Sign In Join 



Are gas prices fueling your pain? - READ ONLY

10042 messages,  Last post on Jul 12, 2008 at 3:07 PM

You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires

What is this discussion about? Fuel Efficiency (MPG)


Messages Page 787 of 1005
1
...
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
...
1005
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#7861 of 10042
Re: We are in trouble [texases] by bpizzuti
May 27, 2008 (8:28 am)

Replying to: texases (May 27, 2008 6:39 am)

p.s. My biggest disappointment with the recent showboating in Congress was that the oil execs didn't pull out a simple pie chart: If gas costs $4/gallon, and crude costs $3/gallon, how much is left for taxes, shipping, refining, and selling? Not much!
 
You know, that is an interesting question....if their margin of profit per barrel of crude is so slim, why didn't they show Congress the books that show this?
 
One possible answer: It's possible that they didn't do so because they were under oath and knew those numbers to be false. All it takes is one whistleblower buried somewhere and all of a sudden CEOs are facing charges.
#7862 of 10042
Re: We are in trouble [gagrice] by imidazol97
May 27, 2008 (8:30 am)

Replying to: gagrice (May 27, 2008 8:05 am)

Actually I heard a discussion that the price of gas is subsidized by the government and is held artificially low in China and another country... India? Venezuela? And if the price there is allowed to rise, the demand will lessen and the price of oil will drop worldwide. I.e., the demand is artificially high due to cheap gas. That demand is affecting our right to the oil at a more reasonable price.
#7863 of 10042
Re: We are in trouble [bpizzuti] by texases
May 27, 2008 (8:30 am)

Replying to: bpizzuti (May 27, 2008 8:28 am)

"possible that they didn't do so because they were under oath and knew those numbers to be false. All it takes is one whistleblower buried somewhere and all of a sudden CEOs are facing charges. "
 
Which numbers are false? You don't think there are 100 eager-beaver politicians and lawyers who would jump on this? Please provide specifics.
#7864 of 10042
Re: We are in trouble [trispec] by kernick
May 27, 2008 (8:38 am)

Replying to: trispec (May 27, 2008 7:19 am)

So let me get this straight? You think the oil companies get to keep the money for the oil and not the governments? Saudi Arabia and Dubai are just letting the oil companies take the oil for a few $'s?
 
Or you think the oil companies are running some sort of under-the-table operation only reporting part of their businesses? And they're putting tons of cash in Swiss banks? and under their mattresses?
 
And you think the IRS is stupid enough not to know what's going on? Oh I forgot the conspiracy that the oil companies have paid off Bush and the Congress, and the IRS is infiltrated with tons of oil company moles.
#7865 of 10042
Re: We are in trouble [imidazol97] by ny540i6
May 27, 2008 (8:38 am)

Replying to: imidazol97 (May 27, 2008 8:30 am)

That demand is affecting our right to the oil at a more reasonable price.
 
Who said that "we" have a "right" to someone else's product at any price?
#7866 of 10042
Re: We are in trouble [texases] by bpizzuti
May 27, 2008 (8:41 am)

Replying to: texases (May 27, 2008 8:30 am)

If crude is $3 and gas is $4 and all the other stuff is basically making their profits 10 cents for every gallon of gas sold (which incidentally is still a LOT of money) then they could simply show Congress the valid numbers as part of their testimony.
 
However, if they were to display those numbers as part of their testimony and later it were to come out that those numbers were false, there would be charges...lying under oath is a crime. I was advancing that as a potential reason why the executives didn't "just display a pie chart" when they were testifying before Congress. And it may also explain why some eager-beaver politicians ARE jumping...the execs were unwilling to provide specifics under oath.
 
Again, I do not have proof of this, but it's a valid possible explanation. Most companies have more than one set of books you know...the real ones and the ones for people outside the company to see. And they always get in trouble when the real ones somehow get out.
#7867 of 10042
Re: We are in trouble [bpizzuti] by kernick
May 27, 2008 (8:43 am)

Replying to: bpizzuti (May 27, 2008 8:28 am)

One possible answer: It's possible that they didn't do so because they were under oath and knew those numbers to be false.
 
The scenario of a CEO or CFO going to jail could happen any day; it doesn't require being in front of Congress for that to happen. Read-up on the Sarbannes-Oxley Act. I work at a smaller manufacturing company and we're always doing inventories, getting audits, and managers have to verify the bill-of-materials, all under the threat of jail-time for any willful misrepresentation.
 
Companies the size of the oil companies would be under pretty heavy scrutiny, and it's fairly hard to hide refineries or millions of gallons of oil, regularly.
#7868 of 10042
Re: We are in trouble [ny540i6] by larsb
May 27, 2008 (8:43 am)

Replying to: ny540i6 (May 27, 2008 8:38 am)

The only oil you have a "right to" is oil pumped up from land you own. Assuming you own the oil rights also.
#7869 of 10042
Re: We are in trouble [kernick] by bpizzuti
May 27, 2008 (8:45 am)

Replying to: kernick (May 27, 2008 8:38 am)

Or you think the oil companies are running some sort of under-the-table operation only reporting part of their businesses? And they're putting tons of cash is Swiss banks? and under their mattresses?
 
Entirely possible. Don't know how likely, mind you, but it would not be the first time. How many corporate executives have been suspected/investigated/charged/convicted lately? And don't tell me Ken Lay doesn't count just because he died before they could sentence him (even though that's technically true, which just goes to show what a WONDERFUL legal system we have...).
#7870 of 10042
Re: We are in trouble [bpizzuti] by kernick
May 27, 2008 (9:10 am)

Replying to: bpizzuti (May 27, 2008 8:45 am)

Well as you said - it only takes 1 whistle-blower, and given the large number of potential whistle-blowers and the last 35 years that oil companies have been accused, the odds would be rather astronomical not to have got caught.
The Enron - Ken Lay story was slightly different then what we're talking about here, but it does illustrate that a large financial scheme will collapse within a few years, no matter how skilled and intricate. This thus supports that the oil companies do not have some large, unified conspiracy that has lasted from 1973.
 
I think people ought to not focus so much on the profits that the oil companies have made, but question why the government takes at least 2X the profit in tax. Instead of Exxon giving back their $40B profit, why don't we tell the government to let them keep that, and drop the $80B tax on Exxon, and make Exxon then drop the price accordingly? And how much tax does the government take from the other oil companies, which we the consumer eventually pay for.
 
All the taxes every corporation pays, eventually is paid by you or I in the end.

Messages Page 787 of 1005
1
...
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
...
1005
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

New? Join Now!

Forum Tools

Please sign in.
Email Address:

Password:

Forgot Password?

Search Forums

Enter Keyword(s)

Advanced Search

Browse by Vehicle



View All Vehicles
Advertisement
Ask the Community
See What People Are Asking

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic


View All Topics

Today's Chats

Advertisement