[clue-talk] oil...

[Angelo Bertolli]

Nate Duehr wrote:
> Angelo Bertolli wrote:
>
>> Let's see, if I were an oil company... I'd hold some drilling 
>> opportunities "for a rainy day."  The oil companies definitely want 
>> to "cash-in" when there's a crisis one day.  I'm not against drilling 
>> for more oil here, but I am against just letting companies do 
>> whatever they want.  If they want us to open up more land for them, 
>> they need to have some obligation to use it for the benefit of the 
>> country and not solely to maximize their profits.  If not, I say 
>> start a public drilling program.
>
> Change your phrase around and apply it to your business:
>
> "I don't want you to be allowed to maximize profit in your business."
>
> Is even saying such things sane in this country?
>
> I've never understood this anti-oil-company profit sentiment.  They 
> pay massive taxes (even if people think they get breaks that are big, 
> their taxes still dwarf a lot of industries), and they make their 
> money at market prices that are traded on an open market.
>
> In fact, if you want a piece of their profits, you have the right to 
> invest in them... many pay decent solid dividends too.  Yes, like all 
> American corporations there are fat cats at the top, but there's also 
> hundreds of thousands of employees getting paid, shareholders getting 
> paid... it's just big business.
>
> Supply and demand...
>
> Try limiting the profit of any software or computer hardware 
> companies, telecom, or whatever... and watch them scream.  I don't 
> like that Dell grew from a tiny company into a big one!  Limit their 
> profits!  Damn them!
>
> It just sounds insane when you look at it that way.  We're either 
> Capitalists, or we hand over all oil production to the government and 
> take whatever price we get, right?
>
> I guess it's "evil" if it's an oil company wants to sell us something 
> we all use, but Automotive companies that make nothing but gas 
> guzzling cars are worthy of government bailouts because it would "hurt 
> too many Americans" if they go under????
>
> (Just wait, the next multi-billion dollar bailout is coming for Ford 
> and General Motors... it's political now.  Obama has promised it to 
> the auto-makers, and I'm sure McCain would do it too.)
>
> Yes, I know oil companies try to slow the growth of alternatives -- 
> but let's get real about that too... if the alternatives were all that 
> cost-effective, they'd take off... and are now that consumers and 
> companies are "going green"... (as if that means their energy 
> consumption changed much).  And EVERY business tries to erect barriers 
> to entry.  Think Apple, Dell, or any other tech company doesn't have a 
> fleet of patent lawyers?
>
> Limit their profit!  They're evil!  (Ha!)
>
> We'll bail out automotive manufacturers who continued to build cars 
> that weren't efficient enough nor had enough quality, compared to 
> foreign imports -- and they CONTINUED to do it into an obvious energy 
> crisis...
>
> And we'll do that so people don't "lose jobs" in the midwest...
>
> And those cars do what?  Burn oil.
>
> But we'll in the same thought think that oil companies shouldn't 
> explore for oil here and force them to go to other countries to find 
> their product, even as we still are willing to pay for it and have it 
> shipped here?
>
> Here's my thought -- want to lower the profits of the oil companies?
>
> Stop using oil.
>
> Otherwise... what exactly is it you'd like to see?  A cap on their 
> profits?
>
> If that somehow makes sense to you, then why not cap all businesses?
>
> Will you volunteer your business to have a cap on future profits?
>
> A long long time ago in a galaxy far far away, I used to work for 
> Texaco.  Even way back then, people who worked in the oil biz were too 
> nice to just come out and say the truth... "You need us."
>
> In fact, it was always almost like people acted like their job was 
> "dirty" and they wouldn't talk about what they did for a living.  (And 
> I worked for a pipeline and tanker scheduling / mostly the accounting 
> division... all they did was the paperwork, and it was massive.  They 
> also had traders who were daily trying to get the best price for every 
> drop of it used, or they weren't any good at their jobs.)
>
> I don't get it.  People want "green" but are still driving.  Then they 
> start thinking that the "evil" part of that is the profit of the 
> company providing them the product they're addicted to?
>
> Good luck with that insanity.  Sounds a lot like the excuses 
> drug-addicted people convince themselves of... it's the crack dealer's 
> fault I'm still using, he makes it too easy for me to get the product.
>
> Oh and he makes too damn much money, someone should limit his profits!

It's not about profits, it's about limited resources.  It's obvious that 
we have something of great value here.  Why should we just open it up 
and hand it off to them without putting some conditions on it?

I think that just about answers this long diatribe about something I 
didn't even say... but if you were just trying to make a statement for 
everyone else, ok.

Angelo