The idea of sending gas rebate checks to taxpayers is just as stupid as the Windfall Profits Tax. Based on how bloated the Federal government is, it would probably cost more than $100 per taxpayer to print and mail all those checks.
I’m rather ashamed my party introduced this as serious legislation.
Like another poster said on this rebate nonsense- it’s bread and circuses from imperial Washington. Don’t ask our Congressthings to do the tough work of creating an actual working energy policy- just have them throw some ca$h at me to shut me up, right?
$100 rebate, taxed and subjected to withholding, buys me 2 tanks of gas, maybe.
When that gas is gone, gas prices will still be a problem.
What then?
And just exactly who will pay for these checks? will these be rebates on gas taxes? when the federal government makes more on a gallon of gas than the most succsessful oil company does, I have to ask the question, If the Federal government is so concerned about high gas prices, why haven’t they repealed the federal gas tax?.
Everyone likes to talk about the billions that Exxon/Mobil made last year but as a function of net profits it was only a profit margin of 10.7%, that is slightly less than the historical average return on investment from the S&P 500. Most of the stock of that company is owned by pension funds. That means that anything that hammers the stock price of Exxon/Mobil will hammer pension funds too, which is taking money from “widows and orphans” as the street likes to call it.
Just for a point of comparison, Microsoft made over 30% profit last year, I don’t see the townspeople marching on Redmond with torches and pitchforks….
If they would just clear a path to meet the demand…
Woody
But our dear leaders must be seen as “Doing Something”. Logic doesn’t enter into it at all, just be able to say something on the Sunday Talk Shows. Sheesh!
The war in Iraq is making ammo expensive.
I want a $100 check to compensate for my .223 NATO bills ….
Now if they revoked the fuel tax for a month that would be a big help.
This is about stupid….Though I will take my check.
Barry said “$100 rebate, taxed and subjected to withholding, buys me 2 tanks of gas, maybe”
WTH? I havent heard anything about that. Is that a rumor, or where in the heck can I find that? If they do tax it maybe I shouldnt cash it………..maybe I should send it back with money due on postage
Hey this is what the Dems wanna do-
http://newsmax.com./archives/ic/2006/4/28/122936.shtml?s=ic
I am SO happy that I got a “beefed up moped” (giggles) In fact, Motorcycles and Moped sales have darn neard tripled.
Rorschach,
With the Platinum parachutes and profit based bonus and incentive plans, just how much of these windfall profits are going to the widows and orphans? It is actually a bad thing for the overall stability of a stock for a company
to be perceived as taking large profits at the expense of the entire driving population that make up potential shareholders of all kinds including those widows and orphans.
So, when oil companies are losing money - should the government subsidize them?
Should work both ways don’t you think? If you take during good times, then you should be forced to give during the bad.
Methinks everyone is just jealous of oil companies making money.
Bif, it is not as if the oil companies are your typical corporation that manuafactures widgets. There is no getting away from the fact that fuel is something that is necessary for us to work and live. We can’t save money by growing it ourselvs, nor is it like any other luxury cost item that we can just do without. And, while we can conserve, we still have to have it to get by. The big oil companies have to be held to a higher standard when it comes to maintaining a higher price. After all they have certainly enjoyed the protection and preferential tax structures doled out by the Bush family and friends. Payback is a b**ch.
Kelly - Any oil companies in your 401K?
Re “The big oil companies have to be held to a higher standard?” with that philosophy - I demand all Americans review their 401Ks and investments and return any money they have made from investing in energy/oil. After you return all the money - then you can go ahead and complain about “windfall profits”.
I suggest reading the childrens story about the little red hen (grew the wheat and made the bread without any help). The oil companies ivested in the risk, many years have lost money on the risk, they explored for oil, they drilled for oil, and now everybody thinks they deserve to eat the oil companies “bread”. Being hypocritical about profit taking is a b$tch.
Bif,
I took the time to check and low and behold, my retirement plans have little investment in oil or gas. That said, I am puzzled as to why it would be of significance that my retirement plan derived a benefit from an investment in any particular company. It is not hypocritical to actually wish that I could recover some of the cost of my fuel outlay. Perhaps I could feel that twinge if I had 25% of my meager retirement dollars invested directly in an Oil company.
Even so I don’t imagine that the average American would see the small bump they might get out of a 401K plan with heavy investment in Oil companies as a windfall. Of course, if your argument holds true, then my net profit from such a long term investment would be nil?
I have read The Little Red Hen. I agree that bread is a good comparison to use when trying to understand the vital nature of fuel. Unfortunately Bif, we can grow our own wheat or rye or whatever your favorite cereal flavor is right here at home with few limitations. What do you think Mr. Bush would do if Raisin Bran got up to close to $5.00 a box…….Oh yea that already happened. When consumers made note of record profits taken by the cereal companies they started raising hell. The cereal companies listened to their customers and recognizing the ill will that was being generated, they reduced their prices.
The difference with the Oil companies, is that they enjoy a relationship with our Government that is only matched by the Arms industry. Bif, what if Ammo became too expensive to practice with and had to be saved purely for defense. How would we be prepared in case of danger. And on and on.
Anyone with a reasonably moral upbringing can clearly see that reaping windfall profits on the backs of those that have been providing you with the means to earn a living even in the hard times is obscene. What about that small business owner that depends on deliveries to make a profit. Most of these folks can’t even afford benefits much less the cushy benefits packages that even mid level employees of the oil companies enjoy.
Take another tack Bif, this one does not hold water much less the heavy weight of oil.
Kelly,
The oil companies are making about 8 1/2 to 9 cents per gallon. Depending upon the state one looks at, taxes can be as high as nearly 32 cents on top of the federal fuel tax of 18.4 cents per gallon.
http://www.gaspricewatch.com/usgastaxes.asp
So, who is making the obscene profits here? Especially considering that government does not produce anything but expenses paid for by taxpayers. Also, regarding Exxon/Mobil, about 70% of their profit $8.4 Billion is made overseas.
Any “windfall tax” of oil companies will end up being paid for by citizens at the gas pump. Thus, any tax added by congress will simply just cost us more, not the oil companies.
What is needed is less governmental restrictions on exploration and production of oil and less governmental regulations of the permitting process of building refineries (which can take up to 10 years to accomplish).
Just within the last few days, Senator Harry Reid of Nevada (Senate minority leader), like many Democrats before him, has said that we need to reduce our “dependence on foreign oil”. Thus, surely even he must be in favor of domestic oil exploration and production. (Sarcasm in that last sentence.)
Increased exploration and production of domestic oil would have an effect on the Oil Futures Market, which is a major factor in the price of oil and thus refined fuel. That effect would be a lowering of the price of fuel to the customer.