Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 10-08-2008, 10:24 AM
 
Location: Eastern Colorado
3,887 posts, read 5,729,234 times
Reputation: 5386

Advertisements

With the large economic downturn now underway many need to know that our number one industry in this state is oil and gas according to a recent study by the school of mines. While several politicians are now claiming to be for drilling, many have shown over the years that they are not being truthful at this point. Obama, Biden, Gov. Ritter and the state of Colorado's congress, and udall are all people who have came down hard against the gas and coal industries, continually voting against the industries, and Udall even backing a bill that makes it harder for the oil companies to drill anywhere in the country. NOt to mention the negative affects that a vote for admendment 58 will have

Here are some facts people need to know.
Analyzing Economic Impacts of Colorado’s Oil and Gas Industry
Quote:
The Booz Allen study showed that Colorado’s oil and gas industry was a bigger economic engine for the state than the travel industry, accounting for 6.1 percent of state industry revenues, contributing $23 billion to Colorado’s economy, and employing 71,000 people.
Colorado Senate News - Oil and gas lead GDP (http://www.coloradosenatenews.com/content/view/555/35/ - broken link)
Quote:
The oil-and-gas study measures economic impact more broadly, however, including the sale of the commodities, the money spent to extract the resources, fees paid to landowners for the right to drill and taxes paid to the government.
Quote:
The study also demonstrated the vast number of jobs the oil- and-gas industry provides the state: 70,779. Those jobs pay an average annual wage of $60,811.
90 Economists Warn Coloradans Against Harmful Effects of Amendment 58
Quote:
The U.S. Congress seems to have wrapped up the federal energy policy debate until after November, but an open letter from 90 economists today warns that a new threat to taxpayers’ wallets has emerged at the state level: Amendment 58, which would raise taxes on oil and natural gas production and, in their words, "have the effect of raising energy prices on consumers and discouraging growth in Colorado’s economy." The joint statement was organized by the 362,000-member National Taxpayers Union (NTU), which has more than 7,300 members in Colorado.
Quote:
"Despite claims to the contrary, the burden of any tax falls squarely on the shoulders of consumers, workers, and shareholders such as retirees or mutual fund investors," the signatories note. "We can safely predict that this measure will cause reduced state oil and gas production, fewer economic opportunities, increased reliance on imports, and higher energy prices."
http://www.oil-gas.state.co.us/RuleM...gstatement.pdf
Quote:
Colorado is already a relatively high cost state for oil and gas development. The proposed regulations will impose further costs to the extraction of oil and gas that will only serve to have a chilling effect on future development in Colorado.
Oil and Gas Drilling in Colorado Need New Rule for Mining Exploration - Company - Mining Exploration News
Quote:
As much as $1 billion in oil and gas investment is bypassing Colorado because of what the industry perceives as interference from Gov. Bill Ritter’s administration, state legislators told the Rocky Mountain News this week.
Quote:
The companies say the Ritter administration’s overhaul of drilling rules is not only turning Colorado into an uncertain regulatory climate but also increasing the cost of doing business.
now we can argue about the effects of drilling, and the need for renewable energy, as I in fact agree with many of the thoughts that we should be pursuing them. But to put people into office that are against the use of our natural resources will have a dramatic affect on this states economy and many of our incomes. Especially considering the loss of the manafucturing segment that was once here, and the downturn in the market leading to less income from travel. Reagrdless of the rest of the country the wrong decisions from the state and federal governments could send this state into a full on depression, with home prices failing through the floor, and many companies being forced to close up shop.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-08-2008, 10:54 AM
 
2,756 posts, read 12,948,446 times
Reputation: 1521
This sounds a bit like shilling.

I'm not very big on Amendment 58 since I think we should enact a Wyoming-like trust fund for all our severence tax revenues rather than immediately spend them. I also think that severence taxes should first be allocated to mitigate the harm caused to the communities negatively impacted by the resource extraction itself (most of whom are on the western slope). Amendment 58 doesn't do that.

I do think that we should raise our severence taxes to match Wyoming's (or only nominally below) -- I've never heard any O&G spokesperson explain to me why Wyoming doesn't have O&G fleeing for the exits with its high severence taxes.

Plus, I think the principle behind severence taxes is that the public deserves payment for losing access to non-renewable mineral resources, and to ultimately defray the cost of cleaning up after the energy companies once they're gone. The history of mining and resource extraction in Colorado has shown that the taxpayers always get stuck with a huge bill after the companies have used up the resources and moved on. In fact, in some cases the taxpayer tab ended up being many times what the actual value of the extracted minerals were ever worth, sometimes orders of magnitude more.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-08-2008, 11:00 AM
 
Location: Eastern Colorado
3,887 posts, read 5,729,234 times
Reputation: 5386
Quote:
Originally Posted by tfox View Post
This sounds a bit like shilling.
Not shilling, this comes from a man who has been forced to work in the oilfield due to lack of work/ large cuts in pay in my former career. I also have several friends and relatives that work in the industry due to lack of opportunities in other areas. Whether people like it or not oil and gas are the only truly strong part of Colorado's economy right now.

As for the severance taxes, the credit that amendment 58 is trying to dissolve is actually a credit for the severances tax that the oil and gas companies pay to cities and counties, so in other words the amendment would require the companies to pay taxes on money that they are using to pay taxes. Nobody wants to be double taxed on anything, but why not do it to the only strong part of our economy, that is sure to make it stronger.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-08-2008, 11:09 AM
 
26,144 posts, read 48,824,756 times
Reputation: 31598
Thanks, but I'm voting YES on "58" so that the severance tax rises to some relative degree of parity with nearby states. To leave it at the current lower rate only means the companies will focus first on quickly pumping Colorado oil and gas to exhaustion, then move on to whatever state has the best sweetheart deal. Time for that gravy train to end. Time for CO to receive it's share of the wealth. I've seen the devastation (to both the land and the people) back east, especially in WV, caused by unbridled resource extraction ... first to go were the massive stands of virgin Spruce, then the coal, then oil and gas. Parts of WV look like a moonscape, with poisoned orange water in the streams. Can't have that here, we know better, we must do better. Time for the robber barons to buzz off.

If my gasoline goes up a dime, so what, let the market set the price. There is no need for tax subsidies to an industry that is mature and needs no incentives to pump oil, especially with oil at prices of $147/bbl this past summer. We need incentives instead for wind, solar and electric cars to jumpstart these long-term, cleaner, sustainable energy solutions.

I've seen no stats that say ALL of the oil and gas coming out of our ground here is consumed HERE. I'd bet that a lot of the oil and gas go to OTHER states, which means that my CO tax dollars are subsidizing consumers in OTHER states. No thanks to that.

In another year or so, a new natural gas pipeline (aka The Rockies Express) will be opened by Kinder Morgan Partners, with the express purpose of moving tremendous amounts of COLORADO natural gas to eastern markets. Let THOSE states pay the market price for OUR resources, instead of we in Colorado subsidizing consumption in eastern states.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-08-2008, 10:32 PM
 
Location: in a mystical land far away from you
227 posts, read 1,007,109 times
Reputation: 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike from back east View Post

If my gasoline goes up a dime, so what, let the market set the price.
And when it does go up a dime (or more) the people that support this tax will complain about the oil companies ripping us off and demand lower prices. As you say, let the market determine the price, not the government. No business pays taxes. Customers do, and this is a TAX ON US. We are sick and tired of this attitude that oil is evil and must be punished.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado
Similar Threads
View detailed profiles of:

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:31 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top