<p>A serious question. Just how much should an oil company be allowed to make in profits, from a dollar point of view? Everyone is complaining they make too much. What would satisfy you?</p>
<p>No problem for these companies making $$ and a lot of money. What I object to is that they get involved in governments and oversight.</p>
<p>All industries get involved in government and oversight…</p>
<p>Listening to “Wait, Wait. Don’t Tell Me”
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Please stick to the topic… I actually intended to have a real debate.</p>
<p>Forget the windfall profit tax. Let’s start by rescinding the tax BREAKS our Prez pushed through for his friends in the energy business.</p>
<p>I agree that there should be no windfall profits tax but there should also be no special tax breaks or subsidies for them either.</p>
<p>“A serious question. Just how much should an oil company be allowed to make in profits, from a dollar point of view? Everyone is complaining they make too much. What would satisfy you?”</p>
<p>The oil companies gave the guidance as to what constitutes a “windfall” themselves. Take their third quarter 2007 guidance to Wall Street, and compute what has come in above that for the past 9 months. It isn’t rocket science. Just do the math. (the oil companies did).</p>
<p>Still no one has answered the question. Everyone says the oil companies make too much money. How much do you think they should make? In 2007 Exxon Mobil made 39.5 billion dollars in profit. What should they have been capped at?</p>
<p>No special breaks or subsidies for them and no caps either. Just require them to set aside a certain percentage of their profits to be pooled into a fund that pays for government-subsidized private research into alternative energy possibilities. Use part of the fund to dangle an enormous monetary carrot for the scientist/inventor who comes up with non-polluting renewable energy source/device/etc…</p>
<p>Oil is a limited resource and we need to plan for the day when it becomes too expensive for ordinary people to purchase.</p>
<p>I’m fine with ending the subsidies or whatever. Gas prices will go up if that happens but I’m ok with it. So no limit on profits from you. Gotcha. Why should they be required to contribute their profits to a government backed research program? That’s nothing more than a tax in wolf’s clothing. </p>
<p>If you don’t think the oil companies are trying to be the first to find the next big energy source then you aren’t thinking straight. An alternative energy source will become viable when it can be produced and distributed in vast quantities, cheaper than gasoline. One way or the other it is going to require an enormous expenditure in changing infrastructure.</p>
<p>I agree with the windfall tax because I don’t think the oil companies or any other sort of company should get more unless they do more.</p>
<p>Anyway, it should be done similar to how it was done in 1980. Only difference is that they need to find a way to create a reasonable “statutory base” price. It shouldn’t be arbitrary like it was in the 1980s.</p>
<p>Then put a number to it newjack. How much is too much? This isn’t that difficult. If Exxon made 39.5 billion where should it have been capped or how much of it should have been taxed as a windfall?</p>
<p>Refiners are oil-companies too and they’ve been killed as crude oil prices have risen. The argument that the oil companies make is that their margins are actually pretty low compared to other industries. You can trot out a big $ number but that’s on sales of huge amounts of product. If it costs too much, then use less or use something else or go into the business. The cure for high prices is high prices. I said that to the kids as they mentioned that gasoline prices have come down.</p>
<p>How about if we stop demonizing major oil corporations that employ many thousands of people and pay billions in taxes. For every one dollar in profit, Exxon paid nearly $3 in taxes. Enough is enough.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>[Exxon</a> sets U.S. mark for quarterly profit, misses forecasts - Jul. 31, 2008](<a href=“Exxon sets U.S. mark for quarterly profit, misses forecasts - Jul. 31, 2008”>Exxon sets U.S. mark for quarterly profit, misses forecasts - Jul. 31, 2008)</p>
<p>Come on razor. Don’t be sensible. I was trying to bait some of these people… You’re killing me. Of course they don’t make as much money as it appears when you take revenues into account. There are many companies that make a whole lot more profit as a percent of revenue. In 2007 Citigroup made 21.5 billion in profits on 146.7 billion in revenue for about a 15% net profit. Exxon made 39.5 billion on 347.2 billion in revenue for an 11% net profit. If Citi had similar revenues they would have outstripped Exxon… I don’t recall that last time I heard anyone complain about Big Pharma, Big Tech or Big Bank making too much.</p>
<p>I guess paying a 49% tax rate is just not enough.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If the next big energy source is abundant, free and renewable (i.e. water or solar or the like) then I don’t think the energy companies or any for-profit company will be too interested. They are interested in maximizing profits for as long as possible. End of story.</p>
<p>No way it can bee too much. They still have money left. The liberals won’t be happy until there is even wealth distribution…unless of course it is their wealth you want. It’s ok when it is some faceless company.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So my car is going to run on a solar panel? Not likely. Of course they are interested in maximizing their profit. EVERY for profit business is interested in maximizing their profit.</p>