Senate Blocks Legislation To End Big Oil Subsidies (global warming, dollar, money)

[burdell]

Originally Posted by DRob4JC

That's liberal economic policy right there. They will have to accept lower profits.

And what is your statement but conservative lack of reading comprehension?

Just WHERE did I ever say they would "have to accept" lower profits?

Please don't comment on what you obviously cannot read and understand.

[DRob4JC]

Originally Posted by burdell

And what is your statement but conservative lack of reading comprehension?

Just WHERE did I ever say they would "have to accept" lower profits?

Please don't comment on what you obviously cannot read and understand.

I never said that you said they would have to accept lower profits. The fact that you even mentioned that liberal line of thinking tells me you don't get it.

[DRob4JC]

Originally Posted by TigerLily24

Who is stopping them from updating their technology?

My mistake - no new refineries have been built since the 1970s.

[nononsenseguy]

Originally Posted by JimMe

Please distinguish between tax credits that are available to any manufacturer, not just oil companies, and subsidies that involve sending tax money to favored industries, like ethanol, solar and wind.

Thank you. Took the words right out of my mouth. These aren't "subsidies". Obama likes to call them "subsidies" because that plays well with the Democrat base, who hate oil (bet they like having cheap gasoline though, and all the other things oil provides).

[nononsenseguy]

Originally Posted by DRob4JC

Ethanol subsidies gone - I understand price increase for that. Blows away Burdell's theory of companies taking less profit.

To me, we really don't need to go anywhere for oil. We have tied our own hands by where we choose NOT to explore. We produce 20 billion barrels. The CBO said there is 145 billion barrels more available that we aren't going to get.

I understand the whole world market view you stated, but we are doing a small fraction of what we should be doing for ourselves.

You're exactly right. We could have gasoline at a much cheaper price if our government would quit bowing to the whims of the stupid environmentalist whacko's. We have plenty of oil.

If we became serious players in the world market once again, the price of oil on the world market would drop. It's a funny thing about the law of supply and demand; it always works as expected.

[HappyTexan]

From the OP's link the President said this:

“Right now, the biggest oil companies are raking in record profits,” Obama said. “On top of these record profits, oil companies are also getting billions a year in taxpayer subsidies.”

Just replace "oil companies" with "GE" and you have the same picture.
Nice to see he's taking sides again.

[burdell]

Originally Posted by burdell

It would still be a competetive market. Would prices necessarily go higher or would they just have to accept lower profits?

Originally Posted by DRob4JC

That's liberal economic policy right there. They will have to accept lower profits.

OK - remove alternative energy subsidies - they will just have to survive on their own.

Originally Posted by DRob4JC

I never said that you said they would have to accept lower profits. The fact that you even mentioned that liberal line of thinking tells me you don't get it.

I asked an either or question.

You then accused me of stating "liberal economic policy......they will have to accept lower profits."

Now you deny it.

I can't think much else but that you're a typically self-Right flip=flopper.

[wade52]

Originally Posted by DRob4JC

Senate blocks proposed end to oil company tax breaks (http://www.southbendtribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-la-pn-senate-blocks-proposed-end-to-oil-company-tax-breaks-20120329,0,5624855.story - broken link)

An attempt to rollback oil company tax breaks was blocked in the Senate, despite a Rose Garden push by President Obama who said the big five oil companies are doing “just fine” as consumers struggle with painfully high gas prices at the pump.

Republicans led opposition to the measure, but several Democrats from oil-rich states joined the GOP in a filibuster to prevent the legislation from advancing. The vote was 51-47, failing to reach the 60-vote threshold.

With tax subsidies, prices are $4/gal. How high would the price go without the subsidies?

Obama wants alternative energy subsidies, but not oil subsidies. Sounds like he is attempting to pick favorites.

Either have energy subsidies for all, or eliminate subsidies for all. Don't pick favorites.

Thankfully, even a left leaning Senate couldn't agree to this.

This should surprise no one. The GOP is owned by big oil, along with various other corporate masters.

[HappyTexan]

Originally Posted by wade52

This should surprise no one. The GOP is owned by big oil, along with various other corporate masters.

Did you not read that DEMS also voted against it ?
Take off those blinders.

[burdell]

Originally Posted by wade52

This should surprise no one. The GOP is owned by big oil, along with various other corporate masters.

So are the Dems, diffeernt masters with the same result, the people get the short end of the stick.