[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I love the way people are so angy with the oil companies. I myself think that the oil companies should embark on a campaign of purposely gouging consumers. Let the price go up to $7.00 a gallon! Ha-ha! It will only be then that people will start to use less and dump their gas-guzzling SUVs. And, most importantly, we can get around to developing alternative fuels. Can't do it without the $7.00 a gallon price... D.C. prayer rally to seek lower gas prices WASHINGTON, April 26 (UPI) -- A U.S. Christian group has grown tired of escalating gasoline prices and is set to stage a national prayer rally to lower the numbers at the pumps. Various Christian clergy from around the country will convene around a Washington, D.C., gas station Thursday at noon to pray. For those who can't attend, a live Internet site and toll-free prayer line have been established. In a release, the Pray Live group said many people are overlooking the power of prayer when it comes to resolving this energy crisis. Apart from sending a message to God, the rally had a message for humanity, said Wenda Royster, the group's founder. It is our hope that seeing and hearing some of the nation's most powerful preachers gathered around a gas station and the United States capital as a backdrop, will remind everyone who is really in charge of our world -- God, Royster said. The Web site is at praylive.com. The toll-free phone number is 888- PRAYLIVE. http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/view.php?StoryID=20060426-114223-5447r http://tinyurl.com/o9d3y 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: I love the way people are so angy with the oil companies. I myself think that the oil companies should embark on a campaign of purposely gouging consumers. Let the price go up to $7.00 a gallon! Ha-ha! It will only be then that people will start to use less and dump their gas-guzzling SUVs. And, most importantly, we can get around to developing alternative fuels. Can't do it without the $7.00 a gallon price... D.C. prayer rally to seek lower gas prices WASHINGTON, April 26 (UPI) -- A U.S. Christian group has grown tired of escalating gasoline prices and is set to stage a national prayer rally to lower the numbers at the pumps. Various Christian clergy from around the country will convene around a Washington, D.C., gas station Thursday at noon to pray. For those who can't attend, a live Internet site and toll-free prayer line have been established. In a release, the Pray Live group said many people are overlooking the power of prayer when it comes to resolving this energy crisis. Apart from sending a message to God, the rally had a message for humanity, said Wenda Royster, the group's founder. It is our hope that seeing and hearing some of the nation's most powerful preachers gathered around a gas station and the United States capital as a backdrop, will remind everyone who is really in charge of our world -- God, Royster said. The Web site is at praylive.com. The toll-free phone number is 888- PRAYLIVE. http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/view.php?StoryID=20060426-114223-5447r http://tinyurl.com/o9d3y Sounds like they need some emergency pundits 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: shempmcgurk wrote: [...] Exxon made a profit of $36 billion last year on sales of $328 billion. That's about 11 cents profit on each dollar of revenue...hardly a windfall. So under which circumstances, Bhairitu, would your windfall profits tax kick in??? Another thing: in business an 11% return on your investment would be considered good nowadays. There is a simple rule in business that if you can't make any more money on your investment than just leaving it in a bank it isn't worth doing. And retail profit isn't the same as return on investment. I tried to tell him that very thing and he told me I was wrong. Large grocery stores only make 1% profit on the goods they sell. However, their turnover of inventory is weekly. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: shempmcgurk wrote: I love the way people are so angy with the oil companies. I myself think that the oil companies should embark on a campaign of purposely gouging consumers. Let the price go up to $7.00 a gallon! Ha-ha! It will only be then that people will start to use less and dump their gas-guzzling SUVs. And, most importantly, we can get around to developing alternative fuels. Can't do it without the $7.00 a gallon price... I would like to see a windfall profits tax on the oil companies. Personally, I think a 40% corporate tax rate is windfall enough...FOR THE GOVERNMENT! Exxon made a profit of $36 billion last year on sales of $328 billion. That's about 11 cents profit on each dollar of revenue...hardly a windfall. So under which circumstances, Bhairitu, would your windfall profits tax kick in??? Another thing: in business an 11% return on your investment would be considered good nowadays. There is a simple rule in business that if you can't make any more money on your investment than just leaving it in a bank it isn't worth doing. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: shempmcgurk wrote: I love the way people are so angy with the oil companies. I myself think that the oil companies should embark on a campaign of purposely gouging consumers. Let the price go up to $7.00 a gallon! Ha-ha! It will only be then that people will start to use less and dump their gas-guzzling SUVs. And, most importantly, we can get around to developing alternative fuels. Can't do it without the $7.00 a gallon price... I would like to see a windfall profits tax on the oil companies. Personally, I think a 40% corporate tax rate is windfall enough...FOR THE GOVERNMENT! Exxon made a profit of $36 billion last year on sales of $328 billion. That's about 11 cents profit on each dollar of revenue...hardly a windfall. So under which circumstances, Bhairitu, would your windfall profits tax kick in??? Another thing: in business an 11% return on your investment would be considered good nowadays. There is a simple rule in business that if you can't make any more money on your investment than just leaving it in a bank it isn't worth doing. ...only the 11% we are talking about has nothing to do with Return On Investment. It has to do with margin, which is a percentage of revenue, and has nothing to do with Return On Investment. 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.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: shempmcgurk wrote: I love the way people are so angy with the oil companies. I myself think that the oil companies should embark on a campaign of purposely gouging consumers. Let the price go up to $7.00 a gallon! Ha-ha! It will only be then that people will start to use less and dump their gas-guzzling SUVs. And, most importantly, we can get around to developing alternative fuels. Can't do it without the $7.00 a gallon price... I would like to see a windfall profits tax on the oil companies. Personally, I think a 40% corporate tax rate is windfall enough...FOR THE GOVERNMENT! Exxon made a profit of $36 billion last year on sales of $328 billion. That's about 11 cents profit on each dollar of revenue...hardly a windfall. So under which circumstances, Bhairitu, would your windfall profits tax kick in??? Another thing: in business an 11% return on your investment would be considered good nowadays. There is a simple rule in business that if you can't make any more money on your investment than just leaving it in a bank it isn't worth doing. ...only the 11% we are talking about has nothing to do with Return On Investment. It has to do with margin, which is a percentage of revenue, and has nothing to do with Return On Investment. You're wrong. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 4/23/06 10:39:58 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 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... I don't think they are making .75 cents per gallon. There are different formulas that different counties have to have per EPA and they are more expensive and then you have delivery and retailers cut and I think states even have their own tax. I heard later today it's more like 11 cents a gallon to the oil companies. Exxon made about 11% profit on their revenues...that's what you're probably referring to: http://tinyurl.com/gw3o7 To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote: In a message dated 4/23/06 10:39:58 P.M. Central Daylight Time, jflanegi@ writes: 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... I don't think they are making .75 cents per gallon. There are different formulas that different counties have to have per EPA and they are more expensive and then you have delivery and retailers cut and I think states even have their own tax. I heard later today it's more like 11 cents a gallon to the oil companies. Again, define net profit. See their income statement: http://tinyurl.com/gw3o7 To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anon_couscous_ff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jyouells2000 jyouells@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anon_couscous_ff no_reply@ wrote: The chances of getting an intelligent incentives policy for energy from the gov't is only slightly better than the chances of getting a group of pundits in FF after all the money is collected. The energy market will eventually do it, almost certainly. There are plenty of smart polcy analysts who know and promote such policies. Its the undemocratic nature of the US governemnt (90% of congressional races not competitive, 70% of states in presidential elections not campaigned in significantly) and the high corruption from current campaign financing that is the problem. ...if people keep voting those same 90% into office with all the alleged corruption, wouldn't you say that the people get the government that they deserve? To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anon_couscous_ff no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jyouells2000 jyouells@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anon_couscous_ff no_reply@ wrote: The chances of getting an intelligent incentives policy for energy from the gov't is only slightly better than the chances of getting a group of pundits in FF after all the money is collected. The energy market will eventually do it, almost certainly. There are plenty of smart polcy analysts who know and promote such policies. Its the undemocratic nature of the US governemnt (90% of congressional races not competitive, 70% of states in presidential elections not campaigned in significantly) and the high corruption from current campaign financing that is the problem. ...if people keep voting those same 90% into office with all the alleged corruption, wouldn't you say that the people get the government that they deserve? Like duh, but given the quality of our educational system, what can you expect? To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote: In a message dated 4/23/06 10:39:58 P.M. Central Daylight Time, jflanegi@ writes: 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... I don't think they are making .75 cents per gallon. There are different formulas that different counties have to have per EPA and they are more expensive and then you have delivery and retailers cut and I think states even have their own tax. I heard later today it's more like 11 cents a gallon to the oil companies. Again, define net profit. See their income statement: http://tinyurl.com/gw3o7 Their net income is $36 billion. I can't find any break down of how much they make per barrel or gallon or whatever. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: snip ...if people keep voting those same 90% into office with all the alleged corruption, wouldn't you say that the people get the government that they deserve? Like duh, but given the quality of our educational system, what can you expect? It's not the educational system so much as the media. 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: snip ...if people keep voting those same 90% into office with all the alleged corruption, wouldn't you say that the people get the government that they deserve? Like duh, but given the quality of our educational system, what can you expect? It's not the educational system so much as the media. Given how much time people spend in front of the boob tube, rather than reading, I would say that the media IS the educational system. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote: In a message dated 4/23/06 10:39:58 P.M. Central Daylight Time, jflanegi@ writes: 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... I don't think they are making .75 cents per gallon. There are different formulas that different counties have to have per EPA and they are more expensive and then you have delivery and retailers cut and I think states even have their own tax. I heard later today it's more like 11 cents a gallon to the oil companies. Again, define net profit. See their income statement: http://tinyurl.com/gw3o7 Their net income is $36 billion. I can't find any break down of how much they make per barrel or gallon or whatever. There are 42 U.S. gallons in a barrel of oil. So, at $75.00 a barrel, the oil company is paying $1.79 at the oil well for each gallon of oilBEFORE any refinement costs, transportation costs, retail costs, etc are added on to the price. Oh, yes, and BEFORE any taxes are added to the price as well. See: http://www.lmoga.com/taxrates.htm (andt there may be local taxes added as well). In Arizona there is 36.4 cents taxes (excluding any local taxes, if any) on a gallon of gas. Of course, the income statement probably includes income from other sources, such as investments. But, hey, we aren't concerned about that; even the most jaded anti-oil-company person isn't complaining about how much the oil companies make on NON-oil sales. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: snip ...if people keep voting those same 90% into office with all the alleged corruption, wouldn't you say that the people get the government that they deserve? Like duh, but given the quality of our educational system, what can you expect? It's not the educational system so much as the media. The media? Remember that the media includes the internet and, by definition, this forum. On an almost daily basis, Judy, when you feel a topic is not well- informed you never hesitate to provide a link to an article that you believe provides proper information and knowledge on the subject at hand. And you're unhappy with this system? To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: snip ...if people keep voting those same 90% into office with all the alleged corruption, wouldn't you say that the people get the government that they deserve? Like duh, but given the quality of our educational system, what can you expect? It's not the educational system so much as the media. The media? Remember that the media includes the internet and, by definition, this forum. Well, it does if that's how you define it. I don't. I was referring to the mainstream media, TV and print (which is what people usually mean by the media). On an almost daily basis, Judy, when you feel a topic is not well- informed you never hesitate to provide a link to an article that you believe provides proper information and knowledge on the subject at hand. And you're unhappy with this system? Deeply. The main reason Bush is in office today is because of the so-called liberal media's War Against Gore in 2000 (and to a lesser extent against Kerry in 2004). (You do realize the preface to your question is a complete non sequitur, right?) To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: snip ...if people keep voting those same 90% into office with all the alleged corruption, wouldn't you say that the people get the government that they deserve? Like duh, but given the quality of our educational system, what can you expect? It's not the educational system so much as the media. The media? Remember that the media includes the internet and, by definition, this forum. Well, it does if that's how you define it. I don't. Then you are out of touch with the times. I don't have any poll results or study results to show you but I suspect that a large portion of the US population gets alot of their news from the internet. Speaking for myself, I certainly do. I NEVER practically see network news or read newspapers; rather, most of the news I get is from the internet. Curious that you, who uses the internet and news sources on the internet herself, wouldn't include this most important of all sources in her definition of the media... I was referring to the mainstream media, TV and print (which is what people usually mean by the media). On an almost daily basis, Judy, when you feel a topic is not well- informed you never hesitate to provide a link to an article that you believe provides proper information and knowledge on the subject at hand. And you're unhappy with this system? Deeply. The main reason Bush is in office today is because of the so-called liberal media's War Against Gore in 2000 (and to a lesser extent against Kerry in 2004). (You do realize the preface to your question is a complete non sequitur, right?) Judy, at least 25% of all my discussion with you are, according to you non sequiturs. 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.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: shempmcgurk wrote: I love the way people are so angy with the oil companies. I myself think that the oil companies should embark on a campaign of purposely gouging consumers. Let the price go up to $7.00 a gallon! Ha-ha! It will only be then that people will start to use less and dump their gas-guzzling SUVs. And, most importantly, we can get around to developing alternative fuels. Can't do it without the $7.00 a gallon price... I would like to see a windfall profits tax on the oil companies. Personally, I think a 40% corporate tax rate is windfall enough...FOR THE GOVERNMENT! Exxon made a profit of $36 billion last year on sales of $328 billion. That's about 11 cents profit on each dollar of revenue...hardly a windfall. So under which circumstances, Bhairitu, would your windfall profits tax kick in??? When the price of oil is above $40 a barrel. It would be a 50% tax. There are several proposals and this is one of them. Exxon probably has some very creative accounting too. :) 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: shempmcgurk wrote: I love the way people are so angy with the oil companies. I myself think that the oil companies should embark on a campaign of purposely gouging consumers. Let the price go up to $7.00 a gallon! Ha-ha! It will only be then that people will start to use less and dump their gas-guzzling SUVs. And, most importantly, we can get around to developing alternative fuels. Can't do it without the $7.00 a gallon price... I would like to see a windfall profits tax on the oil companies. Personally, I think a 40% corporate tax rate is windfall enough...FOR THE GOVERNMENT! Exxon made a profit of $36 billion last year on sales of $328 billion. That's about 11 cents profit on each dollar of revenue...hardly a windfall. So under which circumstances, Bhairitu, would your windfall profits tax kick in??? When the price of oil is above $40 a barrel. It would be a 50% tax. Okay, you say a 50% tax once the price of a barrel is above $40. Now, this would be a tax on...what? Their net profit? A 50% excise tax on each barrel of oil that an oil company buys? A 50% tax on each gallon sold at the pump? Please, a few more details so I can understand your proposal... There are several proposals and this is one of them. Exxon probably has some very creative accounting too. :) To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: snip ...if people keep voting those same 90% into office with all the alleged corruption, wouldn't you say that the people get the government that they deserve? Like duh, but given the quality of our educational system, what can you expect? It's not the educational system so much as the media. The media? Remember that the media includes the internet and, by definition, this forum. On an almost daily basis, Judy, when you feel a topic is not well- informed you never hesitate to provide a link to an article that you believe provides proper information and knowledge on the subject at hand. And you're unhappy with this system? But most people don't read/watch the news, paper or internet or TV. They apparently get their news by osmosis via movies and TV shows, I suspect. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote: In a message dated 4/23/06 10:39:58 P.M. Central Daylight Time, jflanegi@ writes: 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... I don't think they are making .75 cents per gallon. There are different formulas that different counties have to have per EPA and they are more expensive and then you have delivery and retailers cut and I think states even have their own tax. I heard later today it's more like 11 cents a gallon to the oil companies. Again, define net profit. See their income statement: http://tinyurl.com/gw3o7 Their net income is $36 billion. I can't find any break down of how much they make per barrel or gallon or whatever. There are 42 U.S. gallons in a barrel of oil. So, at $75.00 a barrel, the oil company is paying $1.79 at the oil well for each gallon of oilBEFORE any refinement costs, transportation costs, retail costs, etc are added on to the price. Oh, yes, and BEFORE any taxes are added to the price as well. See: http://www.lmoga.com/taxrates.htm (andt there may be local taxes added as well). In Arizona there is 36.4 cents taxes (excluding any local taxes, if any) on a gallon of gas. Of course, the income statement probably includes income from other sources, such as investments. But, hey, we aren't concerned about that; even the most jaded anti-oil-company person isn't complaining about how much the oil companies make on NON-oil sales. However, we can't be sure what the break down is per gallon of gas since the figures include all those other sources of revenue (and expenses for that matter). To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote: In a message dated 4/23/06 10:39:58 P.M. Central Daylight Time, jflanegi@ writes: 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... I don't think they are making .75 cents per gallon. There are different formulas that different counties have to have per EPA and they are more expensive and then you have delivery and retailers cut and I think states even have their own tax. I heard later today it's more like 11 cents a gallon to the oil companies. Again, define net profit. See their income statement: http://tinyurl.com/gw3o7 Their net income is $36 billion. I can't find any break down of how much they make per barrel or gallon or whatever. There are 42 U.S. gallons in a barrel of oil. So, at $75.00 a barrel, the oil company is paying $1.79 at the oil well for each gallon of oilBEFORE any refinement costs, transportation costs, retail costs, etc are added on to the price. Oh, yes, and BEFORE any taxes are added to the price as well. See: http://www.lmoga.com/taxrates.htm (andt there may be local taxes added as well). In Arizona there is 36.4 cents taxes (excluding any local taxes, if any) on a gallon of gas. Of course, the income statement probably includes income from other sources, such as investments. But, hey, we aren't concerned about that; even the most jaded anti-oil-company person isn't complaining about how much the oil companies make on NON-oil sales. However, we can't be sure what the break down is per gallon of gas since the figures include all those other sources of revenue (and expenses for that matter). Well, from the figures I cite above, we know that at $75.00 a barrel, that $1.79 plus $.0364 ( which equals $2.154 ) is a cost of goods sold right off the bat. That leaves $0.846 per gallon of contribution margin; that is, the oil company has 84.6 cents per each gallon of gas it sells to us to pay for transporting the oil, pay the salary of its employees, pay for the medical insurance and retirement benefits of its employees, pay its overhead, RD, etc. etc. On a $3.00 price of a gallon of oil, 84.6 cents is a contribution margin of about 29%. Hardly a windfall... To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
Here's the Senator Dodd and Senator Dorgan proposal: http://dodd.senate.gov/index.php?q=node/3336 shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: shempmcgurk wrote: I love the way people are so angy with the oil companies. I myself think that the oil companies should embark on a campaign of purposely gouging consumers. Let the price go up to $7.00 a gallon! Ha-ha! It will only be then that people will start to use less and dump their gas-guzzling SUVs. And, most importantly, we can get around to developing alternative fuels. Can't do it without the $7.00 a gallon price... I would like to see a windfall profits tax on the oil companies. Personally, I think a 40% corporate tax rate is windfall enough...FOR THE GOVERNMENT! Exxon made a profit of $36 billion last year on sales of $328 billion. That's about 11 cents profit on each dollar of revenue...hardly a windfall. So under which circumstances, Bhairitu, would your windfall profits tax kick in??? When the price of oil is above $40 a barrel. It would be a 50% tax. Okay, you say a 50% tax once the price of a barrel is above $40. Now, this would be a tax on...what? Their net profit? A 50% excise tax on each barrel of oil that an oil company buys? A 50% tax on each gallon sold at the pump? Please, a few more details so I can understand your proposal... There are several proposals and this is one of them. Exxon probably has some very creative accounting too. :) To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here's the Senator Dodd and Senator Dorgan proposal: http://dodd.senate.gov/index.php?q=node/3336 No, no, Bhairitu. Don't pawn this off on some newspaper article. YOU came up with a solution. YOU tell us what YOU think the solution should be. Get out your pencil and paper and start figuring it out and start thinking for yourself... shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: shempmcgurk wrote: I love the way people are so angy with the oil companies. I myself think that the oil companies should embark on a campaign of purposely gouging consumers. Let the price go up to $7.00 a gallon! Ha-ha! It will only be then that people will start to use less and dump their gas-guzzling SUVs. And, most importantly, we can get around to developing alternative fuels. Can't do it without the $7.00 a gallon price... I would like to see a windfall profits tax on the oil companies. Personally, I think a 40% corporate tax rate is windfall enough...FOR THE GOVERNMENT! Exxon made a profit of $36 billion last year on sales of $328 billion. That's about 11 cents profit on each dollar of revenue...hardly a windfall. So under which circumstances, Bhairitu, would your windfall profits tax kick in??? When the price of oil is above $40 a barrel. It would be a 50% tax. Okay, you say a 50% tax once the price of a barrel is above $40. Now, this would be a tax on...what? Their net profit? A 50% excise tax on each barrel of oil that an oil company buys? A 50% tax on each gallon sold at the pump? Please, a few more details so I can understand your proposal... There are several proposals and this is one of them. Exxon probably has some very creative accounting too. :) To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links 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.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here's the Senator Dodd and Senator Dorgan proposal: http://dodd.senate.gov/index.php?q=node/3336 No, no, Bhairitu. Don't pawn this off on some newspaper article. YOU came up with a solution. YOU tell us what YOU think the solution should be. Get out your pencil and paper and start figuring it out and start thinking for yourself... Why? These guys are better at it than I. Right now I'm listening to Ed Schultz on his show talking about a windfall profits tax and he just had a sound clip of a Republican talking about implementing one. There are certainly pros and cons. One thing I *will not* except and I suspect you won't either is some kind of gas rationing like we had back in the 70's. I bought a fuel efficient car back in the 70's and felt penalized because of that BS and the 55 mph speed limit (which I ignored most of the time). As I passed people in their big gas guzzling junkers they would waved their five fingers twice for 55. We would just smile and way back or sometime yell at them to get a real car. :) shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: shempmcgurk wrote: I love the way people are so angy with the oil companies. I myself think that the oil companies should embark on a campaign of purposely gouging consumers. Let the price go up to $7.00 a gallon! Ha-ha! It will only be then that people will start to use less and dump their gas-guzzling SUVs. And, most importantly, we can get around to developing alternative fuels. Can't do it without the $7.00 a gallon price... I would like to see a windfall profits tax on the oil companies. Personally, I think a 40% corporate tax rate is windfall enough...FOR THE GOVERNMENT! Exxon made a profit of $36 billion last year on sales of $328 billion. That's about 11 cents profit on each dollar of revenue...hardly a windfall. So under which circumstances, Bhairitu, would your windfall profits tax kick in??? When the price of oil is above $40 a barrel. It would be a 50% tax. Okay, you say a 50% tax once the price of a barrel is above $40. Now, this would be a tax on...what? Their net profit? A 50% excise tax on each barrel of oil that an oil company buys? A 50% tax on each gallon sold at the pump? Please, a few more details so I can understand your proposal... There are several proposals and this is one of them. Exxon probably has some very creative accounting too. :) To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: snip ...if people keep voting those same 90% into office with all the alleged corruption, wouldn't you say that the people get the government that they deserve? Like duh, but given the quality of our educational system, what can you expect? It's not the educational system so much as the media. The media? Remember that the media includes the internet and, by definition, this forum. Well, it does if that's how you define it. I don't. Then you are out of touch with the times. Um, no. As I went on to say, I was referring to the mainstream media, TV and print (which is what people usually mean by 'the media'). I don't have any poll results or study results to show you but I suspect that a large portion of the US population gets alot of their news from the internet. Non sequitur. Speaking for myself, I certainly do. I NEVER practically see network news or read newspapers; rather, most of the news I get is from the internet. Curious that you, who uses the internet and news sources on the internet herself, wouldn't include this most important of all sources in her definition of the media... Not the least bit curious, in fact. If I had meant to include the Internet, I'd have said, the media and the Internet. That's because the media usually refers to TV and print, you see, not where I personally get my news from. I was referring to the mainstream media, TV and print (which is what people usually mean by the media). On an almost daily basis, Judy, when you feel a topic is not well-informed you never hesitate to provide a link to an article that you believe provides proper information and knowledge on the subject at hand. And you're unhappy with this system? Deeply. The main reason Bush is in office today is because of the so-called liberal media's War Against Gore in 2000 (and to a lesser extent against Kerry in 2004). (You do realize the preface to your question is a complete non sequitur, right?) Judy, at least 25% of all my discussion with you are, according to you non sequiturs. Which raises the question, why do you so often use non sequiturs in your discussions? (And not just with me by any means.) To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
In a message dated 4/23/06 11:45:33 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: High profits are a good thing. It means more cash that can bereinvested in new techology, creating new efficiencies,and raisingproductivity -- which are highly correlated with salary and wageincreases.Not excessive across all industries, particularly on a risk adjustedbasis. (And if not adjusting for risk -- any analysis is deeplyflawed.) Why don't you complain about the "gravy" in other industries?Exxon's recent operating margins were 16%, with net margins of lessthan 11%.Apple's recent operating margins were 12%, with net margins of 10%.And traditionally the oil industry is more risky than highly-brandedconsumer electronics. So it deserves a higher return. I have absolutely no problem with oil companies making a healthy profit. However, I really would not mind the oil companies execs getting up before congress and giving them and the American people an education on why the price of gasoline keeps going higher and higher and what could have been done in the past to keep prices lower and what they believe it will take to get them lower again. The situation is obviously going to be politicized and the American public should know some facts so they can make their own decisions as to what really needs to be done if anything can be done from the governments side. 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: [...] Well, from the figures I cite above, we know that at $75.00 a barrel, that $1.79 plus $.0364 ( which equals $2.154 ) is a cost of goods sold right off the bat. Exxon doesn't have deals for under the open market price? That leaves $0.846 per gallon of contribution margin; that is, the oil company has 84.6 cents per each gallon of gas it sells to us to pay for transporting the oil, pay the salary of its employees, pay for the medical insurance and retirement benefits of its employees, pay its overhead, RD, etc. etc. On a $3.00 price of a gallon of oil, 84.6 cents is a contribution margin of about 29%. Hardly a windfall... 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] [...] On a $3.00 price of a gallon of oil, 84.6 cents is a contribution margin of about 29%. Hardly a windfall... H... The company made $36 billion in net profits. If you're correct, it sold what, a trillion gallons of gas last year? 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: Here's the Senator Dodd and Senator Dorgan proposal: http://dodd.senate.gov/index.php?q=node/3336 No, no, Bhairitu. Don't pawn this off on some newspaper article. YOU came up with a solution. YOU tell us what YOU think the solution should be. Get out your pencil and paper and start figuring it out and start thinking for yourself... Why? Because I was under the impression you knew what you were talking about. If you don't why even consider it? These guys are better at it than I. Right now I'm listening to Ed Schultz on his show talking about a windfall profits tax and he just had a sound clip of a Republican talking about implementing one. There are certainly pros and cons. One thing I *will not* except and I suspect you won't either is some kind of gas rationing like we had back in the 70's. I bought a fuel efficient car back in the 70's and felt penalized because of that BS and the 55 mph speed limit (which I ignored most of the time). As I passed people in their big gas guzzling junkers they would waved their five fingers twice for 55. We would just smile and way back or sometime yell at them to get a real car. :) shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: shempmcgurk wrote: I love the way people are so angy with the oil companies. I myself think that the oil companies should embark on a campaign of purposely gouging consumers. Let the price go up to $7.00 a gallon! Ha-ha! It will only be then that people will start to use less and dump their gas-guzzling SUVs. And, most importantly, we can get around to developing alternative fuels. Can't do it without the $7.00 a gallon price... I would like to see a windfall profits tax on the oil companies. Personally, I think a 40% corporate tax rate is windfall enough...FOR THE GOVERNMENT! Exxon made a profit of $36 billion last year on sales of $328 billion. That's about 11 cents profit on each dollar of revenue...hardly a windfall. So under which circumstances, Bhairitu, would your windfall profits tax kick in??? When the price of oil is above $40 a barrel. It would be a 50% tax. Okay, you say a 50% tax once the price of a barrel is above $40. Now, this would be a tax on...what? Their net profit? A 50% excise tax on each barrel of oil that an oil company buys? A 50% tax on each gallon sold at the pump? Please, a few more details so I can understand your proposal... There are several proposals and this is one of them. Exxon probably has some very creative accounting too. :) To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: snip ...if people keep voting those same 90% into office with all the alleged corruption, wouldn't you say that the people get the government that they deserve? Like duh, but given the quality of our educational system, what can you expect? It's not the educational system so much as the media. The media? Remember that the media includes the internet and, by definition, this forum. Well, it does if that's how you define it. I don't. Then you are out of touch with the times. Um, no. As I went on to say, I was referring to the mainstream media, TV and print (which is what people usually mean by 'the media'). Not any more it's not. One of the main sources of information for not only the public but for journalists themselves is the drudgereport which is NOT on any of the mainstream media as you call it (except for Drudge's Sunday night radio show). I would suspect if you took a poll at random of a 1,000 Americans a vast majority would include the internet within the definition of the media. I don't have any poll results or study results to show you but I suspect that a large portion of the US population gets alot of their news from the internet. Non sequitur. Speaking for myself, I certainly do. I NEVER practically see network news or read newspapers; rather, most of the news I get is from the internet. Curious that you, who uses the internet and news sources on the internet herself, wouldn't include this most important of all sources in her definition of the media... Not the least bit curious, in fact. If I had meant to include the Internet, I'd have said, the media and the Internet. That's because the media usually refers to TV and print, You're so wrong here. For the past 10 years, the media has of course included the internet. you see, not where I personally get my news from. I was referring to the mainstream media, TV and print (which is what people usually mean by the media). On an almost daily basis, Judy, when you feel a topic is not well-informed you never hesitate to provide a link to an article that you believe provides proper information and knowledge on the subject at hand. And you're unhappy with this system? Deeply. The main reason Bush is in office today is because of the so-called liberal media's War Against Gore in 2000 (and to a lesser extent against Kerry in 2004). (You do realize the preface to your question is a complete non sequitur, right?) Judy, at least 25% of all my discussion with you are, according to you non sequiturs. Which raises the question, why do you so often use non sequiturs in your discussions? (And not just with me by any means.) non sequitur. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: [...] Well, from the figures I cite above, we know that at $75.00 a barrel, that $1.79 plus $.0364 ( which equals $2.154 ) is a cost of goods sold right off the bat. Exxon doesn't have deals for under the open market price? If they do, then they can make up the difference on the commodities market (and thereby make extra profit)...and if that's the case, where is that reflected in the $36 billion. That leaves $0.846 per gallon of contribution margin; that is, the oil company has 84.6 cents per each gallon of gas it sells to us to pay for transporting the oil, pay the salary of its employees, pay for the medical insurance and retirement benefits of its employees, pay its overhead, RD, etc. etc. On a $3.00 price of a gallon of oil, 84.6 cents is a contribution margin of about 29%. Hardly a windfall... To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ [...] On a $3.00 price of a gallon of oil, 84.6 cents is a contribution margin of about 29%. Hardly a windfall... H... The company made $36 billion in net profits. If you're correct, it sold what, a trillion gallons of gas last year? Assuming all of the $328 billion revenue they had was from retail sale of gas at the pumps, and assuming an average price of $2.50 at the pumps then that would be about 130 billion gallons of gas sold AT THE MOST. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: [...] Well, from the figures I cite above, we know that at $75.00 a barrel, that $1.79 plus $.0364 ( which equals $2.154 ) is a cost of goods sold right off the bat. Exxon doesn't have deals for under the open market price? If they do, then they can make up the difference on the commodities market (and thereby make extra profit)...and if that's the case, where is that reflected in the $36 billion. That leaves $0.846 per gallon of contribution margin; that is, the oil company has 84.6 cents per each gallon of gas it sells to us to pay for transporting the oil, pay the salary of its employees, pay for the medical insurance and retirement benefits of its employees, pay its overhead, RD, etc. etc. On a $3.00 price of a gallon of oil, 84.6 cents is a contribution margin of about 29%. Hardly a windfall... This info is from http://www.gravmag.com/oil.html Expense Amount per gallon Production costs 33¢ Producer profit 95¢ Refining costs 40¢ Refining profit 10¢ Transportation costs 12¢ Transportation profit 9¢ Marketing costs 4¢ Marketing profit 4¢ Retailer costs 8¢ Retailer profit 8¢ US Taxes 19¢ State taxes (avg. 23¢) Local taxes 0 to 20¢ TOTAL $2.65 Note that Exxon's oil reserves are estimated at 12.3 billion barrels - this is oil they own, they're not buying all their inputs on the open market - that's why their profits go up when oil prices go up, when oil prices increase their revenues increase, but their cost of producing their own reserves stays the same. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: snip ...if people keep voting those same 90% into office with all the alleged corruption, wouldn't you say that the people get the government that they deserve? Like duh, but given the quality of our educational system, what can you expect? It's not the educational system so much as the media. The media? Remember that the media includes the internet and, by definition, this forum. Well, it does if that's how you define it. I don't. Then you are out of touch with the times. Um, no. As I went on to say, I was referring to the mainstream media, TV and print (which is what people usually mean by 'the media'). Not any more it's not. Shemp, this is another of your silly (and uninformed) arguments. When people talk about the media, they usually *still* mean the mainstream media, TV and print. That the Internet has become a source of information for many doesn't change what people mean when they use the term. One of the main sources of information for not only the public but for journalists themselves is the drudgereport which is NOT on any of the mainstream media as you call it (except for Drudge's Sunday night radio show). Irrelevant. The media usually refers to the mainstream media, as I said. It does not usually mean where I personally get my information. And I suspect you have a highly exaggerated notion of what percentage of people use the Internet as a source of information about politics. I would suspect if you took a poll at random of a 1,000 Americans a vast majority would include the internet within the definition of the media. It would depend on how you asked the question, of course. When right-wingers grouse about the liberal media, do you think they're including the Internet? (Careful, now.) snip Not the least bit curious, in fact. If I had meant to include the Internet, I'd have said, the media and the Internet. That's because the media usually refers to TV and print, You're so wrong here. For the past 10 years, the media has of course included the internet. No, Shemp, sorry, not in common usage, it hasn't. It still usually refers to the mainstream media, TV and print. snip Judy, at least 25% of all my discussion with you are, according to you non sequiturs. Which raises the question, why do you so often use non sequiturs in your discussions? (And not just with me by any means.) non sequitur. Not at all. Look how you've managed to get this discussion off track. You use non sequiturs to divert attention from your mistakes. Basta. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: snip ...if people keep voting those same 90% into office with all the alleged corruption, wouldn't you say that the people get the government that they deserve? Like duh, but given the quality of our educational system, what can you expect? It's not the educational system so much as the media. The media? Remember that the media includes the internet and, by definition, this forum. Well, it does if that's how you define it. I don't. Then you are out of touch with the times. Um, no. As I went on to say, I was referring to the mainstream media, TV and print (which is what people usually mean by 'the media'). Not any more it's not. Shemp, this is another of your silly (and uninformed) arguments. When people talk about the media, they usually *still* mean the mainstream media, TV and print. That the Internet has become a source of information for many doesn't change what people mean when they use the term. I don't care what OTHER people mean by the term...I know what the PROPER definition is...and the proper definition includes the internet. See wikipedia.com and search media. You'll see that, while correct in your claim that it usually means the mainstream media that the proper understanding includes the internet. One of the main sources of information for not only the public but for journalists themselves is the drudgereport which is NOT on any of the mainstream media as you call it (except for Drudge's Sunday night radio show). Irrelevant. The media usually refers to the mainstream media, as I said. It does not usually mean where I personally get my information. And I suspect you have a highly exaggerated notion of what percentage of people use the Internet as a source of information about politics. I would suspect if you took a poll at random of a 1,000 Americans a vast majority would include the internet within the definition of the media. It would depend on how you asked the question, of course. When right-wingers grouse about the liberal media, do you think they're including the Internet? (Careful, now.) snip Not the least bit curious, in fact. If I had meant to include the Internet, I'd have said, the media and the Internet. That's because the media usually refers to TV and print, You're so wrong here. For the past 10 years, the media has of course included the internet. No, Shemp, sorry, not in common usage, it hasn't. It still usually refers to the mainstream media, TV and print. snip Judy, at least 25% of all my discussion with you are, according to you non sequiturs. Which raises the question, why do you so often use non sequiturs in your discussions? (And not just with me by any means.) non sequitur. Not at all. Look how you've managed to get this discussion off track. You use non sequiturs to divert attention from your mistakes. Basta. 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip I don't care what OTHER people mean by the term...I know what the PROPER definition is...and the proper definition includes the internet. The *technical* definition includes the Internet, along with movies, books, comic books, street signs, etc., etc., etc. See wikipedia.com and search media. You'll see that, while correct in your claim that it usually means the mainstream media Q.E.D. Thanks for confirming my point. Now say, Sorry, Judy, I should have realized you were using the term in its standard sense and not in its technical sense. 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: [...] Well, from the figures I cite above, we know that at $75.00 a barrel, that $1.79 plus $.0364 ( which equals $2.154 ) is a cost of goods sold right off the bat. Exxon doesn't have deals for under the open market price? If they do, then they can make up the difference on the commodities market (and thereby make extra profit)...and if that's the case, where is that reflected in the $36 billion. In the $36 billion, obviously. Unless we know how many gallons of gas were sold, we can't make any definite claims about the cost per gallon. 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ [...] On a $3.00 price of a gallon of oil, 84.6 cents is a contribution margin of about 29%. Hardly a windfall... H... The company made $36 billion in net profits. If you're correct, it sold what, a trillion gallons of gas last year? Assuming all of the $328 billion revenue they had was from retail sale of gas at the pumps, and assuming an average price of $2.50 at the pumps then that would be about 130 billion gallons of gas sold AT THE MOST. So they made $(36/130) or $0.27 per gallon sold according to you. 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good point. The end product of fermentation is a yeast-molasses, very nutritious, high in protein which can be used as a food source or to keep fermenting the brew. A large portion of the land can be set aside for the production of cheap hybrid corn for fuel as it is now by farmers producing ethanol mixed with gasoline and the rest of the land to porduce organic MMY food! That's actually a very good idea. The layout of the Maharishi Vedic cities/villages is meant to work well with alternative transportation. If the organic farms also produce low-polluting fuel sources, those could be used within the local communities rather than shipping fuel long distances. I wonder if they've considered thisor not... 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ [...] On a $3.00 price of a gallon of oil, 84.6 cents is a contribution margin of about 29%. Hardly a windfall... H... The company made $36 billion in net profits. If you're correct, it sold what, a trillion gallons of gas last year? Assuming all of the $328 billion revenue they had was from retail sale of gas at the pumps, and assuming an average price of $2.50 at the pumps then that would be about 130 billion gallons of gas sold AT THE MOST. So they made $(36/130) or $0.27 per gallon sold according to you. +++ As a side issue, I haven't heard much about the waste of petroleum rescources that go into making usless plastic landfill-serious BS. 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: snip I don't care what OTHER people mean by the term...I know what the PROPER definition is...and the proper definition includes the internet. The *technical* definition includes the Internet, along with movies, books, comic books, street signs, etc., etc., etc. See wikipedia.com and search media. You'll see that, while correct in your claim that it usually means the mainstream media Q.E.D. Thanks for confirming my point. Now say, Sorry, Judy, I should have realized you were using the term in its standard sense and not in its technical sense. From: media under wikipedia.com: Mass media >From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Redirected from Media) Jump to: navigation, search Media redirects here; for other uses, see Media (disambiguation). Mass media is a term used to denote, as a class, that section of the media specifically conceived and designed to reach a very large audience (typically at least as large as the whole population of a nation state). It was coined in the 1920s with the advent of nationwide radio networks and of mass-circulation newspapers and magazines. The mass-media audience has been viewed by some commentators as forming a mass society with special characteristics, notably atomization or lack of social connections, which render it especially susceptible to the influence of modern mass-media techniques such as advertising and propaganda. It is also gaining popularity in the blogosphere when referring to the mainstream media. [edit] Etymology and usage Media (the plural of medium) is a truncation of the term media of communication, referring to those organized means of dissemination of fact, opinion, entertainment, and other information, such as newspapers, magazines, cinema films, radio, television, the World Wide Web, billboards, books, CDs, DVDs, videocassettes, computer games and other forms of publishing. Although writers currently differ in their preference for using media in the singular (the media is...) or the plural (the media are...), the former will still incur criticism in some situations. (Please see data for a similar example.) Academic programs for the study of mass media are usually referred to as mass communication programs. An individual corporation within the mass media is referred to as a Media Institution. The term mass media is mainly used by academics and media- professionals. When members of the general public refer to the media they are usually referring to the mass media, or to the news media, which is a section of the mass media. Sometimes mass media (and the news media in particular) are referred to as the corporate media. Other references include the mainstream media (MSM). Technically, mainstream media includes outlets that are in harmony with the prevailing direction of influence in the culture at large. In the United States, usage of these terms often depends on the connotations the speaker wants to invoke. The term corporate media is often used by leftist media critics to imply that the mainstream media are themselves composed of large multinational corporations, and promote those interests (see e.g., Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting; Noam Chomsky's propaganda model). This is countered by right-wingers with the term MSM, the acronym implying that the majority of mass media sources are dominated by leftist powers which are furthering their own agenda. The more recent term 'Drive-by Media', which appears to have been coined by Brent Bozell in 1998 [1], has been popularized by conservative talk-show host Rush Limbaugh in response to the coverage of rape allegations involving members of the Duke University Lacrosse team [2]. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ [...] On a $3.00 price of a gallon of oil, 84.6 cents is a contribution margin of about 29%. Hardly a windfall... H... The company made $36 billion in net profits. If you're correct, it sold what, a trillion gallons of gas last year? Assuming all of the $328 billion revenue they had was from retail sale of gas at the pumps, and assuming an average price of $2.50 at the pumps then that would be about 130 billion gallons of gas sold AT THE MOST. So they made $(36/130) or $0.27 per gallon sold according to you. Sounds about right...and, note, no great windfall... To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: Here's the Senator Dodd and Senator Dorgan proposal: http://dodd.senate.gov/index.php?q=node/3336 No, no, Bhairitu. Don't pawn this off on some newspaper article. YOU came up with a solution. YOU tell us what YOU think the solution should be. Get out your pencil and paper and start figuring it out and start thinking for yourself... Why? Because I was under the impression you knew what you were talking about. If you don't why even consider it? Well since you think I'm a tax bill writer let's keep it really simple so even you can understand it. We'll tax ALL oil company profits on oil at 50% when it is over $40 a barrel. No if, ands, or buts. Happy? These guys are better at it than I. Right now I'm listening to Ed Schultz on his show talking about a windfall profits tax and he just had a sound clip of a Republican talking about implementing one. There are certainly pros and cons. One thing I *will not* except and I suspect you won't either is some kind of gas rationing like we had back in the 70's. I bought a fuel efficient car back in the 70's and felt penalized because of that BS and the 55 mph speed limit (which I ignored most of the time). As I passed people in their big gas guzzling junkers they would waved their five fingers twice for 55. We would just smile and way back or sometime yell at them to get a real car. :) shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: shempmcgurk wrote: I love the way people are so angy with the oil companies. I myself think that the oil companies should embark on a campaign of purposely gouging consumers. Let the price go up to $7.00 a gallon! Ha-ha! It will only be then that people will start to use less and dump their gas-guzzling SUVs. And, most importantly, we can get around to developing alternative fuels. Can't do it without the $7.00 a gallon price... I would like to see a windfall profits tax on the oil companies. Personally, I think a 40% corporate tax rate is windfall enough...FOR THE GOVERNMENT! Exxon made a profit of $36 billion last year on sales of $328 billion. That's about 11 cents profit on each dollar of revenue...hardly a windfall. So under which circumstances, Bhairitu, would your windfall profits tax kick in??? When the price of oil is above $40 a barrel. It would be a 50% tax. Okay, you say a 50% tax once the price of a barrel is above $40. Now, this would be a tax on...what? Their net profit? A 50% excise tax on each barrel of oil that an oil company buys? A 50% tax on each gallon sold at the pump? Please, a few more details so I can understand your proposal... There are several proposals and this is one of them. Exxon probably has some very creative accounting too. :) To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ [...] On a $3.00 price of a gallon of oil, 84.6 cents is a contribution margin of about 29%. Hardly a windfall... H... The company made $36 billion in net profits. If you're correct, it sold what, a trillion gallons of gas last year? Assuming all of the $328 billion revenue they had was from retail sale of gas at the pumps, and assuming an average price of $2.50 at the pumps then that would be about 130 billion gallons of gas sold AT THE MOST. So they made $(36/130) or $0.27 per gallon sold according to you. Sounds about right...and, note, no great windfall... 40% increase in net profit over last year. SOunds like a great windfall to me... 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: snip I don't care what OTHER people mean by the term...I know what the PROPER definition is...and the proper definition includes the internet. The *technical* definition includes the Internet, along with movies, books, comic books, street signs, etc., etc., etc. See wikipedia.com and search media. You'll see that, while correct in your claim that it usually means the mainstream media Q.E.D. Thanks for confirming my point. Now say, Sorry, Judy, I should have realized you were using the term in its standard sense and not in its technical sense. From: media under wikipedia.com: Say, Sorry, Judy, I should have realized you were using the term in its standard sense and not in its technical sense. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: snip I don't care what OTHER people mean by the term...I know what the PROPER definition is...and the proper definition includes the internet. The *technical* definition includes the Internet, along with movies, books, comic books, street signs, etc., etc., etc. See wikipedia.com and search media. You'll see that, while correct in your claim that it usually means the mainstream media Q.E.D. Thanks for confirming my point. Now say, Sorry, Judy, I should have realized you were using the term in its standard sense and not in its technical sense. From: media under wikipedia.com: Say, Sorry, Judy, I should have realized you were using the term in its standard sense and not in its technical sense. Ah, that's the very point, my fine feathered friend. You see, Judy, we are discussing all of this on...THE INTERNET. You, on a REGULAR BASIS, link to and cite INTERNET ARTICLES on this INTERNET FORUM. Why, pray tell, would the default be that media wouldn't include the internet in its proper definition when you are such a person? It is you, my dear, who created the environment in which it would have been improper to use it in any other sense. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: shempmcgurk wrote: I love the way people are so angy with the oil companies. I myself think that the oil companies should embark on a campaign of purposely gouging consumers. Let the price go up to $7.00 a gallon! Ha-ha! It will only be then that people will start to use less and dump their gas-guzzling SUVs. And, most importantly, we can get around to developing alternative fuels. Can't do it without the $7.00 a gallon price... I would like to see a windfall profits tax on the oil companies. Personally, I think a 40% corporate tax rate is windfall enough...FOR THE GOVERNMENT! Exxon made a profit of $36 billion last year on sales of $328 billion. That's about 11 cents profit on each dollar of revenue...hardly a windfall. So under which circumstances, Bhairitu, would your windfall profits tax kick in??? 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. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: shempmcgurk wrote: I love the way people are so angy with the oil companies. I myself think that the oil companies should embark on a campaign of purposely gouging consumers. Let the price go up to $7.00 a gallon! Ha-ha! It will only be then that people will start to use less and dump their gas-guzzling SUVs. And, most importantly, we can get around to developing alternative fuels. Can't do it without the $7.00 a gallon price... I would like to see a windfall profits tax on the oil companies. Personally, I think a 40% corporate tax rate is windfall enough...FOR THE GOVERNMENT! Exxon made a profit of $36 billion last year on sales of $328 billion. That's about 11 cents profit on each dollar of revenue...hardly a windfall. So under which circumstances, Bhairitu, would your windfall profits tax kick in??? What was counted as a deductable expense, however? Our family business loses money every year and we have NO taxable income from it and yet I still make enough to pay for an apartment for myself, another for my kid and his mom, and my health insurance, not to mention a personal mortgage... Business taxes are an interesting thing (yes we have an accountant that does our bookkeeping, she's honest, legit, and makes sure that our Schedule E's are in good shape for the several IRS audits we've had over the years). 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 4/23/06 5:07:29 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jyouells2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 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. 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anon_couscous_ff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jyouells2000 jyouells@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 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... To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
In a message dated 4/23/06 8:11:40 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: About a month ago I heard that total tax on a gallon was $0.67. Ouch Lots of money JohnY I think that depends on the state and also the higher the retail price, the higher the tax. So where is the incentive to lower the price of gas? Kind of like smoking. The government tells everybody how bad it is and what it costs society but they won't outlaw it because they make so much revenue from the tax on tobacco. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jyouells2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anon_couscous_ff no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jyouells2000 jyouells@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 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... To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
In a message dated 4/23/06 10:39:58 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 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... I don't think they are making .75 cents per gallon. There are different formulas that different counties have to have per EPA and they are more expensive and then you have delivery and retailers cut and I think states even havetheir own tax. I heard later today it's more like 11 cents a gallon to the oil companies. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 4/23/06 8:11:40 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: About a month ago I heard that total tax on a gallon was $0.67. Ouch Lots of money JohnY I think that depends on the state and also the higher the retail price, the higher the tax. So where is the incentive to lower the price of gas? Kind of like smoking. The government tells everybody how bad it is and what it costs society but they won't outlaw it because they make so much revenue from the tax on tobacco. Maybe the gov't should put a windfall profits tax on themselves and return the money to the purchasers, since they (gov't in all forms) make more on a gallon than anyone else. There's a lot of smoke blowing going on in congress. JohnY To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 4/23/06 8:11:40 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: About a month ago I heard that total tax on a gallon was $0.67. Ouch Lots of money JohnY I think that depends on the state and also the higher the retail price, the higher the tax. So where is the incentive to lower the price of gas? Kind of like smoking. The government tells everybody how bad it is and what it costs society but they won't outlaw it because they make so much revenue from the tax on tobacco. In Japan, the government owns the tabbaco company, and guess what, the courts have ruled insufficient evidence to claim that cigarettes cause cancer... 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 4/23/06 10:39:58 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 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... I don't think they are making .75 cents per gallon. There are different formulas that different counties have to have per EPA and they are more expensive and then you have delivery and retailers cut and I think states even have their own tax. I heard later today it's more like 11 cents a gallon to the oil companies. Again, define net profit. 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jyouells2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anon_couscous_ff no_reply@ wrote: 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... Markets will do it eventually. As gas gets to $4-5+. But we will have missed out on 30 years of dramatic benefits -- and 30 years, plus another so many, where the negative aspects of non-policy manifest. Some will argue that the market is always superior to an incentives policy. Sometimes it is. If the market is able to collect for all a products costs and benefits, then themarket should do so. When the market does not naurally do so, an intelligent incentives policy is superior. Pollution is a classic example where the market by itself is highly inefficint in collecting full product costs. With oil, it literally dumps these extra product costs on society. Plus the oil gets a free ride from the military without paying the protection and defense costs necessary for the US level of oil consumption. So its a matter of structuring intelligent and efficient ways for the market to pay for the uncollected costs oil imposes. And the double jackpot is that with these now collected revenues -- incentives can be structured to jumpstart the transformation of the market to -- in this case -- far lower oil and energy use, and resulting pollution, per unit of GNP. 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anon_couscous_ff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jyouells2000 jyouells@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anon_couscous_ff no_reply@ wrote: 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... Markets will do it eventually. As gas gets to $4-5+. But we will have missed out on 30 years of dramatic benefits -- and 30 years, plus another so many, where the negative aspects of non-policy manifest. Some will argue that the market is always superior to an incentives policy. Sometimes it is. If the market is able to collect for all a products costs and benefits, then themarket should do so. When the market does not naurally do so, an intelligent incentives policy is superior. The chances of getting an intelligent incentives policy for energy from the gov't is only slightly better than the chances of getting a group of pundits in FF after all the money is collected. The energy market will eventually do it, almost certainly. JohnY Pollution is a classic example where the market by itself is highly inefficint in collecting full product costs. With oil, it literally dumps these extra product costs on society. Plus the oil gets a free ride from the military without paying the protection and defense costs necessary for the US level of oil consumption. So its a matter of structuring intelligent and efficient ways for the market to pay for the uncollected costs oil imposes. And the double jackpot is that with these now collected revenues -- incentives can be structured to jumpstart the transformation of the market to -- in this case -- far lower oil and energy use, and resulting pollution, per unit of GNP. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jyouells2000 jyouells@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anon_couscous_ff no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jyouells2000 jyouells@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 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. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote: In a message dated 4/23/06 8:11:40 P.M. Central Daylight Time, jyouells@ writes: About a month ago I heard that total tax on a gallon was $0.67. Ouch Lots of money JohnY I think that depends on the state and also the higher the retail price, the higher the tax. So where is the incentive to lower the price of gas? Kind of like smoking. The government tells everybody how bad it is and what it costs society but they won't outlaw it because they make so much revenue from the tax on tobacco. In Japan, the government owns the tabbaco company, and guess what, the courts have ruled insufficient evidence to claim that cigarettes cause cancer... * http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0518/p07s01-woap.html 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jyouells2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anon_couscous_ff no_reply@ wrote: The chances of getting an intelligent incentives policy for energy from the gov't is only slightly better than the chances of getting a group of pundits in FF after all the money is collected. The energy market will eventually do it, almost certainly. There are plenty of smart polcy analysts who know and promote such policies. Its the undemocratic nature of the US governemnt (90% of congressional races not competitive, 70% of states in presidential elections not campaigned in significantly) and the high corruption from current campaign financing that is the problem. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anon_couscous_ff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jyouells2000 jyouells@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anon_couscous_ff no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jyouells2000 jyouells@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 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,
[FairfieldLife] Re: Angry with the oil companies?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anon_couscous_ff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jyouells2000 jyouells@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anon_couscous_ff no_reply@ wrote: The chances of getting an intelligent incentives policy for energy from the gov't is only slightly better than the chances of getting a group of pundits in FF after all the money is collected. The energy market will eventually do it, almost certainly. There are plenty of smart polcy analysts who know and promote such policies. Its the undemocratic nature of the US governemnt (90% of congressional races not competitive, 70% of states in presidential elections not campaigned in significantly) and the high corruption from current campaign financing that is the problem. You assume that the gov't is motivated to produce an intelligent incentive policy. Not yet. Too many other types of power and money gains and grabs to make first. I'm sure that there are people smart enough they just have other motivations to work through first. 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.
