Obama shifts, says he may back offshore drilling

I'm just trying to find the right person to rub shoulders with so that I can make sure I get my $1000 when he/she starts doing it out - but I'll make sure to put in a good word for you.

I hear ya man..Just picking fun with ya, I don't need the $$$. :)
 
I hear ya man..Just picking fun with ya, I don't need the $$$. :)

Apparently! That is, if you're still driving Ed Orgeron's favorite ride. When I'm almost finished up here, I'll have to give you a call and you can help me figure out what the heck I need to do to make some cash! :)
 
Apparently! That is, if you're still driving Ed Orgeron's favorite ride. When I'm almost finished up here, I'll have to give you a call and you can help me figure out what the heck I need to do to make some cash! :)

:birgits_giggle: Man you have a very smart head on you, you don't need my help. Yes, im still spending $120 - $130 to fill up Mr. Ed's ride. :p
 
So...something I've been wondering....they can't just pass the windfall tax down dollar for dollar, right? If they increase prices to recover the losses then their profit goes up, right? Then, the revenue collected would go up...technically there would be no end - but realistically you expect there would be an end. Just something that seemed a bit odd to me....eventually you're going to be into the tenths and hundred of cents increases (theoretically), so I guess it does reach some kind of practical limit. I guess I'm just wondering how much is actually passed along...

There is a big unanswered question and that is - "how are windfall profits defined". Is it an absolute (any profit over "x"), a percentage of profits, or something else.

One issue is that Big Oil could operate less efficiently. It's that old "spend the budget at year end" phenomenon. If they raise their costs, then the profit goes down. Lots of ways they could raise their cost structure.

Big Oil doesn't control the price of oil but they control how much they put on the market. Why try to get more oil (and incur the risk/expenses) if that extra will result in a lower return. The risk/return doesn't add up - they'd be better off investing in other things.

The last WPT curtailed production. Ironically, reducing production will put upward pressure on the price of oil and we haven't accomplished a thing.

The original idea for WPT was to tax excess earnings (whatever the heck that means) on monies NOT reinvested into alternative energy. Now, Obama wants a straight-up transfer from Big Oil to U.S. citizen.
 
A "Gang of 10", including Tennessee's Bob Corker has proposed a compromise in the Senate. I could live with most of the provisions - I would like to think this could help us move toward energy legislation. The compromise calls for off-shore drilling, but no to ANWR drilling. It also calls for a repeal of the tax break for oil companies and billions of investments in alternative fuel vehicles (paid for in part by the oil companies).

Energy compromise offers test for Obama, McCain - CNN.com

If Obama would drop talk of the WPT and just accept the repeal of the tax breaks, he would have a much stronger platform to stand on. His discussion of accepting off-shore drilling if it is part of a larger strategy to lower costs and foreign oil dependence is also the right move (politically). I think that it will be easier for Obama to support this legislation than for McCain - probably because the Republicans seem to be making more concessions than the Democrats, which is to be expected in a Democrat congress I would guess.
 
It was a given Obama would reverse his position on offshore drilling.

no worries, he will switch back as soon as it's politically convenient for him to do so. He, Pelosi, and Reid have no intention of allowing offshore drilling. They are only making noises in that direction to help dem congressman in tough elections.
 
Advertisement

Back
Top