Oil Companies Defend Profits To Congress

[Zoomie1980]

WOW! That's enough to make me want to puke... It does make sense to me that just printing more money to cover Congress's Deficit and the President's Budget would devalue the Dollar... ty for explaining this!

Why did they take this stance though, the administration and Congress?

Why would tax cuts be issued during a time of overspending and war when this just leads to "printing more money" or devalueing the dollar?

Doesn't it turn out that NONE OF US got tax cuts at all....because the Dollar isn't worth a poopie now with their actions of overspending, thus reducing our buying power from what it was prior to the tax cuts? (Speaking of the middle class right now, not necessarily the wealthiest, because they have an easier ability to invest in other currency and gold, where the middle class Joe, usually doesn't and is usually not as balanced with their savings and investments, or in many cases, don't have any savings/investments AT ALL...yikes!)

Pushing tax cuts while not reducing the spending seems to be where this ENTIRE dollar devaluation begins...no?

Though, not really understanding it, I did hear that our Dollar policies/trade policies with China are causing some of this....can you explain that to me?

Care

No, the "Bush Tax Cuts" have nothing directly to do with the devaluation of the dollar. It has a lot to do with credit crisis mostly caused by the collapsing valuation of the backing collateral of all these loans, home values. Even with the Bush tax cuts the top 1%, 5% and 10% of all income earners are paying the highest percentage of federal taxes than at any time in history. So anyone that thinks the "rich" got "richer" BECAUSE of the tax cuts, simply is ignoring fact.

The Fed, essentially "printing more money" to cover liquidity issues has been at the core of the devaulation. Basically the frantic cutting of the discount rate kind of screwed us all in the end of things. They should have just let the economy seeks it's own bottom on it's own.

That's the thing about government, in general. Anytime it gets involved in anything at all outside of what it does well (the Military, the transportation infrastructure and small number of other things), it cocks things up royally.

The government CANNOT SOLVE YOUR PROBLEM. Now that....you can actually TAKE TO THE BANK.

 

[Toro]

The foreign capital markets most definitely believe that the Bush tax cuts contributed to falling dollar. Widening deficits are inflationary. I was in buying wheelbarrows full of gold stocks the day after the GOP won the 2002 Congressional election.

However, the primary culprit IMHO is the Fed, though Wall Street is also culpable, since it is the Fed through the financial system which gunned the money supply.

 

[Zoomie1980]

WOW! That's enough to make me want to puke... It does make sense to me that just printing more money to cover Congress's Deficit and the President's Budget would devalue the Dollar... ty for explaining this!

Why did they take this stance though, the administration and Congress?

Why would tax cuts be issued during a time of overspending and war when this just leads to "printing more money" or devalueing the dollar?

Doesn't it turn out that NONE OF US got tax cuts at all....because the Dollar isn't worth a poopie now with their actions of overspending, thus reducing our buying power from what it was prior to the tax cuts? (Speaking of the middle class right now, not necessarily the wealthiest, because they have an easier ability to invest in other currency and gold, where the middle class Joe, usually doesn't and is usually not as balanced with their savings and investments, or in many cases, don't have any savings/investments AT ALL...yikes!)

Pushing tax cuts while not reducing the spending seems to be where this ENTIRE dollar devaluation begins...no?

Though, not really understanding it, I did hear that our Dollar policies/trade policies with China are causing some of this....can you explain that to me?

Care

And to a point...cutting taxes usually puts more money into the economy by leaving it in the hand of the consumer who will usually spend it, thus increasing corporate income, causing corporations to grow, meaning more hiring, higher demand for limited labor, higher wages, higher income, more income tax collected, more sales tax at the state level, more gov't revenue, etc... All the records for tax revenue have come about AFTER the Bush tax cuts.

Now all that works fine when the economy is going well. Tax revenue is really affected by economic level much more than it is by increasing or decreasing marginal tax rates 2 or 3% or so. It's kind of like the climate, man has an effect but it pales in comparison to variation in Solar output.

Tax rates of 0% and 100% have EXACTLY the same result....ZERO revenue. The trick is maximizing...finding that magic number. We are pretty close where we are at, probably within a few percentage points. And the middle class is virtually UNTAXED these days...

 

[Care4all]

And to a point...cutting taxes usually puts more money into the economy by leaving it in the hand of the consumer who will usually spend it, thus increasing corporate income, causing corporations to grow, meaning more hiring, higher demand for limited labor, higher wages, higher income, more income tax collected, more sales tax at the state level, more gov't revenue, etc... All the records for tax revenue have come about AFTER the Bush tax cuts.

Now all that works fine when the economy is going well. Tax revenue is really affected by economic level much more than it is by increasing or decreasing marginal tax rates 2 or 3% or so. It's kind of like the climate, man has an effect but it pales in comparison to variation in Solar output.

Tax rates of 0% and 100% have EXACTLY the same result....ZERO revenue. The trick is maximizing...finding that magic number. We are pretty close where we are at, probably within a few percentage points. And the middle class is virtually UNTAXED these days...

I Understand that IN GENERAL tax cuts work to bring in more taxes....but what good are these tax cuts in dollar values, if all the money to give them had to be borrowed from the Chinese, Japanese, and Saudi Arabians, or if we had to just print money, raise our debt level?


I am saying that if printing money/(over spending) reduces the value of the dollar, then it is possible that these tax cuts we got are not worth the paper they are on....because the money we got to retain is not worth what it was when we were giving it to the gvt...due to the devaluation?

Tax cuts are bad if they do not have corresponding spending cuts...at this point in the game, because we are approaching the time for the federal revenues to pay back the social security trust funds that it spent and borrowed.

Tax cuts without fiscal responsibility just puts us MORE IN DEBT....

Right now we are spending about $300 BILLION a year on just paying the "interest payment" on the debt....not even reducing it....

That $300 billion is a HUGE number to me....going to the chinese, etc...FOR NOTHING..... that $300 Billion a year...would pay for an aweful lot, here in America.....or be a nice tax cut for all of us if we did not have to pay it....

As far as your comment regarding the middle class not paying any taxes....

I'm sorry to be rude on this one , but WHAT PLANET DO YOU LIVE ON?????

My husband and I pay nearly 50% of what we earn in TOTAL taxes....and we are middle class.... you are only speaking of income tax I would suppose, but WHY? Income taxes are NOTHING compared to all the other taxes we pay at federal and state levels!!!

And the middle class does pay income taxes too....so where that comment came from was LEFT FIELD!!! hahahahaha.....at least to me!!!!

care

 

[BaronVonBigmeat]

America has always taken a stance of keeping a strong Dollar, up until this administration....

Maybe you're talking about the administration of Woodrow Wilson? The dollar has been in decline, with only a few brief pauses here and there, since the founding of the federal reserve in 1913.

 

[Bern80]

I know you're not talking about ANWR.

It's not like ANWR would make us oil-independent. What's estimated to be there would supply 5% of our consumption for 12 years on the low end of the estimates, and 32 on the absolute highest estimate. Take the mean, and you got about 22 years. But that's only 5%. I'd like to drill ANWR, but it's certainly not going to change THAT much, and then what do we do when it's used up? It's not like we're actively seeking alternatives.

We're not seeking alternatives? How many hybrids were there 10 years ago? How many ethanol cars were there 10 years ago? How many hydrogen cars were there 10 years ago? What a crock.

 

[Bern80]

Drilling ANWR would only kill natural area without adding anything of substance to our oil independence. The right loves it b/c it sets a precedent for the way oil companies can treat our environment.

Yes because hurting the environment is right at the top of our agenda. Get real for second will ya. We want to drill because it makes us less dependent and would drive prices down. Not quite as nefarious as you're skewed view I'm afraid.

 

[jillian]

Yes because hurting the environment is right at the top of our agenda. Get real for second will ya. We want to drill because it makes us less dependent and would drive prices down. Not quite as nefarious as you're skewed view I'm afraid.

Actually, that's untrue. Andit is nefarious because the intent is to make such untouched places "touchable". They'll have a precedent to say, "see, it's not sacrosanct".

Saying otherwise is disingenuous. And it's your view that's skewed.

 

[Bern80]

Not a lot of work up in Alaska maybe... ANWR would be a shot in the arm economically. But that's not a good enough reason to destroy it.

What reasonable research has lead you to believe we would be destroying this huge reserve. Alaska is roughly two thirds the size of the entire continental U.S. We're talking about an area the size of Massachusettes maybe. That on top of the fact that believe it or not even the only industry has gotten greener technology wise, there simply woudn't this ecological travesty you envision. One could argue it would actually help the wildlife. You're avg. Caribou is smart enough to go to where it's warm (the Alaskan pipeline).

 

[Bern80]

Actually, that's untrue. Andit is nefarious because the intent is to make such untouched places "touchable". They'll have a precedent to say, "see, it's not sacrosanct".

Saying otherwise is disingenuous. And it's your view that's skewed.

So the right is so stupid that we're going to drill oil not for the sack of oil but just to set a precedent? Go join eots in the tin-foil hat club.

Yes you're vision is skewed. The right is not some secret evil organization with aspirations of world domination. We just have different and often better ways of solving problems than you do. Oil being the perfect example. an obvious solution is to become less dependent on others for oil by finding our own. But what's the left's plan. Poor subsidies into an even less efficient fuel that at the some time REDUCES OUR FOOD SUPPLY. Bravo.

 

[jillian]

So the right is so stupid that we're going to drill oil not for the sack of oil but just to set a precedent? Go join eots in the tin-foil hat club.

Yes you're vision is skewed. The right is not some secret evil organization with aspirations of world domination. We just have different and often better ways of solving problems than you do. Oil being the perfect example. an obvious solution is to become less dependent on others for oil by finding our own. But what's the left's plan. Poor subsidies into an even less efficient fuel that at the some time REDUCES OUR FOOD SUPPLY. Bravo.

actually...yes... because ANWAR doesn't give us much in the way of oil reserves...it's not like it would make us independent from foreign oil.

what we need to really do is fund alternative energies. there's been nothing of any real advancement over the last 7 years... and that'swhat happens when the VP creates energy policy with the heads of the oil companies and/or their lobbyists. (I'd be more specific about whom, but Cheney gave us the finger when asked who created those policies).

 

[Care4all]

Maybe you're talking about the administration of Woodrow Wilson? The dollar has been in decline, with only a few brief pauses here and there, since the founding of the federal reserve in 1913.

if it was so weak previously then the 50% drop in value these past few years must have put us in the toilet?


care

 

[BaronVonBigmeat]

what we need to really do is fund alternative energies. there's been nothing of any real advancement over the last 7 years...

Actually the big surprise story of the last 7 years has been the radical leap forward in lithium battery technology, which has thankfully put most of the daydreaming about hydrogen to rest. (hydrogen is/was a boondoggle scam to benefit natural gas companies, just like ethanol was for corn congolmerates like Archer Daniel Midlands)

In 2~3 years, Toyota and GM will both have cars capable of traveling up to 40 miles before the generator turns on. For many people, this will mean weeks or even months between fillups.

 

[Zoomie1980]

It's almost enough to warm me to the idea of socializing the oil/fuel industry.

Their ROI is LESS than the car manufactures and still LOW in comparison with almost all other industries. They are simply very large companies. For every $1.00 Exxon invests in drilling they get $.80 back.....some business. And for the past 30 years they mostly LOST money. Where were you feeling sorry for them all in the 1990's when they were losing their collective asses???

 

[Zoomie1980]

I Understand that IN GENERAL tax cuts work to bring in more taxes....but what good are these tax cuts in dollar values, if all the money to give them had to be borrowed from the Chinese, Japanese, and Saudi Arabians, or if we had to just print money, raise our debt level?


I am saying that if printing money/(over spending) reduces the value of the dollar, then it is possible that these tax cuts we got are not worth the paper they are on....because the money we got to retain is not worth what it was when we were giving it to the gvt...due to the devaluation?

Tax cuts are bad if they do not have corresponding spending cuts...at this point in the game, because we are approaching the time for the federal revenues to pay back the social security trust funds that it spent and borrowed.

Tax cuts without fiscal responsibility just puts us MORE IN DEBT....

Right now we are spending about $300 BILLION a year on just paying the "interest payment" on the debt....not even reducing it....

That $300 billion is a HUGE number to me....going to the chinese, etc...FOR NOTHING..... that $300 Billion a year...would pay for an aweful lot, here in America.....or be a nice tax cut for all of us if we did not have to pay it....

As far as your comment regarding the middle class not paying any taxes....

I'm sorry to be rude on this one , but WHAT PLANET DO YOU LIVE ON?????

My husband and I pay nearly 50% of what we earn in TOTAL taxes....and we are middle class.... you are only speaking of income tax I would suppose, but WHY? Income taxes are NOTHING compared to all the other taxes we pay at federal and state levels!!!

And the middle class does pay income taxes too....so where that comment came from was LEFT FIELD!!! hahahahaha.....at least to me!!!!

care

The top 1% pay 38% of ALL federal taxes, income and otherwise. The top 5% pay 57%, the top 10% pay 70%. The group BELOW 50% pay 3%!!! The "middle class" that between 25-75% pay a total of about 15% of ALL taxes. So why you may "think" you pay a lot, you don't. I'm pretty sure I pay more taxes than many that post here make in salary, and I don't make that much....and am NOT "rich" by any means.... By that, I mean I could not afford to pay cash for my kids' college....I had to borrow. I can't afford to pay cash for my modest house in Iowa. But I pay over $40,000 in federal taxes alone (doesn';t even count state sales and gas taxes).

 

[Toro]

actually...yes... because ANWAR doesn't give us much in the way of oil reserves...it's not like it would make us independent from foreign oil.

I have no problem with drilling in ANWR, but this is correct. At full bore, ANWR would add about 300,000 barrels of oil a day to US supply whereas we import about 8 million.