{OT} gasoline price gouging

Every body is so concerned about the oil companies making a profit and sending their money to the mid east, but none of the Toyota loyalists seem to mind helping Toyota make huge profits on their overpriced cars and taking their customers money out of the county. At least the oil companies are paying taxes to the federal treasury on the profits they earn in the US keep their taxes from going up even more. ;)

mike

Of course they did, they had to since Clinton failed to do what the Congress wanted back in 1989 when the Congress granted him the authority to do whatever was necessary to rid Iraq of the WMDs they claimed they had. Iraq was in violation of the first gulf war ceasefire and to prevent him from attacking our forces in the area, as Iraq was doing for nearly ten years. Do a search so you can catch up on the facts leading to the resumption of hostilities in Iraq, WBMA

mike

Oh?

Tell that to his own dead people......

No, it doesn't.

Exxon/Mobil, $40B in *profits*, the largest EVER posted by any corporation

*ever*.

No, because the economy of the US is on the "Petroleum Standard". I have been saying this since I was a Senior in High School. NOTHING cotrols the amount spent on Goods and Services in the US then the price of petroleum. The price of petroleum goes up, the price of *everything* goes up, and also determines how much money people have for discretionary spending. If people are paying more for gas and food (which is greatly effected by the price of fuel), then they have less money for other things. If allowed to continue this way, the economy will be in a recession before too long.

I have an Orange around here. East Overshoe is next town over.

UGH! Letting Congrees have the money? How about, instead of giving it to Congress to waste on cr@p, they just cut the prices and make everyone happy, and give that money back directly to the people buying the product, so they can have more to spend on other things and keep the economy bouyant?

Oh, I forgot, you're a Democrat. Letting the People spend their own money isn't in the best interest of the country to you guys...

I see a bit of greed creeping in here?

You're getting a whopping $0.35 dividend per share, on a $79 stock?!?!?!

Dude, I had NoestUtil stock, $12 a share and was getting $1.20 a share!!!!

Guess they saw you coming!

That's oil consumption. Oil consumption includes diesel fuel, jet fuel, plastics, gasoline, lubricating oils, etc.

I was talking about gasoline consumption. Sorry for the confusion.

Jeff

I am well aware of that. How much profit should they be allowed to make? They had an 11.65% profit margin last year. Is that an unreasonable profit margin? What is a reasonable profit margin?

Last year, they sold an average of 7.2 million barrels of petroleum products each day, but only 2.7 million barrels was in the US. In other words, over

60% of the petroleum products that were sold were sold outside the US. About $11.2 billion profit (after taxes) was earned in the US, the rest was earned outside the US. The rest was earned outside the US. (Source 2006 ExxonMobil annual report.)

Should they not be allowed to make money outside the US, too?

And what do you suggest we do about this?

Oh, thanks. I had a couple of bananas earlier.

What? I never said that people should not be allowed to decide how to spend their money.

Yeap. The American way.

Gee the stock was $65.73 (adjusting for dividends) one year ago. And it $79 today. That's like an 22% return. I feel so poor.

Yeap!

Ok, look at your own link for finished motor gasoline . The 4 month period from Jan - Apr 2007 increased 1.6% over the same period last year. Doesn't seem to warrant a 40% increase in price.

Um, if you admit the "kooks" have the facts, then it must be you who is rambling.

As far as being taken seriously, you ever consider coming forward to the present? You do realize it isn't 2003 anymore?

If I wished for an earlier time it would be 1943, when Americans were more willing to fight for their freedom than their political party, at the expense of their freedom. Good thing nobody takes you kooks seriously

mike

What's next? Are you going to say the price of crude oil is down? Well, it is, from about $75 to around $63 (from last year). However, according the news reports, there were more problems with the refineries, limiting their capacity. These problems seem to be over and gasoline stockpiles seem to be growing.

However, one thing that the oil companies learned is that Americans will tolerate price around $3 or even more. If you learned that Americans will buy just as much gas at $3 per gallon, would you lower your gas to $2 per gallon?

If gasoline companies are charging what the market will bear, is that price gouging? Or should the gasoline companies have profit limited?

Jeff

Should the Natural Gas company charge what the market will bear, should the Water, electric company, Sewage etc. You may say yes, but when it comes to essentials, that effect peoples lives and economy, I say no. But I do agree that cutting usage wis the only real solution.

How was the contained Saddam a threat to your freedom? Good thing no one is taking you kooks seriously any longer.

You should listen to some actual Democrats instead of getting your misinformation about them from people with other agendas.

The domestic oil companies' huge profits are driven largely by their old oil sources. They are diggin up oil that belongs to The People and selling it back to us at highly inflated prices. They discovered some of it dozens of years ago, their production price can be very, very low but their selling price is dictated by the market.

The Democrats are looking at this and thinking, "Well, sure the oil companies risked some money finding it, so they deserve a return on their investment. But the returns they're getting selling our own national resources back to us are ridiculous." Why not hit ExxonMobil with a $20billion windfall profits tax on that $40billion? They would still be making a crapload of money and a lot of it is being made, now, with no risk whatever.

Alexander Hamilton was a genius. Did you know that? He was instrumental in developing a policy - pay off the war loans - that was very significant in holding the country together. It gave the former Colonials with influence and local power a reason to stick with the Union.

If you look at Iraq, you find three tribes... the Sunnis, the Shi'ites and the Kurds. They have no particular reason to want to keep Iraq together. Alexander Hamilton would look at this problem and I believe he would propose a solution (which, to be fair HAS been proposed by other people). Give every Iraqi a dividend or ownership of the oil as a national resource. Everybody's entitled to 1/(population) of the oil and its profits, so every Iraqi citizen would get a check every year. Suddenly, they'd have a reason to stick together.

Bush policy is to stabilize Iraq as one nation. Why aren't we pressing hard for shared oil ownership? Because our oil companies don't want you thinking in terms of you ownnig the resources that they're selling to you. It would be good Iraqi policy but it would be bad domestic US policy (bad for the oil companies, anyway). If this idea of community ownership gets out of hand, ExxonMobil's $40 billion would get taxed the way it should - or new concepts of oil and gas leases would be developed that would eat away at their $40 billion.

Are you referring to NU on the NYSE? They're only paying $.80 and their price is $32.

Actually, you have to get your numbers right. The $40B is worldwide profits. Only $11B is US profits. Are we going ot penalize them for making money outside the US?

I think, in the future, setting the royalties so that they are fair is a great idea. However, the US made a contract with the oil companies, and should honor that contract.

It was both Democratic and Republican administrations who agreed to the contracts.

After they take the oil out and pay the royalties, it is their oil, not ours. They do add value to the oil, but getting it out of the ground, refining it and delivering it to where it can be used (i.e., the gas stations).

IMHO, Americans don't take ownership of public resources. That includes thinking of public parks, libraries, schools and roads and a resource in which they are part owners. The same extends to mineral resources under the ground. If Americans thought this way, they wouldn't dump trash all over the place and take pride in their schools, parks and libraries.

Jeff

Yeah, but we bought at $12 and had years of $1.20 dividends. It went to $29, then started tanking, but the were still paying $1.20. I sold a good chunk at $19, the dividend stopped, the stock went to $9, and then we scrapped the board. (we had more shares than some on the board!).

I should have bought at $10 but I didn't. Yeah, I'm only getting $0.80 now, but I bought my shares low, cashed out ahead, and still have a good amount of voting shares.

That is correct. If this is the way it's done, then adding a "Windfall" tax would be Double-Dipping, and I am certainly not for that.

I'd rather get my 'rebate' at the pump. Congrees is the last bunch I want to see getting that kind of money.

Well put. Some do but hardly enough.

That makes sense, but you got that impressive yield only because you bought a risky stock. Their price was depressed to a yield of 10% because they had problems. You could have ended up under the bus. You had to get out (and back in) at the right time.