15 Comments Add your own

• 1. Kaus  |  May 2nd, 2008 at 11:08 am

  Take a look at Exxon (XON) and net income. 13 percent increase in 2008 so far. The stock is still a good buy, but it certainly doesn’t directly correlate with the increase in prices at the pump. In fact it isn’t even close. Your all wet. The stock should be going through the roof don’t ya think? Of course, in a Marxist world, capital gains taxes would take all my profit anyway so why bother.

• 2. Menlo Bob  |  May 2nd, 2008 at 11:15 am

  You link sez:
  “That’s $10 billion, and it’s going into the pockets of oil refiners,” said Leonard Burman of the Tax Policy Center in Washington. “The last time I checked, they didn’t need it.”

  Economists don’t get to decide the proper profit a corporation is allowed. If that were the case companies with larger profit margins would be constrained by the all knowing economist or fellow Marxists.

• 3. Kaus  |  May 2nd, 2008 at 9:09 pm

  Obama’s advisor says “The profits right now are so remarkable that one could trim them 10 percent or so, which would turn out to be somewhere in the $15 billion range,” said Jason Grumet, an adviser to the Obama campaign”.

  So if Exxon makes 13 percent profit 1st quarter 2008, Obama will take 10 percent. Ya think the price at the pump goes up for consumers…you bet. Nice plan Obama. Marxist idiot.

• 4. Mr. Baseball  |  May 3rd, 2008 at 5:23 pm

  Kaus, I usually don’t like to comment about your remarks because your ignorance is so astounding, but this time you’ve gone too far. The quote from Jason Grumet means a 13 percent profit would be reduced to 11.7 percent. I’m not sure how I feel about this issue, but you should at least get the facts and numbers right. The bigger issue here is whether oil companies should continue to get tax breaks. If you’re truly a free market captialist, the answer should be to eliminate those breaks.

• 5. Kaus  |  May 3rd, 2008 at 10:02 pm

  Mr. Baseball…do you think 13 percent profit is evil? Yes I understand the math of taking 10 percent MORE of the profit….but I do believe Exxon is already paying taxes. Do you have a 401k or other investments? Do you think that after inflation, 13 percent growth should also be taxed and taken by our government to redistribute? Perhaps you don’t comment on my remarks because you’re dumb enough to believe that capital gains and inheritance tax are good things that politicians should be able to redistribute to people that vote for them. The increase at the pump doesn’t correlate directly to net income at Exxon.

• 6. Mr. Baseball  |  May 4th, 2008 at 5:23 pm

  Kaus, from your comments you obviously do not understand the math and you have no clue about how the economy works. Of course Exxon’s income goes up when gas prices go up. Just read their annual reports. And just because someone disagrees with you doesn’t make them a marxist. From your use of the term, I doubt that you even understand the meaning. You and Joe McCarthy would have gotten along fine. Be careful Kaus. There are Marxists under your bed as we speak. They’re everywhere!

• 7. Pat Cunningham  |  May 4th, 2008 at 7:49 pm

  You’re right, Mr. B. Kaus knows nothing about Marxism, which is good for us Marxists. Once our revolution becomes a complete success, I say let’s put Kaus in a re-education camp — or, in his case, an education camp; you can’t RE-educate someone who hasn’t been educated in the first place. (Heh, heh. A little Marxist humor there.)

• 8. Henry  |  May 5th, 2008 at 6:46 am

  Kaus merely uses name calling and inflammatory labels to support his arguments and convoluted logic. Perhaps we should all chip in for a copy of Das Kaptial. After reading a page or two, Kaus could always use it for a door stop.

• 9. Kaus  |  May 5th, 2008 at 10:51 am

  I didn’t start the name calling in this thread.

  ROI on Exxon is 15 percent currently. They pay 41 percent in federal taxes. Consumers pay additional tax at the pump. You guys tell me fuel prices are too high. Obama wants to raise it even more through additional taxation. Do you see a problem here? Mr. Baseball doesn’t.

  At what point does tax rate become so high that you declare government ownership and redistribution. (Marxism)

  Yes, I use the ‘marxist’ tag a lot in my threads for effect sake. Obviously we are not even close to true marxism. Perhaps psuedo marxism is a better choice of words.

  The government is too punitive in taxation my friends. It doesn’t help the US Economy, it doesn’t make us competitive in the world economy.

  I’m willing to bet Mr. Baseball has never owned a stock, has no 401K and is living on social security benefits.

• 10. Pat Cunningham  |  May 5th, 2008 at 11:46 am

  You lose the bet, Kaus. I know Mr. Baseball personally, and you’re wrong about him on every count (which is par for the course for you).

• 11. Kaus  |  May 5th, 2008 at 12:26 pm

  The industry average on true profit for the entire oil industry in the last 12 months was 7.8 %. Gas prices went up over 25 percent. So tell me where the money went? Taxes and oil exploration. If an investor can’t profit on a risk, he won’t make an investment in oil exploration. No profits, no oil.

• 12. Kaus  |  May 5th, 2008 at 2:56 pm

  I know most of you posters and Pat only get your real news from the Daily Kos….but the Wall Street Journal (that capitalistic trade rag) has a great article on the subject….since I’m just an idiot….http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120977019142563957.html?mod=djemEditorialPage

• 13. Henry  |  May 5th, 2008 at 8:50 pm

  Kaus -

  I don’t read Daily Kos, but I do read the Wall Street Journal. That doesn’t mean I agree with everything I read . As far as Mr. B, I think I know who he is, and I’ll bet he forgot more about stocks and bonds than you have every known. You’ll never know what a foolish statement you made. Out of curiosity, do you own any shares of any company? My 401k was up 17% last year. How did yours do?

• 14. Kaus  |  May 5th, 2008 at 9:01 pm

  Henry…33 percent….that beats yours don’t it. NO one has given me evidence to refute my remarks except to call me ignorant. Not an acceptable answer, but typical of this web site in general. Income is not Return on Investment.

• 15. Henry  |  May 5th, 2008 at 9:21 pm

  Kaus -

  I don’t believe you.

Leave a Comment

Name Required

Email Required, hidden

Url

Comment

Security Code:

Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed