Are Oil Companies Breaking the Law and If Not Should Laws be Changed

[adios]

I've read and heard alot of rhetoric about how the oil companies are gouging. Also I've heard and read alot about people wanting to tax the oil company profits. If the oil companies are guilty of breaking the law then yeah lets build a case and prosecute. IMO they're probably not guilty of breaking the law but I could be convinced otherwise. Which brings up another question, if they're not guilty of breaking the law then should the laws be changed and if so how so? Taxes on gasoline tend to restrict supply and IMO they're a regressive form of taxation. We've discussed the possibility of redistributing taxes collected on gasoline before. If memory serve Wacki is the only poster I've read that has concrete proposals and ideas about redistributing income collected on gasoline taxes. Apologies if I'm forgetting other posters ideas. I've brought up the idea of government sponsored mass transit solutions but I haven't read any posts giving more details on how this might be accomplished. I don't have any myself but would certainly be interested in reading some.

[bobman0330]

Oil companies are not breaking any price gouging laws.

There seem to be two general proposals:

1. Pass a law that says, in effect, that gas has to be cheap and abundant. And then if that works, we can pass a law saying that AIDS and cancer won't kill people anymore.

2. Tax the "windfall profits" the oil companies are making. Somehow, this idea manages to be worse than idea #1. This is essentially a form of government-sponsored theft which flies in the face of property rights and the rule of law. Furthermore, it would destroy incentives for future investment, which is what we desperately need right now.

[benfranklin]

If they are making huge profits because of supply and demand conditions, they are not breaking the law. If a number of them are colluding to create shortages, high prices, etc., then they are breaking the law.

Whatever the economics behind the gas situation, there is ample evidence that it is exacerbated by governments, state and local. While taxes on gas to pay for roads makes logical sense, it is a disproportionate burden on the poor.

Also, government must take a large part of the responsibility for supply problems. It has been decades since a new refinery was built in this country, and the hurricane shut-downs of gulf refineries were a large cause of recent jumps in gas prices. I heard a story on the news during that period about a company (in Arizona?) that was in its 6th or 7th year of working to get permits to build a new refinery.

Oil companies are most certinly breaking the law if you consider the Law of Human Decency and Morality to be a law. EXXON MADE $10 BILLION DOLLARS LAST QUARTER! How is that legal? Who could countenence such huge profits in a time when we are facing all these national security issues? As near as I can tell, George Bush and Richard Dick Cheney, that's who. If you want to lock someone up for breaking the law and ratting out covert agents in these uncertin times, I would start with those two.

[bobman0330]

[ QUOTE ]
Oil companies are most certinly breaking the law if you consider the Law of Human Decency and Morality to be a law

[/ QUOTE ]

nope.

[BCPVP]

[ QUOTE ]
EXXON MADE $10 BILLION DOLLARS LAST QUARTER! How is that legal?

[/ QUOTE ]
Uh...there's not law against making profits...?

[jt1]

[ QUOTE ]
EXXON MADE $10 BILLION DOLLARS LAST QUARTER! How is that legal?

[/ QUOTE ]


Read a book, man. Your economic theories didn't work in India, Mexico, or China. Why would they work here? The exact opposite of your theories did work in Singapore, though. Base your opinions on a foundation of theory and then aggressively test that theory. If you do this you won't embarass yourself on this forum.

taxing oil profits won't significantly alter investment. do you honestly think that if Exxon made 8 billion last quarter they would do something differently? Plus, how much are oil companies investing in the US anyway?

[ACPlayer]

There is another esoteric twist to consider.

The present administration has, with its foreign policy actions, pretty much declared oil to be "national asset". To protect this asset the administration is willing to deploy tens of thousands of soldiers and billions of dollars of tax money. So, if our tax dollars are being used to nationalize this resource and as a direct consequence of this we are now seeing $60 plus oil helping to create the windfall for some companies, should we not be looking to get some of our tax dollars back?

Did any companies lose money? What about the ones that lost their production capabilities and didn't have any reserves?