Does Congress bother to read

locoyo386

locoyo386

Member
Originally Posted by ophiura
http:///forum/post/3078360
Well I can say that I am in the oilfield business and I assure you we, at least, are not making much money and laying off quite a few people.
Or maybe an answer is this.
Better management.
CEOs actually may be able to manage budgets better than politicians? Because CEOs do answer to their shareholders and will be tossed, whereas politicians have a relatively cushy ride once in office and many of them will never be voted out.

You are a worker for the company. As stated above how can we still be paying $2.79 per gallon of gasoline, when the barrel of oil is $70. We payed $3.89 back when it was at $150 per barrel, Should we be paying (3.89/150)*70= $1.82 per gallon of gasoline?
 
flpriest

flpriest

Member
Originally Posted by locoyo386
http:///forum/post/3078384
You are a worker for the company. As stated above how can we still be paying $2.79 per gallon of gasoline, when the barrel of oil is $70. We payed $3.89 back when it was at $150 per barrel, Should we be paying (3.89/150)*70= $1.82 per gallon of gasoline?
trust me, i would also LOVE to jump on this "bash the oil companies" band wagon, but I'm thinking that our state and federal governments have alot to do with the price we pay at the pumps... It's called taxes. It seems that they have found a cash cow as well while everybody is busy blaming a corporation for making money. Kinda strange how this works...
 
locoyo386

locoyo386

Member
Originally Posted by flpriest
http:///forum/post/3078389
trust me, i would also LOVE to jump on this "bash the oil companies" band wagon, but I'm thinking that our state and federal governments have alot to do with the price we pay at the pumps... It's called taxes. It seems that they have found a cash cow as well while everybody is busy blaming a corporation for making money. Kinda strange how this works...

I am mentioning this only bacuase of the comment of this thread. Goverment intervention is always backed up with hidden agendas, Republican or Denocrat, it does not matter. If the goverment tells us that we can't sell our homes untill they are energy efficient, than I say (as a byer) why not? Given that the energy companies are making a huge profit from us since we can't defend ourself to the point that we have to pay what they ask. As a seller, hell no why should I pay extra to make my home more energy efficient for the next person to occupy it? The government should not tell me waht I should do. Either way, how ever your opinion is, the intervention of goverment should be limited and not allow to reach status os osicalism or communism. At the same time we wamt government to help us when we are in trouble. Either way there are good things and bad things that the government does for us. like the saying goes, we can't live with and we can't live without it.
 
flpriest

flpriest

Member
Originally Posted by locoyo386
http:///forum/post/3078402
I am mentioning this only bacuase of the comment of this thread. Goverment intervention is always backed up with hidden agendas, Republican or Denocrat, it does not matter. If the goverment tells us that we can't sell our homes untill they are energy efficient, than I say (as a byer) why not? Given that the energy companies are making a huge profit from us since we can't defend ourself to the point that we have to pay what they ask. As a seller, hell no why should I pay extra to make my home more energy efficient for the next person to occupy it? The government should not tell me waht I should do. Either way, how ever your opinion is, the intervention of goverment should be limited and not allow to reach status os osicalism or communism. At the same time we wamt government to help us when we are in trouble. Either way there are good things and bad things that the government does for us. like the saying goes, we can't live with and we can't live without it.
I agree with you on that one. But, ... let me ask you this. What are the taxes collected from gasoline used for?
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
How you suppose the oil companies were doing in the late 90's and early 2K's when oil was around 20 a barrel? You run red ink in the bad times and hope you will make up for it in the good.
When oil prices are on the upswing exploration companies will be busy because it's worth the million dollar risk to drill a simple well. Even with modern technology many of these wells aren't sure things. If you hit a dry well or one that isn't doing better than 20 or 30 barrels a day you are talking about a lot of money being tied up for a long time. With the slow economy and the Ossiahs Cap and Tax scheme I can see why oil companies would be cutting back.
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Originally Posted by locoyo386
http:///forum/post/3078402
I am mentioning this only bacuase of the comment of this thread. Goverment intervention is always backed up with hidden agendas, Republican or Denocrat, it does not matter. If the goverment tells us that we can't sell our homes untill they are energy efficient, than I say (as a byer) why not? Given that the energy companies are making a huge profit from us since we can't defend ourself to the point that we have to pay what they ask. As a seller, hell no why should I pay extra to make my home more energy efficient for the next person to occupy it? The government should not tell me waht I should do. Either way, how ever your opinion is, the intervention of goverment should be limited and not allow to reach status os osicalism or communism. At the same time we wamt government to help us when we are in trouble. Either way there are good things and bad things that the government does for us. like the saying goes, we can't live with and we can't live without it.
I have a friend who's a big lib and he doesn't see any problem with this stuff. I quoted him a great line from John Wayne in the Alamo. Goes something like "You might not care much when the other fella's ox gets gored but when someone gets used to goring oxes sooner or later they are going to get around to yours".
If they can justify making you upgrade your home for energy efficiency is it really much of a stretch that at some point they are going to limit the amount of power you can use or set up a tiered taxing system so people who have energy hungry items in their home like say a reef tank are going to get nailed.
We volunteered to allow the power company to install a deal on our air conditioning condenser. What it does is if the AC is running it will cut off the condenser but let the fan continue to run. It's based on how much demand there is on our area of the grid at the time. If demand reaches a certain point they send out a radio signal which shuts down the condensers for up to 20 minutes. Pretty slick system and we get a 20.00 credit on our bill every October for doing it.I have never noticed the house getting hotter when it activates.
None of that cost us a dime. That is the smart approach to energy conservation.
 
scsinet

scsinet

Active Member
Originally Posted by locoyo386
http:///forum/post/3078384
You are a worker for the company. As stated above how can we still be paying $2.79 per gallon of gasoline, when the barrel of oil is $70. We payed $3.89 back when it was at $150 per barrel, Should we be paying (3.89/150)*70= $1.82 per gallon of gasoline?

ummm... because the cost of the oil is only one part of the total cost of going from oil in the ground to gasoline in your tank?
It's amazing how many people that are so angry at the oil companies fail to understand basic economics.

Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3078427
If they can justify making you upgrade your home for energy efficiency is it really much of a stretch that at some point they are going to limit the amount of power you can use or set up a tiered taxing system so people who have energy hungry items in their home like say a reef tank are going to get nailed.
Is it really much of a stretch to suggest that at some point they are going to limit the amount of money you can make by setting up a tiered taxing system so people that make the most money are going to get nailed?
Oh wait... we already have that...

But if something like that energy usage gets put in place, I'm sure while Obama is up there claiming that "95% of Americans don't have reef tanks, so this will be like a 'tax cut' for them" nobody here will have a problem...
 
scsinet

scsinet

Active Member
Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3078427
If they can justify making you upgrade your home for energy efficiency is it really much of a stretch that at some point they are going to limit the amount of power you can use or set up a tiered taxing system so people who have energy hungry items in their home like say a reef tank are going to get nailed.
Is it really much of a stretch to suggest that at some point they are going to limit the amount of money you can make by setting up a tiered taxing system so people that make the most money are going to get nailed?
Oh wait... we already have that...

But if something like that energy usage gets put in place, I'm sure while Obama is up there claiming that "95% of Americans don't have reef tanks, so this will be like a 'tax cut' for them" nobody here will have a problem...
 
ophiura

ophiura

Active Member
I guess there is no point to my opinion, because I do work in the oilfield industry.

FUNNY thing is that loads of my neighbors work in the industry too. But it won't make a difference if the evil oil companies, and all the service companies go out of business. Because those people are faceless. It won't matter to drive the evil oil companies out of town...actually, no, it would be better to NATIONALIZE them, so all the profits can go to the government.
FWIW, I do work for a service company (exploration side, not an oil company - they are our clients) and they aren't spending much these days. I have let rather a lot of people go...less so than in the rest of the company. And it is a definite trend here in the business.
 
locoyo386

locoyo386

Member
I know a little about cost analysis, but what I don't understand is; If there is so much cost associated from getting the oil off the ground and into refineries and finally into our cars, why are they still making huge profits, even when people are not putting as much gasoline in their cars. Why are they not reporting low profits, to none, like many other companies or even states like California or Florida (that might go bankrupt). I guess the poloticians are taking all the money that we pay as tax.
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by locoyo386
http:///forum/post/3078714
I know a little about cost analysis, but what I don't understand is; If there is so much cost associated from getting the oil off the ground and into refineries and finally into our cars, why are they still making huge profits, even when people are not putting as much gasoline in their cars. Why are they not reporting low profits, to none, like many other companies or even states like California or Florida (that might go bankrupt). I guess the poloticians are taking all the money that we pay as tax.
Three words
Economies of Scale
Their margins are razor thin. Compared to their costs. You know those "record profits" the government gets 2.5 times that from exxon...
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Originally Posted by locoyo386
http:///forum/post/3078714
I know a little about cost analysis, but what I don't understand is; If there is so much cost associated from getting the oil off the ground and into refineries and finally into our cars, why are they still making huge profits, even when people are not putting as much gasoline in their cars. Why are they not reporting low profits, to none, like many other companies or even states like California or Florida (that might go bankrupt). I guess the poloticians are taking all the money that we pay as tax.
Their huge profits aren't really all that large when you look at it as a percentage return on their operating budget. The oil companies don't make near the profits apple or Pfizer do. It's kind of like comparing the guy on the corner with a hot dog cart to McDonald's. Mickey D's will have 10,000 times the profit but their expenses are a whole lot more as well.
 
locoyo386

locoyo386

Member
Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3078793
Their huge profits aren't really all that large when you look at it as a percentage return on their operating budget. The oil companies don't make near the profits apple or Pfizer do. It's kind of like comparing the guy on the corner with a hot dog cart to McDonald's. Mickey D's will have 10,000 times the profit but their expenses are a whole lot more as well.
I see, wonder how much they really take.
 
scsinet

scsinet

Active Member

Originally Posted by locoyo386
http:///forum/post/3078714
I know a little about cost analysis, but what I don't understand is; If there is so much cost associated from getting the oil off the ground and into refineries and finally into our cars, why are they still making huge profits, even when people are not putting as much gasoline in their cars. Why are they not reporting low profits, to none, like many other companies or even states like California or Florida (that might go bankrupt). I guess the poloticians are taking all the money that we pay as tax.
I must compliment you for asking questions. This is the right attitude. So many people just parrot what they hear in the media, but you are trying to understand the facts.

To elaborate a little more on what I was saying above... the price of crude is one of the only variables. The other costs involved are - to name a few - refining, transportation, taxes, and distribution. If you look at those, you'll see that all of those costs, with the exception of the crude (raw materials), are going to be pretty much the same regardless of the price of crude, except maybe taxes. Let's say that gas costs $3 a gallon,. at a time when crude was $100 a barrel. If $1 of that final price is for the crude, that means that even if the price of crude dropped to $0.01 per barrel, gas would still cost $2.01 per gallon, which goes against what lots of folks believe, but if you look at it this way, it makes sense. Of course that is a rudamentary example assuming all things being equal, which they never are.
Where the profits come in is all about competition. Retailers that compete with each other within the boundaries of the US suffer hits to their bottom line and profits becuase the US economy has a direct impact on them - we spend less, they make less.
However, oil is a commodity purchased in the global marketplace. We are bidding for crude against other countries with stronger (or really strong) economies (read: CHINA). Furthermore, it's far easier for Americans to hold off on buying that plasma TV than it is to put less gas in their cars. While Americans might be putting less gas in their cars, it's not much less, and overall, we are still burning more gas than ever before. The PROFITS are larger but the PROFIT MARGINS (what portion of what you pay for a gallon of gas that ends up being profits to the oil companies) are pretty much the same. The amount of profit margin that oil companies are making is not much different than it's ever been in the past, it's just that we are consuming so much more oil than before, there are more profits. The media is all to happy to sensationalize this, because one thing Americans love to do these days is blame someone else - especially if it's a "big evil corporation."
The ironic twist to this tale is that these record profits generally go to two main places: exploration and shareholders. Exploration is self explanatory, it's to try to find new sources of oil. Of course, lawmakers are making this very difficult by severely limiting the places where we can explore and get oil closer and cheaper. What the oil companies are able to get to, they tax into oblivion. Shareholders is where the irony comes in... the oil companies are owned by people... everyday people like you in me in many cases.
Now... can anyone draw the parallels between the heavy taxation of oil usage in this country and what is coming down the pipe (no pun intended) with cap-and-trade regulation of most other forms of energy production? What we are paying at the pump is a great lesson of things to come...
 
ophiura

ophiura

Active Member
Also keep in mind that there is more use for a barrel of oil than just gas for your car. Many people do forget this in the whole energy debate.
 
locoyo386

locoyo386

Member
Originally Posted by SCSInet
http:///forum/post/3078856
I must compliment you for asking questions. This is the right attitude. So many people just parrot what they hear in the media, but you are trying to understand the facts.

Well we all have our opinions, but just because we have them it does not mean that they are correct.
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
I just read an article that claims the national association of realtors or something like that lobbied congress and got existing homes exempted from the energy audits at the last minute. Haven't seen any reporting on that yet but I assume the article is correct seeing as it came from their website.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top