Stu and Phantom, Your words are like sweet music to the ears of this financial conservative and free market proponent. We all are in the same club. That doesn't mean that I blindly side with business just because the liberals do not. Regarding gas prices, the conduct of the participants at the lower end of the food chain, the ones I see on street corners every day, reminds me of the banking business when I was part of it. When the Fed raised the discount rate, the local banks' prime rate went up the same day. When the Fed lowered the discount rate, the local banks somehow got stuck in neutral and the prime rate took a while to go down. The same thing is happening with gas prices. Whether or not some form of collusion is involved, who knows? But when you compare the rapid upward movement vs. the slow downward movement a la my banking comparison, something definitely is stinky in Helsinki.
Being a "country bumpkin" I only have 3 comments: 1)" It's the market Dummies"! and it ain't gonna stop till it hits the wall. 2) That Jabba the Hut look-a-like did not deserve that "golden parachute". He did nothing that helped inovate the industry, he was just in the right place at the right time. Give him a ten to twenty mil kiss and show him the door. The rest of the money should go to the shareholders! 3) Congress should rescind the tax breaks and subsidies that just passed last year for the oil industry. They are not a basket case!. "ENERGY INDEPENDANCE IS THE MORAL EQUIVILANT OF WAR"! I didn't vote for the guy either time but boy he sure nailed that one on the headIMHO
Check out the party contributions for Reps and Dems in 2000: http://www.opensecrets.org/parties/indus.asp?Cmte=RPC&Cycle=2000 By industry, Oil and Gas checked in at #5 on the R-party's list of contributors and it never makes the Dem's list at all. Interesting that as the Bush years move on that oil and gas contributes less and less as a group to the R-party. Maybe as prices heated up some R-party members realized they needed to distance themselves from Big Oil and their contributions.
I agree 110% with the comment made about Jaba the Hut (good description) getting his mega-millions severance pay.... 160 million was it? This guy happened to show up when the gettin' was getting gooder. With gas prices where they have been who couldn't show a huge profit gain when the oil prices are just happily and moronically passed on to the consumer. It doesn't take Einstein to maneuver a profit out of that simplistic strategy. Maybe he is being rewarded for being good at the shell game Exxon has played with the American public and the U.S. Gov't. Another theory of mine is that these guys get this kind of money because those who vote yes for it on the board know it could be them in that seat so if they don't give it away to someone else how can they themselves expect to get their own windfall?
MCG what did you think of Jack Welch? Just for the record though, it's clear to me that companies rise and fall with good/bad leadership at the top. Look at HP's turnaround since Carly left. There are damn few people capable of leading a large company, they are unique in the world. Sometimes the public acts like they think anybody could do the job, but that just isn't true. Also for the record, I've learned a lot in this thread! Terry
Also those who are trying to rebuild from Katrina and Rita know only too well the effects of supply and demand on commodities. Concrete, timber, pipe, steel, etc are all in short supply and the cost is rapidly rising. I put in a new fence a month ago, I got several bids all higher than I expected, the reason? The demand is sky high due to Katrina and Rita. Those tree's that were cut down for fence rails, were planted a long time ago. But in our system when demand is high prices rise, if it were any other way then it wouldn't be a free market economey. Also here is an article on just one project in the Gulf of Mexico, looking for more oil. They key factor is that it's 2.3B project, that's how expensive it is to be able to get new oil to meet the demands. If you artifically hold down the cost of end products and profits, then how will we find new supplies? Chevron Project
Speaking of the old shell game... :roll: I have a problem using numbers from the 2000 election in a discussion of spiraling 2006 gas prices. I mean we (Republicans) stole the 2000 election anyway, so what difference does it matter where we got our money? Why not look at CURRENT contributions and the fact that Oil & Gas contributions have been steadily DECLINING since 2000 and are now almost off the bottom of the chart. Here is MCG's chart for 2006: REPUBLICAN PARTY (2006 election cycle) Top Industries Industry Total Retired $14,501,231 Real Estate $7,811,254 Securities & Investment $5,982,482 Candidate Committees $5,258,195 Health Professionals $4,804,744 Misc Finance $4,353,726 Misc Business $4,083,101 Lawyers/Law Firms $3,740,074 Business Services $2,487,352 Insurance $2,224,438 Oil & Gas $2,221,451 General Contractors $1,974,045 Misc Manufacturing & Distributing $1,712,784 Commercial Banks $1,654,899 Pharmaceuticals/Health Products $1,342,974 TV/Movies/Music $1,314,470 Leadership PACs $1,291,407 Retail Sales $1,191,966 Automotive $1,155,972 Computers/Internet $1,127,144
:shock: Now lets take a look at the charts of the Democrats in the latest election. Please take note of a few items, which stay pretty much consistent through every election cycle; the trial lawyers and public employee unions own and control the Democratic Party. Teachers unions alone give more money to the lib/Dems than Exxon, Arco and Chevron combined give to the Republicans. They also control most of your state legislatures the same way the railroads use to control them in the 19th Century. Trial lawyers are now cranked out by the tens of thousands in small "law schools" at every little college around here in a continuing conspiracy to extort money from every successful business, big or small. The year I was born, your odds of being sued sometime in your life was 1-100,000. Now its 1-3. Read it and weep: DEMOCRATIC PARTY (2004 election cycle) Top Industries Industry Total Candidate Committees $71,220,348 Lawyers/Law Firms $43,717,138 Retired $35,151,747 Securities & Investment $19,540,364 Real Estate $14,343,953 Education $10,380,365 Business Services $9,277,407 TV/Movies/Music $9,144,543 Misc Finance $9,115,030 Misc Business $7,495,795 Health Professionals $7,454,208 Computers/Internet $6,411,229 Printing & Publishing $5,447,972 Non-Profit Institutions $4,322,712 Civil Servants/Public Officials $3,913,782 Other $3,341,465 Commercial Banks $2,650,007 Lobbyists $2,624,860 Insurance $2,545,537 Misc Manufacturing & Distributing $2,369,626 BTW- that huge number at the top represents mostly millionaires and billionaires (like George Soros) who contribute more money to the lib/Dems than all of the rest combined. In 2000, the average contribution to the Democratic Party was over $10,000 while the average contribution to the Republicans was under $50 bucks. Only three people gave a million to the GOP that year, while 23 gave a million or more to the lib/Dems. What are they buying? Government control of the economy. This way their success is guaranteed, whether they earn anything or not...whether they even work or not...
Pharmaceuticals also showed heavy on the R-party's side early on in Bush's tenure. That's oil/gas and drugs....two American staples whose cost has skyrocketed in the last 6 years. I notice you list the 2004 numbers for the Dems vs. the 2006 numbers for the Reps? 2004 is a complete year whereas 2006 is only 1/3 done.
:roll: I made no comparison between those two years, why not use them? I used the 2006 Republican numbers as an example of how Oil & Gas contributions to the GOP have declined in EVERY election year since 2000. Look at each number in sequence. This is hardly what you would expect if the Bush team was on the take to Big Oil. I used the 2004 Democrat numbers to show how they are actually raising MORE money than the GOP and they're getting it from groups who attack successful businesses and/or benefit from government spending. Both sets of numbers were a comparison to 2000, not to each other. That Pharmaceuticals or any other business group gives money to the GOP should hardly come as a surprise. Its an act of self-defense. The lib/Dems want to raise their taxes and take away their patent protection, while bleeding them dry in the courtrooms. This killing-the-Golden-Goose liberalism will stifle medical research just as surely as it has choked off the flow of oil and created gas lines in the past. Its flim-flam demagoguery pure and simple.
Self-defense or self promotion? When Bill Clinton was in office his administration placed a heavy pressure on the health care industry to hold down costs to the public and he was successful in my own experiences. As soon as Bush came in my company started to levy annual increases in my premiums followed by decreases in coverage the last 2-3 years. My prescription co-pay went from $10.00 in 2001 to $40.00 this year!!! I have a family of 5 and I take cholestrol lowering drugs daily so my annual drug bill alone has risen at least $1000.00 over what it was in 2000. A Republican controlled Congress and a Republican President have allowed this to happen. Man...those Dems are powerful ain't they?
Guys, we're all impacted and due to rising prices, filling up is not a pleasant experience. But whining about economic reality - when demand is increasing at a greater rate than supply, prices rise - and denying relevant facts is not the way to build a compelling argument....until I see a pattern of facts that points to the massive worldwide collusion necessary for your gouging case, its very difficult for me to imagine a scenario wherein Venezuela/Chavez's Citgo, the Netherlands Shell, Britain's BP, et al and the many US providers are all on the same page holding hands singing the Kumbaya song of "I'm gonna manipulate prices in a manner inconsistent with my costs over time such that I can gouge the consumer and I know that in so doing, I will create opportunites for you to massively undercut my prices and put yourself in a position of competitive advantage. Howeve, I won't steal your business if you don't steal mine....". imho, it's just not plausible. The profitability - measured in returns and margins - is simply not such that it could support claims of a monopolistic industry structure or profit manipulation. XOM's margins are below the average of the S&P 500. It's returns to its owners are below those achieved by the Chinese, French, Italians, Dutch, Spanish and latin american counterparts. Under the scenario that many here subscribe to, how can that be????? If I look at the movement of crude prices over time in comparison with gasoline prices at the retail level, I'm thinking if these guys are out to gouge me, they need to do a much better job! The facts: In Dec 1994 crude oil was selling for $17.16/barrel At present, crude is selling for $70/barrel. - an increase in excess of 4X. In Dec 1994 retail gas prices were $1.09/gallon. At present, retail gas prices are $2.92/gallon - an increase less than 3X. It's painful, emotional and we all want to b!tch and moan about it, but I just can't see that the preponderance of the factual evidence could support a case as you guys subscribe. A sold factual case can yet win the day......I just have not seen it. If you want to make a statement, fill up at the lowest priced provider. Buy a hybrid or more fuel efficient vehicle and drive less. MCG, congratulations! You are, without queston, the only living person in the civilized world that is not a consumer of copper 24/7. Be it your house, your car, your phone, your computer, your washer or dryer, your air conditioner or furnace, your toaster, your TV, your flashlight, etc., etc., etc. You truly must lead a fascinating existence. To your point about, phone bills and airline tickets and the competitive intensity of the auto industry. What you described about the pricing trends in telecommunciations and air travel is a DIRECT result of deregulation. Both industries have undergone a material change in the amount of government regulation and the redduction of the government hand in free markets. Now, you suggest the govenment should intervene in the oil markets. UGGGH...If,as you suggest, that falling prices are an indication of a competitive marketplace and further, you suggest that the auto industry is intensely competitive, why then have we not seen falling car prices?????? Terry
So no thanks to the industry for developing cholesterol lowering drugs that were not available 10 years ago? You are spending $1000 extra a year to prevent that heart attack or stroke that would have either killed you and left those kids fatherless, or cost tens of thousands of dollars for a bypass or stent operation. Yeah, life sucks here. stu
To paraphrase the TV ad for MLB: I LOVE THIS BOARD! .....because in the end common sense prevails, a la Stu's most recent post.
Just think, You get to live another 40-50 years so that you can further the $$$$ demands on the health care industry. People that want to live are really screwing up our healthcare system. It was so much better back in 1960 when 40 year olds would just die of heart attacks and medical insurance was so cheap. Even going to the doctor was easy. Doc would check your ears, throat, eyes, make you cough once or twice and you were all done! Too bad the world had to change and too bad no one wants to die.
:twisted: "I'm shocked to find there is gambling going on .....er ...make that no mention of the FTC investigations into certain drug companies that are paying off other companies to not manufacture generic versions of their drugs that have come off patent.