I read that BP profits were way down last Q. I don't know about Exxon, but the bottom line is high crude prices are bad for them, not good for them. $75/barrel is $1.50/galllon for crude. Tack on transportation and refinery costs and no wonder we're paying $3/gallon. When oil was $25/barrel ($0.50gallon) for crude, how much was gas? I don't know, but it wasn't cheap. Our problem is that we've been hooked on cheap oil forever.
What is ironic to me is all of the pro-conservation folks who talked up the ideas of increasing the national tax on gas by up to $0.50/gallon. Now they are the biggest whiners about gas being so expensive. I would much rather have gas stay this price and force our country to develop alternative fuels. Then we could tell shithole governments like Iran and Venezuela to go screw. On 4/26/06, Jerry Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I am thankful we haven't passed an ANWAR drilling package. > > Why on earth do we want to use up our reserves? Let's keep that in our > pockets for when we REALLY need some oil to keep the countries economy > from collapsing. Let's not open it up just to jack up Exxon's profits > this year. > > As we've seen, the oil companies will just continue to shaft us, they > aren't going to give us a break because we let them drill in our own > back yard. It will just increase their profit margin for a few years, > and let their execs retire with a billion dollar compensation package, > rather than the measly half billion the last guy got. > > On 4/26/06, C. Hatton Humphrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > McCain would be great - especially if the Republicans lose the > > > majority in Congress this next election. That would put the cap on > > > spending - however, I still might be willing to abondon that principle > > > for McCain as he's a maverick and *hopefully* wouldn't be as much of a > > > spineless loser as Bush. > > > > Let's all learn a lesson right now: regardless of which party is in > > office, regardless of what any politician says on the campaign trail, > > the government will NEVER spend any less unleless we figure out how to > > replace the estabishment without outright revolt. > > > > It's true no matter what level of government you're looking at. I say > > that as a self proclaimed conservative. It doesn't matter which party > > holds the house, senate or presidency... if those that have held > > office since Nixon was President cannot be shaken into changing things > > then things are going to continue as they are already. > > > > Numerically speaking, if you want <insert your political platform and > > goals here> to happen you need to control at LEAST 65-70% of both > > houses of Congress. The Presidency helps but with enough > > Congressional power any veto can be overruled. > > > > People don't understand that. Take ANWAR drilling as an example. The > > Republican held Congress wanted to allow for drilling in the 90's and > > Clinton vetoed it. Congress could not overrule the veto because they > > did not have enough votes. When it came up again, the Sentate energy > > committee refuled to let the energy bill out of committee with any > > mention of ANWAR. If we want to get drilling in ANWAR we will need at > > least 65-70% of Congress. > > > > Which means for both sides of the aisle, we're fscked. > -- --------------- Robert Munn www.funkymojo.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:205563 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
