It was surreal to see the chief executives of five major oil companies hauled before Congress today to justify their industry’s record profits. House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., is demanding that Big Oil spend some of its earnings on consumer price relief. Other lawmakers are arguing for a windfall profit tax. But Wednesday’s hearing likely was just posturing by lawmakers feeling heat from angry constituents. Actual action by Congress and the Bush administration seems remote.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- ANTI on Open thread 11/24
- DavidB on Open thread 11/24
- ANTI on Open thread 11/24
- ANTI on Open thread 11/24
- DavidB on Open thread 11/24
- Chas on Open thread 11/24
- Chas on Open thread 11/24
- okobserver on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- okobserver on Open thread 11/24
47 Comments
This is too much. You can bet I’m hot.
George W. Bush threatened Iran with a nuclear strike on channel 3 in Israel, and that alone drove the price of crude oil through the roof.
Iran supplies 60% of the world’s crude oil supply and oil traders buy futures on the open market, fearing oil supplies would be drastically cut.
Anytime the MSM uses the term “Big Oil” their distracting your attention from the real problem and using you for a simple-minded patsy.
Israeli greed is the problem with the price of gasoline at the pump. Bush gave Israel penetrated bombs and radio-active oil is of no use to anyone { what’s left if any }.
Knowing this nuclear threat was coming meant the Israeli oil traders have advanced notice that crude oil prices would spike and made of fortune. The price you’re paying at the pump right now is a direct result of lining the pockets of Israeli insider oil traders, making them rich.
Don’t bend over when the MSM starts talking about “big oil” and BTW, big oil supplies a lot of “big oil” to keep our economy running.
That Senate committee is truthfully impaired.
We invaded Iraq for the oil. Everybody knows this.
No it turns out we can’t even get the Iraqi oil out.
Corrupt AND incompetent. It’s the worst of both worlds: big government that DOESN’T help people.
Considering that big oil owns the president and vice president, I won’t hold my breath waiting for any relief that comes from republicans. Oh, they’ll talk tough and beat their chests, but when the rubber hits the road, nothing will get done. Even republicans aren’t stupid enoough to bite the hand that feeds them.
The really sweet part is, things are only going to get worse for republicans between now and next November. We have the “perfect storm”. Unless they take over the ballot boxes (and I wouldn’t put it past them), I think the republican lock on the government is over.
I oppose any action against the oil companies. The reasoning is too vast.
Ed has really gone off the deep end in his fantasies this time. A little research of OPEC says that Iran has proven oil reserves of approximately 96.4 billion barrels. Worldwide proven reserves are 940.8 billion barrels. Iran totals about 10.2%. Long way from 60%.
But, then again, when have facts ever bothered “Ed”?
This link indicates that Iraq has 115 billion barrels of proven reserves with many more possible. Their oil is the highly desirable “sweet crude” version also.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/iraq.html
“Ed” was postulating about Iran, not Iraq, and naturally had his facts wrong. No surprise there.
XXX
Between now and next november elections expect the Mossad to blow-up things here on American soil.
They need Americans to be fearful of so-called “terrorists” attacking Americans in their own backyards.
Bush will then round-up some Arabs in a foreign country and they will “confess” to whatever the Mossad blew-up.
Expect those attacks to increase as the election draws near.
My My, Ray the stupid Zionist sympathizing punk is starting to sweat.
I never mentioned oil “reserves” but rather oil production and delivery.
“Reserves” are guesswork anyway.
Crude prices would not move on the gesswork of “reserves” but just immediate threats against production and deliveriies.
Don’t flatter yourself. I don’t “sweat” the petty babblings of a total idiot.
So when you talk you sweat. ok
OK kids, let’s get this straight. Big business, including oil, rules the world. Always has, always will. Henceforth the phrase, “Money talks and bullshit walks”. The almighty dollar, in whatever form or currency, has always been the deciding factor. No matter what your politics or beliefs might be. If anybody expects that to change then they are damn fools.
I can remember traveling up and down the east coast when the peanut man was pres. Had to have two license tags, one for even days and one for odd days so I could buy gas. The price was $4.50 per gallon if you adjusted for inflation to today’s prices. Then I have spent over an hour in line only to have the station run out of gas! On the New Jersey turnpike most places limited you to 5 gallons; If you could get it!
All of you nit wits that think “big Oil” is the problem are nuts. Government is the problem. Politicians afraid of the environmental wackos are the problem. I don’t care if the price of gas goes up to $5.00 per gallon as long as I can get it and I don’t have to wait in line.
The major oil companies are doing a great job keeping us supplied with fuel considering the regulations imposed on them by state, federal and local governments.
Let ‘em drill for oil! Let ‘em build refineries! Let the electric companies build nuke plants!
If you think the ragheads have us by the balls now, wait until we have to start importing gasolene instead of crude!
The “problem”, if you choose to phrase it that way, is that the world has changed. China and India are now fast rising industrial powers with a thirst for oil too. The winners in this competition will be the ones who can transform themselves into highly efficient users of energy resources.
The same thing happened to the United States in the late 60, early 70s. For 25 years after WWII we stood unchallenged as producers for the world. Our companies became complacent and moribund by success with no competition or challenge. We failed to see the rise of Germany and especially Japan. We were unable to compete with them because we ha ‘lost the edge’.It has taken us the better part of 25 years to reform our thinking.
Unfortunately it appears as if we’ve hit another defining moment..and we seem unwilling or unable to deal with it. We need to get over the idea that oil and gasoline will be freely available for an infinite amount of time. We need to get rid of SUVs, invest in high efficiency capital equipment, develop alternate fuels, etc. We need to free ourselves from oil dependence as much as possible. That’s goingto be the future. We can lead or we can be left in the dust.
Brian, it doesn’t appear that you have much faith in free market forces. After all, we are a capitalistic society. Surely you exaggerate when you say that we need to get rid of SUVs! Do you suggest a government ban? That’s pretty socialistic, don’t you think?
SUVS will fall out of favor when fuel gets prohibitively expensive. That is if we let market forces work. We already see reductions today in SUV sales because of prices increases.
I have confidence in our free enterprise system. I think that as the supply of oil dwindles over the next century or so, tremendous breakthroughs will occur in energy production. All of those things that you listed will happen because of market forces. Private enterprise, not the government, will throw it’s resources into doing so. Because it will be profitable to do so.
Brian is right in that we need to move away from oil toward alternatives. But with the current pres and vp I doubt anything will happen. The smart thing to do would be to explore alternatives (hybrid and fuel cell cars for example) and work to eliminate our oil dependance completely. But again it would mean tweedle dumb and tweedle dumber would lose money. So they will just have to stick it to America.
Know what I call five greedy oil producing corporations hauled into the Senate to answer questions? A good beginning!
Next I want some tarrifs put on foreign goods. I want companies that outsource our manufacturing told with the whole force of government, “If you don’t make it here, you don’t sell it here!”
Finally, I want the capital gains tax that Bush rescinded put back in place. This tax was for a long time a reminder to those folks who make nothing but money of their responsibility as citizens of a nation rather than scrutinizers of their bottom line. Do that with not just the oil companies but all of corporate America and you just might get these folks interested in something beyond their own personal greed. I think we have seen more than ample evidence they aint gonna get patriotic on their own.
Dudley,
I call for things like high fuel efficiency standards. I’m amazed at your belief that everything is or should be subject to market forces and your belief that there is any purely capitalistic country in the world.
If you’re a pure market capitalist, why do we have drug laws? Surely people should be able to smoke a joint or do some blow as they see fit. If these drugs cause medical problems then people will simply not buy them.
For that matter, why do we have an FDA which prohibits the marketing of drugs that are not safe and effective? Surely this is a limit on capitalism. Companies should be able to produce and market whatever they want. If a drug is ineffective or kills people, the market will simply punish the stock price until the manufacturer removes the unsafe drug.
Why can’t I buy yellowcake uranium or maybe even weapons grade plutonium? Or maybe I’d like a howitzer or some VX nerve agent.
See what I’m getting at? The market isn’t ‘free’ right now. We’ve taken common sense precautions to protect the public welfare and national security, for example.
The government already has a list of raw materials that it considers vital to national security…many aren’t found in abundance in the US. Oil should be added to the list.
Galahad, you said “We invaded Iraq for the oil.” Could you please explain what you mean by that. Who is going to benefit, how will they benefit, details like that. You may even assume that the war had proceeded according to the best-laid plans.
A sad day when the baseball players are sworn in to testify before the Senate, but the oil execs dont’ need to be sworn in.
Joe,If you havent’ figured out by now that Cheney and Bush make their fortunes in oil, that help explains why you can’t see the facts in front of your face because of the kool-aid you’re drinking.
Sum1, I’m not disputing that the war in Iraq was for oil, and that the two you mentioned have oil industry interests, but just how does it work? I’ve never seen an explanation of how the oil or dollars would flow.
Brian: I understand the point that you are trying to make, and I agree that a certain amount of government oversight is necessary in certain circumstances.
However, I don’t think that you can make a valid comparison between the government mandating what kind of vehicle someone can own and drive, and the role of government agencies set up to regulate the sale of controlled substances. Or yellow cake uranium? That is stretching it a little too far.
100 billion dollar profits?Damn, wish I would have bought some stock.At least some Americans have flourished under George’s watch.
Joe–
The oil companies in Iraq were “nationalized” by Saddam Hussein.
That meant basically that the gov’t owned them, and the big Bush backers couldn’t make as much money off of Saddam as they could if they were controlling the product from wellhead to gastank.
Also there were those pesky sanctions. Saddam wasn’t selling his oil to Americans (with the exception of one Texas refinery) because he hated us for any number of reasons.
The plan was simple. We go in and overthrow Saddam. We install our corrupt and venal guy, Ahmad Chalabi, who then turns around and “privatizes” the oil fields by selling drilling rights to big American companies like Saudi Arabia has done.
Unfortunately, Ahmad Chalabi was even more corrupt and venal than we thought, and started (actually CONTINUED) working for the Iranians.
So he had to go and go he did. Now the US is trying to establish a weak “federalized” government that will essentially let us do what we came their to do, “privatize” the oil fields for big American companies.
That’s why you don’t see an effective central gov’t emerging in Iraq. It’s by design. BushCo. can’t get the oil if they don’t have fragmentation and chaos.
Just to develop the above, BushCo needs a legitimate gov’t that it can “negotiate” with and that will maintain a semblance of security for oil workers and pipelines, but that gov’t has to be weak and fragmented enough that it is easily manipulated by Big Oil.
It needs a facade of democracy to justify its control. Unfortunately you can’t have both. You can have democracy or you can have control, but not both.
That’s the whole problem in Iraq right now. Bush wants to give Iraqis democracy, but at the same time they want to run the country.
It can’t be done. That’s why the whole deal is totally FUBAR.
Dudley,
Believe me, I understand where you’re coming from and I would have agreed 30 years ago. But the facts are these..the United States is becoming increasingly dependent upon a non-expendable material..we can’t just walk away from it. This holds us hostage to it. Therefore we need to try to break our dependence on it to whatever degree in whatever timetframe we can. Oil has become an item of vital national interest and (in)security.
Further, exploration and discovery around the world has not kept up with demand. Many experts now predict that oil production will peak soon, to decline to almost nothing perhaps in 100 years. So, again, it is in our long term interest to free ourselves from oil.
Finally, burning oil is such a waste of a precious resource that could in principle be somewhat renewable. If you look at a bottle of shampoo, every chemical in the water and the bottle itself were derived from oil. The plastic is recyclable. Any plastic you can name most likely came out of an oil barrel. Paints and pigments. integrated circuit components..the list goes on. Instead we take the starting material and burn what precious little we have left…
As long as the oil companies have the government in their pockets and are making 100 billion dollar profits, nothing will change. This country’s addiction to oil is the life blood for their greed.
Brian–are you familiar with some guy named Gold? His theory is that oil is continually created at high pressure and heat under the earth’s crust.
I don’t buy it, but I know you have a background in science, so I wondered if you’d heard of this idea.
Galahad,
I’ve heard of the conjecture, but never read anything about it. Let me find some information and references, read a bit, and then report back to you.
Even as Congress was beginning to question the oil companies’ windfall profits, they rushed through passage in early October HR 3893 to give oil refineries federal insurance in case refinery projects were slowed or halted by lawsuits or government regulations.
And in late summer Bush signed a bill giving $14.5 billion in tax breaks and incentives to the oil companies–who obviously didn’t need them.
Maybe those laws could now be somehow be rescinded as it was obviously a big misunderstanding that the oil companies were in financial difficulties.
Or are our laws like those of the Medes-Persians? And we, the average consumers, must be dumped into the lion’s den for not worshipping the golden gas pump?
Thanks, Brian and Sean.
Exactly right. Local communities and the feds give all kinds of tax breaks and subsidies to Wal-Mart so that it can run mom-and-pop operations (who don’t get subsidies) out of business.
Oil is part of the same story. Cut welfare for the poor to provide welfare for the rich.
Something like a third of all Wal-Mart employees are on medicaid because they can’t afford healthcare. Talk about abusing the system–it’s the world’s biggest and richest corporation forcing their employees into taxpayer funded relief.
Real nice.
I know this is off point but,Galahad I know many people who feel the same way about Wally World.The problem is that now many people in small towns have no where else to go. I’d go to Costco if there was one. I’d pay a little more knowing that Costco pays their employees a lot more.
Face it, our country has been taken over by corporate greed and the American public is too stupid or apathetic to try and do anything about it.I’ve got to go, I want to drive my SUV to Walmart so I can get a headstart on my Xmas shopping.
Tracy, if you feel that Walmart doesn’t pay its employees enough, there’s nothing I know of that prevents you from tipping the cashier a few dollars as you check out. Doing that would let you express your beliefs fully.
Steve, sorry that misses the point entirely.
Why should WalMart NOT do the appropriate thing and then be rewarded for NOT doing it by having others pick up the tab?
The situation is somewhat similar to what’s happened in the schools. We have a bunch of kids NOT performing but we don’t have the will or facilities to keep them all back so we essentially reward them by ’socially promoting’ them anyway. They’re rewarded for non-performance.
We already pay a lot of WalMart’s bills. Whenever an amployee or an employeee’s dependent has to go to the ER for care because WalMart’s health coverage is inadequate, WE pay the bill. Walmart has foisted off onto the general public a lot of their health care tab. Why should we now, in addition, subsidize their substandard salaries? When do they, as a corporation, do the right thing?
Galahad,
For a layman’s explanation check out
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin
and
http://voluntaryxchange.typepad.com/voluntaryxchange/2004/06/where_does_oil_.html
I gues you cannot dismiss Dr. Gold since he has been right on several other topics considered wrong or improbable.
Interesting, thanks for pointing him out.
Tracy,When I see walmart with banks, fast food restaurants, optometrists and all the other “departments” they attach to themselves I get worried for our future.I see Walmart as becoming a monopoly and someday in our future our only choice will be walmart land. Even dillons is having trouble competing, what will happen when there is only one grocery store andthat’s walmart.Are quiktrips and walmarts our economic future?
Brin, isn’t the true problem here is that there are many people who just don’t have the education or skills to earn more than what Walmart pays?
After all, if they did have an alternative to earn more, wouldn’t most of them take that opportunity? Or wouldn’t Walmart need to pay them more so that its pay is competitive with its employees’ alternatives?
And by earning, I mean their total pay package — their salary plus whatever Walmart contributes to the health insurance.
Steve,
I don’t subscribe to the “iron law of wages”..a bit outdated but gets to the crux of the issue. WE\ithout some sort of regulation, the salaries of workers tend towards bare subsistence levels. I also don’t subscribe to the idea that I should have to pay for a a share of my “profit” because WalMart is unwilling topay part of it’s “profit” to keep its employees minimally insured.
Let me try that again…
I don’t subscribe to the “iron law of wages”..a bit outdated but gets to the crux of the issue. Without some sort of regulation, the salaries of workers tend towards bare subsistence levels. I also don’t subscribe to the idea that I should have to use a share of my “profit” to pay for WalMart workers’ needs because WalMart is unwilling to pay part of it’s “profit” to keep its employees minimally insured.
Now that you are on the topic of Walmart, I found amusing Walmart’s effort several weeks ago when they protested in English court TESCO’s (a large British grocery chain) apparent monopoly in the British grocery business. Not that TESCOs–or Krogers (Dillons) for that matter–have anything to worry about when it comes to groceries since Walmart has LOUSY produce. I mean, it’s spoiled before it gets through the checkout counter.
Now that you are on the topic of Walmart, I found amusing Walmart’s effort several weeks ago when they protested in English court TESCO’s (a large British grocery chain) apparent monopoly in the British grocery business. Not that TESCOs–or Krogers (Dillons) for that matter–have anything to worry about when it comes to groceries since Walmart’s produce is spoiled before it gets through the checkout counter.
Sum1, it has already happened in smaller towns. There’s a couple of conveinence stores and the supercenter, that’s it. I know of one family owned grocery chain that pulled up stakes an entire year before a new supercenter is to open.
If we paid everyone a living wage there would be little need for the social programs everyone hates.
Sum1, whatever the wage that is a “living wage,” there will be some people who don’t have the skill, training, or ability to produce something that others value enough to pay them that wage. After all, if someone did value their output that much, they could be earning that wage right now. I don’t see how we can overcome this basic reality just by passing a law.
Sum1, whatever the wage that is a “living wage,” there will be some people who don’t have the skill, training, or ability to produce something that others value enough to pay them that wage. After all, if someone did value their output that much, they could be earning that wage right now. I don’t see how we can overcome this basic reality just by passing a law.