On May 2, 1:34 am, Hank wrote:
Charlie Self wrote :



On Apr 26, 1:34 pm, Mark & Juanita wrote:
Leon wrote:

"Hank" wrote in message
. ..

I think we should
stop subsidies to oil companies. They no longer drill nor do they
build refineries. Perhaps a windfall profits tax would be proper.
Any profit over
5% roi should be subject to an 80% tax. There goes most of my
income for the year (past years).

So you blame oil companies for not drilling or building refineries?

From ANWR to the North Dakota oil fields, there is sufficient oil
to let
us tell the OPECers to go pound sand. But ... we might inconvenience
some caribou (even though the plan is to use only 2000 acres out of
several million), or we might endanger some previously unknown
"endangered" microbe or left-handed kangaroo rat. We have gas prices
going up now because of the required cafe blends for each specific
city that requires refinery shutdown and reconfiguration every year.
Only when people get angry enough at the shenanigans going on to
thwart production and distribution is this problem going to get
solved. Instead, right now we have self-righteous earth-worshipping
luddites preventing progress and trying to force people to buy
indulgences to atone for peoples' environmental sins. Neither of
which is going to solve the needs and will only exacerbate the
problem. It will, however have the effect of providing lots of money
and power to the people espousing these policies (who, will of course
not alter their lifestyle -- that is for the "little people") and
lower the quality of life and remove freedoms from the rest of us.
Until and unless people wake up to this sham, I'm afraid we're in for
a lot more of the same.

--

Aw, c'mon, Mark. Didn't you hear that Gore put in solar panels on his
mansion? Dunno if he did the same on his jet, but...it always strikes
me as wonderful how much money these guys make out of telling the rest
of us to live frugally, green, and wipe our butts an extra stroke in
the process, without wasting paper.

There's a big "Save The Trees" movement against printed junk mail,
these days. I don't like junk mail, but I do realize that 90+% of the
paper that goes into it, and most other printed material, is
specifically planted and nurtured for just that purpose, to make
paper. We're not dealing with virgin forests, but, essentially, with
cropland.

But, hey, we don't want the natives getting restless. That would be
like wondering how Jesse Jackson, a preacher without any church,
always manages to make over a quarter million a year.

Many liberal policies make sense, but not even close to all.

Charlie, check Rev. Jackson and Rev. Sharepton again. A quarter of a
million to them is chump change. The Reverend Sharpton pays more for his
hairdo (whoops), I mean haircut, than President Clinton, Senator Kerry
and Senator Edwards combined. Up here in Windham, NY, I pay (still have a
pretty good head of hair) $12 and that includes a 20% tip.

Hair is about the only thing I have left. It costs about 12 bucks
here, with tip. Wotinell happened to the 75 cent haircut? My biggest
expense in the crotch. "Self, get yer hair cut!" Self, getcha
goddamned hair cut!" About once a week.

On Apr 25, 7:29*am, Renata wrote:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 07:44:06 -0700, Doug Winterburn





wrote:
Renata wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 17:30:36 -0700, Doug Winterburn
wrote:

Dave in Houston wrote:
"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in message
....

Not all petroleum comes from OPEC nations, *But enough
does that they control the price on the world market.
* * Which means that our patriotic American Oil companies are selling us
their domestically produced crude for the same price the Saudis are selling
us theirs?
Which, if true, I suppose is where Exxon-Mobil makes a good chunk of their
$49 billion profit?
Actually, $40 billion on $400 billion total revenue - or 10 cents on the
dollar. *The also paid $30 billion in income tax.

I seriously doubt Exxon is paying *$30B income tax on $40B net.

Renata

I didn't say net. They paid $30 billion on $72 billion gross. *Their net
income was $40 billion.

But this seems to indicate that their accountants are so bad that they
paid 3/4 of their profit over to income taxes? *Even 30B on 72B gross
is way high. *Corporate taxes these are nowhere near 42% these days. *

Something smells funny here. *I see the numbers, I just want to know
the "rest of the story".

Renata- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Not true.

U.S. companies are typically at around 41% (35% federal and 7-8%
state, less federal deduction for state taxes).

Dave - Parkville

"Mark & Juanita" wrote in message
m...
Ummm, have you checked Exxon's latest quarterly profit? [hint: it wasn't
up] From Forbe's.com: "The latest results fell short of the record $11.7
billion in earnings Exxon Mobil reported in the fourth quarter of 2007."
Earnings for the first quarter were $10.9 billion.

And for those dismal numbers their stock took a four percent hit
yesterday, down $3.47/share to $80-something. It seems their worldwide
production is down some 10%.
Go figure.

Dave in Houston

On Apr 28, 11:31*am, Doug Winterburn wrote:
Renata wrote:
On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 07:00:46 -0700, Doug Winterburn
wrote:

Renata wrote:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 07:44:06 -0700, Doug Winterburn
wrote:

Renata wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 17:30:36 -0700, Doug Winterburn
wrote:

Dave in Houston wrote:
"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in message
...

Not all petroleum comes from OPEC nations, *But enough
does that they control the price on the world market.
* * Which means that our patriotic American Oil companies are selling us
their domestically produced crude for the same price the Saudis are selling
us theirs?
Which, if true, I suppose is where Exxon-Mobil makes a good chunk of their
$49 billion profit?
Actually, $40 billion on $400 billion total revenue - or 10 cents on the
dollar. *The also paid $30 billion in income tax.
I seriously doubt Exxon is paying *$30B income tax on $40B net.

Renata

I didn't say net. They paid $30 billion on $72 billion gross. *Their net
income was $40 billion.
But this seems to indicate that their accountants are so bad that they
paid 3/4 of their profit over to income taxes? *Even 30B on 72B gross
is way high. *Corporate taxes these are nowhere near 42% these days. *

Something smells funny here. *I see the numbers, I just want to know
the "rest of the story".
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=XOM&annual

Yeah, I looked up some numbers too. *Can't imagine that, if this is
the whole story, they're not crying publicly about how nearly 1/2
their mega, record setting profits are being turned over to the
guvmint. *

I don't know why it wouldn't be the whole story - if it's not, somebody
is going to the slammer. *I also don't know why they would cry publicly
as corporate income taxes run almost the same rate for all big
corporations. *By the time you add in federal and state gasoline taxes
(not to mention Exxon-Mobil employees income taxes), who do think is
making the more money from Exxon-Mobil's business - Exxon-Mobil or guvmint?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The taxes you see on the income tax line of the income statement are
ONLY taxes based on income, not fuel taxes or payroll taxes.

Dave - Parkville

On Apr 26, 1:22*am, Hank wrote:
Renata wrote :





On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 07:44:06 -0700, Doug Winterburn
wrote:

Renata wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 17:30:36 -0700, Doug Winterburn
wrote:

Dave in Houston wrote:
"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in message
.
com...

Not all petroleum comes from OPEC nations, *But enough
does that they control the price on the world market.
* * Which means that our patriotic American Oil companies are
* * selling us
their domestically produced crude for the same price the Saudis
are selling us theirs?
Which, if true, I suppose is where Exxon-Mobil makes a good chunk
of their $49 billion profit?
Actually, $40 billion on $400 billion total revenue - or 10 cents
on the dollar. *The also paid $30 billion in income tax.

I seriously doubt Exxon is paying *$30B income tax on $40B net.

Renata

I didn't say net. They paid $30 billion on $72 billion gross. *Their
net income was $40 billion.

But this seems to indicate that their accountants are so bad that they
paid 3/4 of their profit over to income taxes? *Even 30B on 72B gross
is way high. *Corporate taxes these are nowhere near 42% these days. *

Something smells funny here. *I see the numbers, I just want to know
the "rest of the story".

Renata

You might want to check your numbers. $30 billion is 75% *(OK 3/4) of $72
billion? Try again. We live in a ' Capitalist Society'. Making a profit is
what all of us that wish to remain in business try to do. I think we should
stop subsidies to oil companies. They no longer drill nor do they build
refineries. Perhaps a windfall profits tax would be proper. Any profit over
5% roi should be subject to an 80% tax. There goes most of my income for
the year (past years). * *- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The effective income tax rate is tax expense divided by income before
taxes.

Dave - Parkville

"Charlie Self" wrote in message
...

Hair is about the only thing I have left. It costs about 12 bucks
here, with tip. Wotinell happened to the 75 cent haircut?
That would be the "regular boys" haircut like those my dad would force
me to get.
Flatops for summer were a a buck-fifty plus mandatory Butch Wax. That
would've been the late 50s.

Dave in Houston

"Charlie Self" wrote in message
Hair is about the only thing I have left. It costs about 12 bucks
here, with tip. Wotinell happened to the 75 cent haircut? My biggest
expense in the crotch. "Self, get yer hair cut!" Self, getcha
goddamned hair cut!" About once a week.

Several years ago, I got tired of being charged $20 to cut my mostly bald
head at barbershops. They'd zip along with an electric shave set on #3 level
to get the few hairs I had left that would still grow. Went out and bought
myself a hair trimmer for $25 and haven't paid a cent since. One of the very
few benefits of being bald, or mostly so.

Dave - Parkville, MD wrote:
On Apr 28, 11:31 am, Doug Winterburn wrote:
Renata wrote:
On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 07:00:46 -0700, Doug Winterburn
wrote:
Renata wrote:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 07:44:06 -0700, Doug Winterburn
wrote:
Renata wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 17:30:36 -0700, Doug Winterburn
wrote:
Dave in Houston wrote:
"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in message
...
Not all petroleum comes from OPEC nations, But enough
does that they control the price on the world market.
Which means that our patriotic American Oil companies are selling us
their domestically produced crude for the same price the Saudis are selling
us theirs?
Which, if true, I suppose is where Exxon-Mobil makes a good chunk of their
$49 billion profit?
Actually, $40 billion on $400 billion total revenue - or 10 cents on the
dollar. The also paid $30 billion in income tax.
I seriously doubt Exxon is paying $30B income tax on $40B net.
Renata
I didn't say net. They paid $30 billion on $72 billion gross. Their net
income was $40 billion.
But this seems to indicate that their accountants are so bad that they
paid 3/4 of their profit over to income taxes? Even 30B on 72B gross
is way high. Corporate taxes these are nowhere near 42% these days.
Something smells funny here. I see the numbers, I just want to know
the "rest of the story".
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=XOM&annual
Yeah, I looked up some numbers too. Can't imagine that, if this is
the whole story, they're not crying publicly about how nearly 1/2
their mega, record setting profits are being turned over to the
guvmint.
I don't know why it wouldn't be the whole story - if it's not, somebody
is going to the slammer. I also don't know why they would cry publicly
as corporate income taxes run almost the same rate for all big
corporations. By the time you add in federal and state gasoline taxes
(not to mention Exxon-Mobil employees income taxes), who do think is
making the more money from Exxon-Mobil's business - Exxon-Mobil or guvmint?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The taxes you see on the income tax line of the income statement are
ONLY taxes based on income, not fuel taxes or payroll taxes.

Dave - Parkville

If you re-read my post, I think you'll find that's the essence of what I
said.

On May 2, 10:03*am, Doug Winterburn wrote:
Dave - Parkville, MD wrote:





On Apr 28, 11:31 am, Doug Winterburn wrote:
Renata wrote:
On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 07:00:46 -0700, Doug Winterburn
wrote:
Renata wrote:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 07:44:06 -0700, Doug Winterburn
wrote:
Renata wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 17:30:36 -0700, Doug Winterburn
wrote:
Dave in Houston wrote:
"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in message
...
Not all petroleum comes from OPEC nations, *But enough
does that they control the price on the world market.
* * Which means that our patriotic American Oil companies are selling us
their domestically produced crude for the same price the Saudis are selling
us theirs?
Which, if true, I suppose is where Exxon-Mobil makes a good chunk of their
$49 billion profit?
Actually, $40 billion on $400 billion total revenue - or 10 cents on the
dollar. *The also paid $30 billion in income tax.
I seriously doubt Exxon is paying *$30B income tax on $40B net.
Renata
I didn't say net. They paid $30 billion on $72 billion gross. *Their net
income was $40 billion.
But this seems to indicate that their accountants are so bad that they
paid 3/4 of their profit over to income taxes? *Even 30B on 72B gross
is way high. *Corporate taxes these are nowhere near 42% these days. *
Something smells funny here. *I see the numbers, I just want to know
the "rest of the story".
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=XOM&annual
Yeah, I looked up some numbers too. *Can't imagine that, if this is
the whole story, they're not crying publicly about how nearly 1/2
their mega, record setting profits are being turned over to the
guvmint. *
I don't know why it wouldn't be the whole story - if it's not, somebody
is going to the slammer. *I also don't know why they would cry publicly
as corporate income taxes run almost the same rate for all big
corporations. *By the time you add in federal and state gasoline taxes
(not to mention Exxon-Mobil employees income taxes), who do think is
making the more money from Exxon-Mobil's business - Exxon-Mobil or guvmint?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The taxes you see on the income tax line of the income statement are
ONLY taxes based on income, not fuel taxes or payroll taxes.

Dave - Parkville

If you re-read my post, I think you'll find that's the essence of what I
said.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Agreed. Skipped over too many.

On May 2, 12:04 am, Hank wrote:
Fred the Red Shirt wrote :



On Apr 29, 1:33 am, Mark & Juanita wrote:
Dave in Houston wrote:

...

WOW! I never knew THEY were in those secret, closed-door
energy policy
meetings headed by President Cheney! It's no wonder that
regular-unleaded has gone from .79/gal to 3.50/gal and diesel to
4.10/gal and oil company profits reach record highs every quarter
(not to mention Halliburton). Who knew?

...

and just where in those "secret" meetings did Cheney and company
declare
we would NOT drill in ANWR, would NOT drill offshore, would NOT build
more refineries, would NOT exploit the North Dakota oil finds?

Probably right before the part about how we
were going to invade Iraq.

Of course since those meetings were secret,
and no one in the Justice Department has had
the balls to prosecute the attendees for lying to
Congress about attending them, we may never
know.
...


Actully President Bush and his cabinet were quite open with their
intentions. ...

That is a very interesting statement considering that
Cheney successful quashed the Congressional effort
to obtain minutes of those meetings by citing executive
privilege. Which later made it all the more precious
when he later advanced the novel claim that the Vice
President was NOT part of the administration.

So please do tell us what transpired when Cheney met
with those Enron Executives six months or so before
Enron collapsed.

--

FF