Oil Subsidies Repeal Blocked By Industry-Bankrolled Senators

Post Reply New Topic

That is a very good comparison actually.

Farm subsidies do not benefit farmers nor the consumer. They benefit the mega-corporations that over the past 40 years have taken over the agricultural industry in the US.

Both oil and farming industry have incredibly powerful lobbying power in congress. Their money pays for the passing of the laws,tax breaks and subsidies that benefit only them.

When you consider that the tax breaks and subsidies given to farms allows them to sell their products at nearly half the cost to produce them and the gov. picks up the remaining tab (and then some) -AND- that a large portion of the food is sold overseas at dirt cheap prices rather than to the US consumer AT those dirt cheap prices... you start to see a very odd picture. It makes no sense when you look at it in terms of FOOD but when you see the profits being raked in by those corporations you see a very different thing.

We are entitled to our own opinions but we are not entitled to our own facts.

Why does it matter if they have infrastructure investments in the United States when the portion of their business that generates revenue largely comes from abroad, and not from the business it does in the United States? Just because they are based here doesn't mean we have a right to profits that clearly come from places outside our country. They employ a million Americans with above-middleclass wages and we are in essence punishing what are the only 4 major privately/investor owned oil companies in the world. The rest of the top 20 oil companies, all of which are giants compared to our entries into the energy market, are nationalized and state-owned entities with the full financial backing of the state...

Their profits represents a small portion of their total revenue. Say they make 10 billion dollars this quarter, 50 billion total profit for the year. That is still less then 10% of their total revenue for that quarter (100-150 billion a quarter, 70% of which goes to operational costs, the rest goes to taxes and fees to foreign governments that let them operate in their country). Put things into perspective... having an 8% of your total revenue as profit is not much when you consider how much their bringing in.





That tax provision is not idiotic at all.

Most of our Oil companies revenue come from abroad. To use the case of Exxon, (or chevron if you prefer) Exxon's profit over the last 5 years from its US business was 40 billion dollars. It's taxes over that same period has been 58 billion, which is a reflection of it's total profit worldwide. That is $18,000,000,000 more then all of its profit from its US business. Essentially, it is punishing corporations for doing business abroad. You don't overpay 18 billion dollars in taxes and equate it to taking money from taxpayer wallets.





Yes but they compete in an unfair market where all of their competitors own most of the worlds oil reserves, make most of the profit in the energy industry, and get 100% state-backing since they are nationalized. As I said, none of our Oil Companies crack the top 10 largest energy companies. The argument that they are mature is not relevant to whether one gives or doesn't give tax breaks. Economic realities are... Ford Motor Company invented the assembly line and is in a very matured industry with its dealer networks and network of OEM suppliers. But if it becomes virtually impossible to build a car or truck in the US because of costs from Unions to taxes on productivity, they will send their business to Mexico, Asia, or the Middle East. That is why the state of Missouri gave this company in a Matured industry a $150,000,000 tax break over 10 years. It is to help keep jobs in America and make it affordable for us to export cars abroad.

The US Taxpayers don't do anything for Big Oil in the way of subsidies. Big Oil is one of the biggest taxpayers in this country... 10 Billion alone was payed by Exxon, including almost 2 billion dollars in income tax expenses when it filed.

You cannot butcher words for political gains and not expect others to then take you seriously... you've rendered their definitions meaningless. They don't need their own money back??? Their profit margins are 10% or less every year. That money is used and used well... given the market they compete in, they don't have a choice after all, they competing on a crutch. They don't have the full backing of the US government, they can't drill in the Gulf, Pacific, or Atlantic, the lands they currently own on US soil are still being developed for drilling, and they spend billions into exploring and developing new wells all over the world.

You want despicable profit margins? Why don't you go after Google?

One can pick and choose according to which is important to our our national interests and which is not... It's not an all or nothing approach anyways.

I by the way oppose farm subsidies and would recommend that we cut back on them greatly. If US farming corps can't compete with other countries, then perhaps they should return that land to the real farmers of our country. It would lead to Americans producing food for Americans, bring up the price of junk food and food in general, bring down obesity, and help local farmers make a living wage in a sustainable way.

I really hate having to repeat myself.