|
Post by redwolf on Jun 11, 2008 11:47:08 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by blueneck on Jun 11, 2008 15:39:44 GMT -6
Clearly they are in the pockets of big oil.
Not so sure windfall profits tax will help since it would just be passed back to the consumer, but certainly the taxpayer should not be giving any subsidies or tax breaks to the oil companies in times of record profits, which means rolling back the Cheney top secret "energy" policy.
I think what helped keep big oil in check and behaving themselves during the 90s was the threat of increased scrutiny and regulation under the Clinton admin. Under the Cheney Bush oil admin and the rep congress its been a free for all for the fossil fuel industry
|
|
|
Post by agito on Jun 12, 2008 0:43:32 GMT -6
I don't agree completely with that sentiment. Any subsidies that encourages good pay or health benefits for it's workers should still be left in place, but the classic mineral extraction subsidy should go the way of the dodo.
|
|
|
Post by blueneck on Jun 12, 2008 4:08:12 GMT -6
But that isn't really happening is it? the subisidies only seem to be raising the obscene salaries of the execs, and increasing the gross profits.
And weren't the subsidies supposed to be used to R&D alternative energies, improve efficiencies and capital equipment investmenr? that isn't happening in any meaningful way either.
An industry posting historically record profits does not need the public's largess. The higher prices are already a tax on working people. This is corporate welfare in its most basic form.
I still think there should be the carrot and stick approach of a winfall tax on all profits above a cetain margin that is not reinvested back in R&D and capital improvements
|
|