wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <jflanegi@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "jyouells2000" <jyouells@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected], anon_couscous_ff <no_reply@>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In [email protected], "jyouells2000" <jyouells@>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In [email protected], MDixon6569@ wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In a message dated 4/23/06 5:07:29 P.M. Central Daylight
> > Time,
> > > > > > noozguru@ writes:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I would like to see a windfall profits tax on the oil
> > > companies. I
> > > > > > don't mind the price of gas going up if it is from taxes to
> > > improve
> > > > > > roadways, bridges and make mass transit more ubiquitous.
> > And
> > > those
> > > > > > taxes should not be golden goose for gouging contractors
> > either and
> > > > > they
> > > > > > should ONLY be used for transportation projects. The
> > scariest
> > > > > thing is
> > > > > > to see some mindless woman aiming her Ford Expedition or
> > Lincoln
> > > > > > Navigator while blathering on her cellphone. I think we
> > should
> > > make
> > > > > > thought vehicles require truck licensing and take away the
> > tax
> > > > > break on
> > > > > > them.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Don't you think we have enough tax on gasoline? The
> > government
> > > > > makes more
> > > > > > off a gallon of gas than the oil companies do and they have
> > no
> > > > > investment. The
> > > > > > last I heard the government makes about 50 cents a gallon
> > and the
> > > > > petroleum
> > > > > > companies 7 to 8 cents. Actually I would rather hear the oil
> > > > > companies side of
> > > > > > the story as to why prices are up instead of the usual
> > accusations
> > > > > that they
> > > > > > are gouging without any proof. Surely the truth lies
> > somewhere in
> > > > > the middle.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > About a month ago I heard that total tax on a gallon was
> > $0.67. Ouch
> > > > > Lots of money....
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > JohnY
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Its quite low, huh. If congress and the admin had been far
> > sighted and
> > > > had some courage 10-20 years ago -- best yet 30 years ago during
> > the
> > > > first oil crises, and added an annual cumulative 10-20 cent tax
> > on gas
> > > > (all BTUs actually) and plowed the full tax revenues back into
> > > > aggressive incentives for more far more efficient cars, different
> > > > types of engines (natural gas, electric, hybrid) as well as
> > doing far
> > > > more to jump start solar and wind, etc, demand for gas would
> > have
> > > > gone way down, total prices would have fallen (at least relative
> > to
> > > > their actual trend), total gas bills would have decreased (50%
> > use x
> > > > reduced oil price + tax), arab sponsored terrorism would have
> > been
> > > > funded far less, the air would be cleaner, greenhouse gas buildup
> > > > would be far less, GNP would be growing faster, and the reveneus
> > we
> > > > see now going to oil companies oil lease holders would be far
> > less,
> > > > defense spending would have been far less (to keep oil lanes
> > open,
> > > > oil sponsored terrorists at bay, and the US rep around the world
> > would
> > > > have been far more friendly -- for not beefing up oil patrons,
> > > > invading oil countries,etc.
> > > >
> > > Gov't is not that farsighted, it tends toward selfish-interest ...
> > > capitalism might do it, if the price keeps climbing.
> > >
> > > JohnY
> > > ps. pundits won't do it either...
> > >
> > Speaking of record profits by the oil companies, I researched this
> > recently and found out that it now costs the oil companies about
> > $1.50 to make, market and sell a gallon of gas. Add the US tax to
> > that and total equals ~$2.25, total. the rest is pure ,er, gravy...
>
> well at $3.00 per gallon -- a recent high, it was $2.50 until very
> recently, thats 10-30% operating margins. From this, interest payments
> from debt and amortization of intangibles from acquisitions are paid.
> As are dividends. And taxes (35% of profits). The remander is retained
> (aka retained earnings) to reinvest in more efficient, (including less
> polluting) technologies, exploration for new fields -- usually risky,
> and exploration of new unique (and expesnive) methods like oil shale.
>
> High profits are a good thing. It means more cash that can be
> reinvested in new techology, creating new efficiencies,and raising
> productivity -- which are highly correlated with salary and wage
> increases.
>
> Not excessive across all industries, particularly on a risk adjusted
> basis. (And if not adjusting for risk -- any analysis is deeply
> flawed.) Why don't you complain about the "gravy" in other industries?
> Exxon's recent operating margins were 16%, with net margins of less
> than 11%.
> Apple's recent operating margins were 12%, with net margins of 10%.
>
> And traditionally the oil industry is more risky than highly-branded
> consumer electronics. So it deserves a higher return.
>
> Per the above reasons, I doubt the comprehensiveness of your research.
> Current oil industry margins are not that high.
>
> Regardless, if you feel gouged, buy Valero, Oxy and Exxon. Donate your
> excessive profits to environmental groups if you like.
>
I agree with your analysis. That's what I mean when I say certain
elements of congress are blowing disengenuous smoke. All this for the
people sh*t, when they are just using peoples ignorance for there own
selfish ends.
JohnY
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'
SPONSORED LINKS
| Maharishi university of management | Maharishi mahesh yogi | Ramana maharshi |
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
