this would seem to be a good place to trim a few billion from the budget, but it has been voted down very recently.-Paul
http://thinkprogress.org/2011/03/01/...oil-subsidies/
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|||
this would seem to be a good place to trim a few billion from the budget, but it has been voted down very recently.-Paul
http://thinkprogress.org/2011/03/01/...oil-subsidies/
there's no good reason to fatten up a retriever.
Care to specify what the subsities are? In my state, the tax on a gallon of gas is 38 cents a gallon. The last I saw the oil companies made an average profit on 9 cents a gallon or one fourth as much on a gallon of gas as the government. Nice profit for the government which has to do no work for the gas but makes four times on a gallon of gas as the oil companies do.
The state of NC gets 32.5 cents per gallon of gas. They are ripping us off alot more than the gas companies. Oh yeah, the gas tax increases when the gas price increases real nice.
Hihope Hiland Heathen of Perth CD, RE, CGC, TDI
it would be great to stay on topic, please.
below is a link to financials for Shell for 2010. as you can see they posted a profit of $18.6 billion last year. WHY should we offer them subsidies that our tax dollars pay for?-Paul
http://www.shell.com/home/content/in...sults/2010/q4/
there's no good reason to fatten up a retriever.
they are approximately $4 billion of our tax dollars a year given to the oil corporations. even Mr. Hofmeister says it's not necessary. if that's the case, i think that it would be a good place to shave a little off the budget.-Paul
there's no good reason to fatten up a retriever.
Are you saying that the government writes a check to the oil companies to the tune of 4 billion dollars? If not are you saying that it is 4 billion dollars less that they tax the oil companies? If this is the case then SINCE WHEN WAS IT OUR DOLLARS IN THE FIRST PLACE!
Sounds like progressives, liberals, socialists, marxists, you take your pick, that feel as if the money belongs to the government and they decide how much of your money they let you keep.
Again tell me if the Government writes a check to the oil companies to the tune of 5 billion dollars.
Maybe you should let you elected officials from CT know how you feel. I would wager that they get some of that 4 Bil back from oil lobbyists along with most of the other elected official from around the country. That's why they want to keep earmarks...so they can get their dirty paws on the money. This is a problem in every industry, not just oil.
Bill Davis
100% no need for oil subsidies.
.
That's because Mr Hofmeister is the former President of Shell Oil Company. They don't need any financial help. The government help goes mostly to small companies who compete with the oil giants so yes, Mr Hofmeister would like to eliminate the competition from the smaller comapnies.
Mr Hofmeister has also gone on record for regretting that he sent financial support to Obama's campaign and also regerts voting for Obama.
P S
You still haven't answered the question of where the money goes.
Some is going to help new innovative companies. Soem of it goes to research on how to improve fuel usage. Many oil companies are actually doing research for the Fed Government.
Some of that money goes to them so that they will drill in countries that need us for thier economic survival. What company in thier right mind is going to drill in the Congo without Federal support?
I have no problem with eliminating the money but don't try a fool folks that it is some sort of charity to the oil companies.
Last edited by Franco; 03-07-2011 at 01:20 PM.
Where do we go without great leaders for the defense of our liberties? Who will defend our right to live our lives _as we chose_ without others taking that from us? The answer is, as it should be, no one. We are the defense of our rights and should always remember that. Libertarian blogger