossible to predict or control (even for the business), profit margins will fluctuate by a point or so, depending upon market activity.

Example - a restaurant has employees that will work regardless of how many customers are present. The plate of food still costs the same. If a restaurant has an unusually busy quarter/year, profits will be up, as operating expenses will not have changed and material costs are generally proportional to the business demand (and factored into the price of each meal). Each meal may cost only 20-30% of what you pay for it, but your meal also pays for the employees, the food in stock that is purchased in advanced and must be refreshed if it is not used, the cost of operating the restaurant, etc. The actual end-quarter profits will hinge greatly on how many customers that business had that quarter. Negative profits are not uncommon. Some businesses hinge most of their financial activity on a time frame of a few weeks or months.

Since businesses cannot forecast profits, they just pass the tax on to the customer to ensure they can continue operating. It would be irresponsible for them to not adjust their prices accordingly - particularly large businesses that supply goods and services essential to a large number of people. To not pass the tax on to the customer jeopardizes the future of the business - and all who depend on it for employment and for resources.


So which is it, is it only about the bottom line and numbers, or do they throw us poor plebes a bone? They stick the knife in further, then twist. Its been proven over, and over, and over again.


Strange concept of proof that you have.

Your whole point, though, originally hinged around the BP oil spill and how they were not obligated to be there to clean it up. Yet, they were, and they have paid for it (though they are trying to write it off on their taxes - that is also a logical and responsible business move; if you have a problem with it, blame the entire tax system that allows people to write off expenses).

Now - you can look at it two ways - BP did the correct thing and cleaned up the oil spill that was the fault of a oil rig they were contracting oil from (it wasn't even their rig). Tax incentives were put in place to make it more enticing for companies to do things that the government would otherwise have to spend money on, and are charitable/responsible in nature. BP did that - and before you get all up in a bunch about wanting to write off the expense from their taxes, remember that it is that reason, exactly, why the tax write-off was created. And whining about how they shouldn't get a write-off (I know you will) undermines the entire tax write-off system, making it invalid as it becomes another tool of political favoritism.


That interesting you decide to use that as an example, which shows third quarter, they have a negative tax rate due to a loss, not a profit that quarter, so technically, according to BPs own charts, they werent taxed in the third quarter??!


You really have no clue what you are talking about.

A business is taxed on its revenue, not just its profit. Further - there are taxes on every piece of equipment they buy, every material they consume in operation, etc.

When an effective tax rate is quoted, it usually is total taxes paid versus total business revenue (after deductions and write-offs). Effective tax rate for the nine month period quoted was 33%. It doesn't matter if the company was in the black or in the red.


Still, if a company makes THIRTEEN BILLION a YEAR exploiting our resources, Im of the opinion that they can give up a third of that for the common good of the people that they are gouging daily, dont you?


Why don't they give all but a few thousand of it!? I mean... you can't REALLY need that much extra money, can you!?

Why not instate a per-capita limit on profit - no more than $500 profit per employee... the rest goes to the government.

You nor I are in a position to determine what profit is made and what profit isn't. Additionally, that's not 13 billion a year in profit. That's 13 billion in total cash flow. Most of that gets fed back into operating costs (paying employees), maintenance costs, contracts (tankers), etc.


Nice attempt to try and smear me as some sort of crazy loon. Corporations provide jobs? In case you havent noticed, now might not be the best time to try and push that argument....


That's fine - you're more than welcome to kick the corporations out of your state and send them here. We'll get the taxes from their operation and the jobs they bring.

Corporations provide jobs. They may not provide as many as you would want when the economy is in the crapper - but, unlike the government, businesses have more concrete indicators of when they are spending themselves into oblivion at an unsustainable rate.

A business has the instinct to survive. A government has the instinct to control. The two are, often, mutually exclusive.



posted on Nov, 12 2010 @ 11:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by abecedarian

Originally posted by Gakus
I got two sentences into your post, before being compelled to reply.

You do in fact realize it was the Democrats wanting to add even higher tax prices to oil barrels?

Just saying...



You're not the first to point that out.

edit on 11/12/2010 by abecedarian because: (no reason given)


Do you realize this was prompted in large part to testimony of market making, which likely produced prices far higher than any tax would have at the time. Do you realize that the Barrels were being inflated up well above the
typical mark up at the time??? Like $50.00 over an already profitable mark up, to the market place.

Ultimately I think the real question is do you care???

I think I know the answer



posted on Nov, 13 2010 @ 12:01 AM
link   
reply to post by abecedarian
 


I lve in LA also and they 'were' that high. I think you are blocking it out as most people do with painful memories.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 09:07 PM
link   
2011

GOP back in power

Look at prices


my retarded friends are endlessly retarded

you people in the future can witness our countries stupidity, hopefully safe from the stupidity of our historical footprint...

People now, could not even correlate a basic cause and effect -

then they employ these fantastic explanations to justify their insane desire to perpetuate horrible ideas
regarding "FREEDOM" - the freedom to rob all is covered by the idea, they need more freedom to rob more from us.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 10:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Janky Red
 


We've only been talking about the devaluation of currency through policy for 3 years...

Has nothing to do with that...No, GOP is in power, that HAS TO be it.



Let's look at the Fed shall we? Let's look at organizations like the SEC who give waivers and write rules favoring this sort of market distortion instead of politicizing this. There's no liberal of conservative way of fixing the economy, there is what works and what doesn't. Just like fixing a car.

We can opine about academic economic theory all we want, but at the end of the day, the actions of markets prove the ineptitude of governments to control the minute machinations of market forces.

It's like trying to actively control nature.



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by Janky Red
 


We've only been talking about the devaluation of currency through policy for 3 years...

Has nothing to do with that...No, GOP is in power, that HAS TO be it.



Let's look at the Fed shall we? Let's look at organizations like the SEC who give waivers and write rules favoring this sort of market distortion instead of politicizing this. There's no liberal of conservative way of fixing the economy, there is what works and what doesn't. Just like fixing a car.

We can opine about academic economic theory all we want, but at the end of the day, the actions of markets prove the ineptitude of governments to control the minute machinations of market forces.

It's like trying to actively control nature.




No lets look at oil


An lets imagine or federal employees are or only as good as their personal ideas... Do you think Ayn Rand would
execute her job well if that was her job was to regulate???

The two things you are stating are separate markets, oil is not dominated solely by the US or the FED for that matter.

It is NOT an accident that the most ENERGY connected White House oversaw the most overly inflated prices in
U.S history. The GOP does NOT care about energy prices, they care about getting more money circulating and going into the producers pockets, that is nothing to shy away from if you dig the implications of such. The GOP
will not ever investigate prices because that is what they want.You paying $4.00 for gas instead of $2.50
is a sign the GOP is doing the right thing... You are pumping out more money to be spent on hiring, bonuses and investment. It is built into the idealism, it fights entitlements and beats back social things. The sad part is you and I have to pay for this healthy economy. What GOP and ideology misses in this case is this money does not benefit our economy, it goes over sees or towards the second economy. Oil is not unique and it is not a luxury,
therefore markets cannot be kept in check by consumers as the good book suggests. Consumers have very little choice in wether or not they want to use petroleum.



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 01:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Janky Red
 


What monetary metric is used to price oil?

What US regulatory agency relaxed the rules for oil speculation?

What effect do you think the FEDs QE1 and 2 policy will have on the monetary metric
that prices oil?

If anything both parties are to blame for spiking oil prices and for letting the FED and arbitrary regulatory institutions makes up the rules as they go along. Not to mention monetary debasement.



posted on Sep, 17 2011 @ 11:50 AM
link   
Three years later and Americans have been gouged out of??? A Trillion dollars? More?

We learn the truth, the attempts to investigate and address oil speculation were based
in sound principles.
We find out that the GOP and these citizens here on ATS fought for the entities that literally

ripped them off relentlessly.

GOP IS FOR CORPORATIONS FIRST



They are worried about their money, unless it is taken by a company with a logo.


edit on 17-9-2011 by Janky Red because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2011 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by just great

There have been some recent attempts to blame democrats for the high gas prices.
I have also read here that the Democrats have achieved next to nothing in these past two years. Well here is an example of the democrats trying to address the gas pricing
issue -

This bill would have allowed an investigation to address , questionable market influence , supply and demand, Tax sheltering and the whole nine yards...
All but 6 of our red friends voted against everyone with a car that is not a billionaire!

This bill was an attempt to remedy the current prices - this bill was an attempt to
protect the AMERICAN CITIZEN against the current profiteering that is running rampant.
Republican and Democrat would have benefited from this in the long run. I must mention this bill was not an attempt to , socialize or heavily regulate. This bill was
the only official way to address the issue of possible(red), probable (blue) ENRON Style
wrong doing's - todays prices are $5.13 for premium in Los Angeles.

Unfortunately Senator Obama was elsewhere and Mccain voted NAY -


Official: A bill to provide energy price relief and hold oil companies and other entities accountable for their actions with regard to high energy prices, and for other purposes. as introduced.
Short: Petroleum Consumer Price Gouging Protection Act as introduced.
Short: NOPEC as introduced.
Short: No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels Act of 2008 as introduced.
Short: Consumer-First Energy Act of 2008 as introduced.

This BILL had 0 AMENDMENTS

I will provide a link to the votes -

www.senate.gov...

I have been dredging the votes since 06 and this a very common political tactic to
point to Democratic inaction. I have done some very rough math and I think the independently minded person would see a clear trend of blocking by wasting time
with open debate. If you don't believe me that is fine, however don't be blind and ignorant just because of your party affiliation. Check out senate.gov and see where the time and energy is going.

Also I have provided a link to a video with the big five OIL Senate Judiciary Cmte. hearing on Rising Crude Oil Prices.

I remember tuning in on cspan to watch this,,, You will be amazed to hear what comes from mouth of John Hofmeister, president and U.S. country chairman, Shell Oil Co( the only honest one of the five) -
paraphrased - he said that if you take out the market speculation and the geo political
concerns that oil can (without speculation) be produced, shipped at about 40 - 60 dollars a barrel -

all the other members cited 130 - 170 a barrel !

bottom video of the four

www.c-span.org...

This video is over three hours but maybe some of you would like to see these men
you defend (free market ).
understand the issue a little better...

In closing I remember the CA energy crisis horse crap, FOX NEWS took the same stance with that issue as well. Do your own research and you might find that this is not magic, rather it is strategic, intentional requiring some level of blocking at the political level.

Heres the eight year gas trend -thanks GW

www.swivel.com...

Fire Away Wood shacks

P.S gov. Wallace Was a democrat -- you got me





posted on Sep, 17 2011 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by Janky Red
 


What monetary metric is used to price oil?

What US regulatory agency relaxed the rules for oil speculation?

What effect do you think the FEDs QE1 and 2 policy will have on the monetary metric
that prices oil?

If anything both parties are to blame for spiking oil prices and for letting the FED and arbitrary regulatory institutions makes up the rules as they go along. Not to mention monetary debasement.





How did you like paying $20-$40 extra for a tank for a gambling scam?





edit on 17-9-2011 by Janky Red because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join