Main Menu

Sponsors:

Poll: windfall profits

Started by Ron Wenrich, February 13, 2006, 07:53:34 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Ron Wenrich

Poll ends 2-27-06

The last quarter, oil companies made something like $10 billion in profit, and $36 billion for the year.  Too much?
Never under estimate the power of stupid people in large groups.

Don_Papenburg

I voted NO  because  I would not want my profits taxed extra  If I ever had a windfall.   
Frick saw mill  '58   820 John Deere power. Diamond T trucks

SwampDonkey

Not as long as they're paying their share.  ;)
"No amount of belief makes something a fact." James Randi

1 Thessalonians 5:21

2020 Polaris Ranger 570 to forward firewood, Husqvarna 555 XT Pro, Stihl FS560 clearing saw and continuously thinning my ground, on the side. Grow them trees. (((o)))

ellmoe

   Due to circumstances beyound my control I've had a "windfall loss" before. I don't recall the government pitching in to help then. I sure wouldn't want them trying to take any "windfall profits" from me. The increase in fuel prices drove down demand, and then prices came back down. I think the market worked. Beside the ROI is not that great for the oil companies anyhow, it's the volume that makes it impressive.
Mark





Thirty plus years in the sawmill/millwork business. A sore back and arthritic fingers to prove it!

GHRoberts

I must own some oil stock in a mutual fund.

We have several clients who own a lot of oil. They spent a lot of money for a lot of years before they made much. Now they are richer than God.

I don't want to tax them.

farmerdoug

I would never vote for the government to decide to tax windfalls.  How would it be determined what a windfall is?  What if you only make 50,000 a year and your parents die and leave you an estate worth 500,000 dollars.  With today's land prices that is very common.  Now since you only make 50,000 a year that would be a windfall so the government takes half and then still makes you pay taxes on it then that would be okay, right?  I think not.

Windfalls are only there because of shortsightedness of others.  The government might as well tell you what you can sell your wood for and what everyone else sells their stuff for then we will be USSR II.

Farmerdoug
Doug
Truck Farmer/Greenhouse grower
2001 LT40HDD42 Super with Command Control and AccuSet, 42 hp Kubota diesel
Fargo, MI

Onthesauk

How about if you phrase the question, "You have a couple of hundred acres of marketable timber and lumber prices go up ten fold.  Should you pay windfall profit tax on that increase in profit?"  It's really just a matter of degrees.  They have an inventory of oil in the ground that they have invested in over a period of time, kind of like growing trees.
John Deere 3038E
Sukuki LT-F500

Don't attribute irritating behavior to malevolence when mere stupidity will suffice as an explanation.

Bill

Even though the buggars made a pile of moula I'd say no -

There was a show the other night that gave me something to think about. If you buy bottled water you're paying way more than $3 gallon. Ditto for many other consumer type goods. Bottled water costs zilch to produce compared to oil well, oil tanker, oil refinery, oil distributor, oil truck, EPA reg's, gas station and still under $3 gallon.

I sure wish it cost less but I don't want the govt deciding that they can create wind fall taxes when they think they can get away with it.

Of course I'm now driving that diesel VW at 40-55 mpg and will look into biodiesel given some time when I don't need the truck. A friend also raced dirt track cars back in the 70's on straight alcohol - he showed me the motor at the end of the season and zip for build up or wear inside the engine - near as I recall the byproducts for alcohol combustion are h2o ( water ) and co2 ( carbon dioxide ) . Seems to me we have a few choices not quite politically correct. ( I guess they don't want us to drink our fuel  ;D  )

Paschale

Well, I'm very suspicious of the gas companies right now.  There was an interesting report on the news a few months ago, comparing profits when gas was close to around $1.35 on average, and then comparing profits of the gas companies now where the average has been over $2.00 a gallon.  The oil companies are making more than ever before...it was almost double what they were making when the average was much lower.  Seems to me like a serious case of gouging, using Katrina and Iraq as an excuse to get the price higher so the shareholders can make more money.  I'm all for capitalism, but this sort of seems suspicious--I think that there's been some serious collusion on pricing going on behind the scenes.  I wish Elliot Spitzer would do an investigation of the gas companies.   ::)

Y'all can pronounce it "puh-SKOLLY"

wiam

I voted no because I think........  ok ok my grandmother gave my kids abunch of petroleum stock.

Will

DanG

I vote no, as well, but I have other plans for the big companies.  First, I gotta wonder how much of the profits are actually going to the shareholders.  I own stock in a major corp that brags about their profits, but I don't see any of it. ???  I am retired from that same company and I have absolutely no benefits except my wimpy little pension check, and I'm worried about that!

I think the Gov't should tax the living daylights out of the greedy buzzards, then give them a generous deduction for taking care of their employees and retirees.  I don't know of a single big company that is in trouble because of the line workers.  ALL of the big booboos are being made in the Boardroom, and those are the ONLY people who are being taken care of! >:(
"I don't feel like an old man.  I feel like a young man who has something wrong with him."  Dick Cavett
"Beat not thy sword into a plowshare, rather beat the sword of thine enemy into a plowshare."

Tom


Brad_S.

Quote from: Paschale on February 13, 2006, 09:33:35 PM
I wish Elliot Spitzer would do an investigation of the gas companies.


Sorry Paschale, he's much too busy gearing up for his run for Governor.
"Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans." J. Lennon

CHARLIE

I voted NO!  More taxes is not a solution to anything.  Companies and individuals are taxed enough.  And...companies are already taxed on their profits.  Maybe close some loopholes in the tax structure or go to a flat tax.
Charlie
"Everybody was gone when I arrived but I decided to stick around until I could figure out why I was there !"

isassi

Come on guys! The "big oil" companies didn't dream up these windfall profits overnight. Seems like everyone fails to notice we have commodity traders in Chicago, buying and selling futures based on the whims of news and speculation on weather. I don't like the idea a guy can buy or sell a future contract for hogs or wheat, or even gasoline, and affect what we will pay 6 months later, but that is how it is. If we were in a worldwide shortage of beef, would anyone want to tax a farmer who was having a calf crop hit the market at the right time? We are in a market driven economy. That is what capitalism is all about. The price of oil products would drop if demand eased up. I drove a 1960 Ford pick-up to high school in '77, that I bought and paid for myself. I noticed the other day driving by the school parking lot, there were at least a dozen vehicles in the area students park in newer and more expensive then my diesel. Small town here, I know most everyone. And the point is, these kids are driving when it isn't needed, and those vehicles pump the demand for fuel, driving up prices. And then, when demand isn't enough, a pit trader in Chicago decides to speculate on a storm at sea, and we pay higher prices.... ::)

crtreedude

I voted no because the oil companies are going to have to reinvest a lot of the money in technology to extract oil that is harder to come by. If they don't, it will be taxed as profits, which most companies work very hard at trying to keep low.

So, how did I end up here anyway?

submarinesailor

Working at the Defense Energy Support Center, I read A LOT of industry trade rags.  And crtreedude hit it dead square on the head.  If they do not re-invest the money into exploration and process, E&P money, than they will be taxed to death on their profits.  Oh, BTW I hate the BIG oil companies as much as you guys do.  But, I am all for the America way/dream.

Bruce/subsailor

Cedarman

I voted no also.  Big profits today can always turn into big losses tomorrow.  Big profits give lots of incentive for others to invent ways to cash in.  That in turn should lower fuel costs in the future.  If it doesn't, we will invent ways to conserve and use less of it.  If we all do our part to conserve, we will keep for ourselves some of that profit.
I am in the pink when sawing cedar.

crtreedude

Keep the law too so that if they do reinvest it, it won't be taxed - which means lots of new jobs usually.

One of the things that was a jaw-dropper for me down here in the Socialistic country of Costa Rica (their words) is that profits ARE NOT TAXED!

My capitalistic heart just beats a little faster on things like that.

Honest, at the end of the year, we are permitted to remove profit and use it without taxation.

Now, when you spend it, it is taxed. The tax code here is pretty simple. Spend, and it is 13% tax. Make more than a certain amount, that is taxed (and not a really bad rate either). Health and retirement are manditory taxes. Environmental (and road) taxes are tied to fuel.

All pretty basic - oh, and the Ticos make an art form out of avoiding paying any tax.
So, how did I end up here anyway?

flip

If, no, when more bio diesel and ethanol are used demand for gas products will go down and so will the price and profits. (or as least they should)  I hate to see someone taxed because they did good, but.   The fuel suppliers are in a bit better position to control profits, they charge what they want.  Kinda like if your city started charging a premium for your tap water, just because they could doesn't mean they should.  I have no good answer except that those that make more should be taxed more.

Flip
Timberking B-20, Hydraulics make me board quick

thedeeredude

More taxes is slower growth.  I have no grievances against oil companies.  They're just like any other business in America, some person saw a market and made his money there.   My solution, a team of belgians and an old farm wagon, is now a 1 ton truck.  A morgan horse and a phaeton are economy cars.  And they all run on fuel made here in America.  Not only that it would create more jobs, someoene would have to pick up "road apples" :D

Cedarman

The incentive to make more has gotten me to grow a business that provides full time jobs for 14 families. If I am going to be taxed more because I make more, then I might as well go back to being a one man show, make what I can because any thoughts of getting wealthy are down the drain.

Our problem in this country is not that we pay to little in taxes, it is that the govenment spends too much because every Tom, Dick and Harry wants a bunch of freebies and they just cant stand the thought that someone else gets more goodies than they do.

I do not begrudge some else's profits, so don't begrudge me mine.
A few years ago I had a piece of property for sale. A couple was interested in it until I priced it. They said, "We know how much you paid for that and we won't pay that much". They just couldn't stand to see me make that much profit. Six months later I sold it for 30% more than I first priced it.  Also to this day I have never referred anyone to their business, always to their competitor.

I am much more concerned about my profits to worry about how much some else makes.
I am in the pink when sawing cedar.

Kirk_Allen

NO, NO, NO.  Did you hear me? NO >:(

crtreedude

Watch out - Kirk is going to hose someone down with the nozzle if they aren't careful!  :o
So, how did I end up here anyway?

scsmith42

Cedarman - well stated!

The media has been really sneaky about focusing on the dollar amount of the oil companies profits. What they are not showing you is the net profit percentage amount..., which has not gone up by a "windfall".

Oil prices are impacted by futures traders, local distributers, as well as our insatiable appetite for oil.  Last year when the prices here in North Carolina approached $3.00, it got my attention and I started paying more attention to seeking ways to reduce my fuel consumption.  I was stunned though by the fact that very few other people did anything more than gripe about the cost.  I would still see most folks zooming 75 - 85mph down the road, wasting fuel.  There was no noticible decrease in traffic...

Why should the oil companies be punished because of our wasteful ways?  Should we punish ourselves in the future by reducing their ability to invest in more R&D, exploration, ect - ie creating jobs and expanding the economy?  I don't think that this would be the intelligent choice...

I do not agree with the premise of taxing them more.  Sopmething like 45% of our current federal budget already goes to entitlements (and I have a copy of the Constitution on my wall and the founding fathers vision was not for a socialized nation), we do not need to feed this monster more.

In almost every instance, when taxes are reduced companies and the general population spend more, thus expanding the economy and creating jobs (and new tax revenue sources- duh!).  Increased taxation only hurts us - lowering rates and expanding the tax base helps us.

We really do need to get serious about viable alternative fuel sources and distribution systems.  We're funding terrorism and wasting a precious global resource, and the health of our economy is linked to a resource that is going to become increasingly more difficult for us to control.

On a side note, since Congress won't act, we ought to have a national referandum and grant the executive branch a line item veto over entitlements.  I don't care which party is in office - they will both use it to curb waste from the other (and both parties are just as guilty here).

My 2 cents...
Peterson 10" WPF with 65' of track
Smith - Gallagher dedicated slabber
Tom's 3638D Baker band mill
and a mix of log handling heavy equipment.