That'll lower oil prices! Take that! Arrrh!

[Beerina]

Uhhh, thanks?

Topping the list for repeal are:

• Tax breaks for refinery expansion and for geological studies to help oil exploration.

• A measure passed two years ago primarily to promote domestic manufacturing. It allows oil companies to take a tax credit if they choose to drill in this country instead of going abroad.

Because oil companies just eat the additional taxes instead of passing it on, and expanded refining capacity and domestic drilling are useless to keep prices low and generate oil in places that are not the mideast.

 

[zenith-nadir]

A great documentary I highly recommend is "Who Killed the Electric Car?"

It really opened my eyes about how the oil and auto manufacturers conspired to limit the development of the electric car. Imagine, (as John would say), a world without [SIZE=-1]dependency on foreign oil.[/SIZE]

 

[Grammatron]

A great documentary I highly recommend is "Who Killed the Electric Car?"

It really opened my eyes about how the oil and auto manufacturers conspired to limit the development of the electric car. Imagine, (as John would say), a world without [SIZE=-1]dependency on foreign oil.[/SIZE]

Cool conspiracy! First you dump hundreds of millions upon hundreds of millions into the electric car project. Then spend more millions to lobby states and cities to allocate parking spaces and charging units for those cars. Then kill those cars. Brilliant conspiracy I say.

 

[Beerina]

Well my point was that if you're mad at high oil prices because (among other things) lack of refining capacity, you don't want to cut that tax break. And if you're mad at foreign oil needs, you don't wanna cut the tax breaks to find domestic oil. You might want alternate fuels, but that's in addition to finding more domestic oil. It's a multi-pronged attack.

 

[Rob Lister]

This may or may not be off topic, but why are not oil sands profitable yet?

 

[RandFan]

This may or may not be off topic, but why are not oil sands profitable yet?

According to 60 minutes they are.

 

[BobK]

It seems the Israeli's may have come up with a cheap way to use oil shale. They're talking about $17 a barrel to produce a few years down the road. Don't know how much of it might be hype.

A.F.S.K. Hom Tov presented its oil shale processing method on Tuesday, outside Haifa and just down the street from one of the country`s two oil refinery facilities.

'Because the patents for this process belong to (the company), Israel is the most advanced in the world in the effort to create energy from oil shale,' Moshe Shahal, a Hom Tov legal representative and a former Israeli energy minister, told United Press International.

Shahal estimated that the company`s Negev Desert facility would begin full-scale production in three to four years, while other countries with oil shale deposits will need five to six years to reach production.

Article

 

[SezMe]

Because oil companies just eat the additional taxes instead of passing it on <snip>

But doesn't this assertion contradict the oil industry's assertion that the price of oil is driven by market forces? Can you cite evidence that the oil industry "eats" the additional tax expense instead of passing it on?

 

[AWPrime]

Cool conspiracy! First you dump hundreds of millions upon hundreds of millions into the electric car project. Then spend more millions to lobby states and cities to allocate parking spaces and charging units for those cars. Then kill those cars. Brilliant conspiracy I say.

Frankensteins monster?

 

[Beerina]

But doesn't this assertion contradict the oil industry's assertion that the price of oil is driven by market forces? Can you cite evidence that the oil industry "eats" the additional tax expense instead of passing it on?

I was being sarcastic. "Of course the industry will gladly take the cost of the additional taxes out of their profits rather than just pass it on to the consumers."

 

[Lurker]

Beerina:

Essentially, you are saying we should not repeal those tax breaks cause the cost will just be passed on to us.

Taking your logic in a consistent fashion, oil companies should not be taxed at all since they just pass the cost of those taxes on to us. Matter of fact, the govt should start giving money to the oil companies and that money would be passed on as savings to the customer, right? If the govt gave enough money, gas could be free! Waahoo!

Back to reality, I think that oil companies can pass on SOME of the increased cost due to revocation of tax breaks but not all. Therefore, there is some incentive to repeal the tax breaks.

Lurker

 

[Lurker]

And refining capacity has little to do with the cost of gasoline. Oil companies have spent billions expanding capacities at existing refineries and see no need to build new refineries.

Lurker

 

[Beerina]

Beerina:

Essentially, you are saying we should not repeal those tax breaks cause the cost will just be passed on to us.

Among other reasons. The primary reason not to repeal them are because we want more refineries built, and we want more domestic exploration.

Taking your logic in a consistent fashion, oil companies should not be taxed at all since they just pass the cost of those taxes on to us.

All taxation lessens production of that which is taxed. This isn't to say government can't make up some of the difference with infrastructure, etc. (not that I argue this) but at best it is amelioration of damage done.

Matter of fact, the govt should start giving money to the oil companies and that money would be passed on as savings to the customer, right? If the govt gave enough money, gas could be free! Waahoo!

No, that's not how economics works.

It's amazing how much difficulty people have just grasping the concept of government leaving you the hell alone. It's always government taxing like a predator, or someone sucking on the government's tit.

Now, evolutionary politics explains this with an analysis of the vote combined with shallow ethics the average person has with respect to not jamming things they believe down other people's throats, but sheesh.

Back to reality

Government taxation is absolutely nothing, if not reality.

, I think that oil companies can pass on SOME of the increased cost due to revocation of tax breaks but not all. Therefore, there is some incentive to repeal the tax breaks.

Lurker

You can think that if you wish, and you'll be wrong. The consumer pays for it all ultimately, anyway, and decreased profits reduce the incentive to produce more gasoline.

And your belief, even if 100% correct still does not address the issue of the increased taxes decreasing the incentive to expand domestic oil production or produce more refineries.

Shall these reduced tax breaks increase the oil companies' efforts? No? Shall it allow the effort to remain even at the same level? No?

Hmmmm.

 

[Beerina]

And refining capacity has little to do with the cost of gasoline. Oil companies have spent billions expanding capacities at existing refineries and see no need to build new refineries.

Lurker

Then there's no need to repeal the tax breaks for it, is there? Any future expansion it would help, and repealing it would hurt. So there's no need, is there?

Unless, of course, you believe in the usefulness of politicians grandstanding pointlessly to make the common yokel feel he's doing sumptin' 'bout them evil rich bastards.

 

[Lurker]

Among other reasons. The primary reason not to repeal them are because we want more refineries built, and we want more domestic exploration.

I'll disagree with the former and agree with the latter. Why build more refineries? Our current # is keeping up with demand and oil companies have found it far more cost effective to expand existing refinery capacity rather than build new ones.

All taxation lessens production of that which is taxed. This isn't to say government can't make up some of the difference with infrastructure, etc. (not that I argue this) but at best it is amelioration of damage done.

Actually, you are pushing when you should be pulling here. DEMAND will be effected by price increases, not SUPPLY.

You can think that if you wish, and you'll be wrong. The consumer pays for it all ultimately, anyway, and decreased profits reduce the incentive to produce more gasoline.

Incorrect. Tax increases or decreases may or may not be all passed on to the customer. It depends on the elasticity of demand.

And your belief, even if 100% correct still does not address the issue of the increased taxes decreasing the incentive to expand domestic oil production or produce more refineries.

Shall these reduced tax breaks increase the oil companies' efforts? No? Shall it allow the effort to remain even at the same level? No?

Hmmmm.

And yet we see massive investment into oil exploration despite these oil companies being taxed. It does nto work like an on/off switch. Our taxing may effect what a company does but we need to consider the ROI, or in this case, the financial ramifications incremental changes to the corporate tax rates would bring about.

I posit that the financial rewards of taxing them is more than the higher cost to consumers of gas. Your opinion appears to be different.

Lurker

 

[Lurker]

Then there's no need to repeal the tax breaks for it, is there? Any future expansion it would help, and repealing it would hurt. So there's no need, is there?

You would be correct IF the only thing you are looking at is the cost of gasoline. I am not sure why one would have such a myopic view.

Lurker