Obama on Coal Production

[audtatious]

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/...ction/

I've seen the video and it's interesting. Seems he plans on implementing the most aggressive cap and trade system for us once he is President and it will lead to anyone supporting coal to go bankrupt. Since 49% of our electricity comes from coal do you think our electric bill will be higher once they start penalizing the hell out of them?

I'm sure this makes the environmentalists happy at least.

[480sx]

Your kinda spinning that article, and so is the GOP. Obama is apparently going to try and implement a carbon tax, that will hit power plants the hardest.

There will still be profitable things to do with coal. While it might change the coal mining industry and possibly make it less profitable, it is not going to bankrupt it.

We need to be taxed, and as hard as that is to accept, our govt needs money. We got ourselves into this mess by electing retards, and we all are going to pay for it. This is just one way of increasing tax revenue for the country, and personally its more appealing than say a federal personal property tax or something. It also has the added bonus of possibly helping the environment.

We'v got a national debt in excess of 10 trillion dollars that needs to be paid down, and a crumbling financial system. We really need to stop spending.. But thats a whole other issue.

BTW.. 1000's of dem 'Socialismish' programs would have been a hell of a lot better than the wars we are now engaged in, and probably cheaper. Dems for the longest time have been thought of as the tax and spend, however look at our national debt that has doubled over the last 8 years under a mainly republican controlled government.

No, im not saying dems have the answer or are the right way to go, or that i want to give 'free' money to anyone, just making a point.

[WDRacing]

Also, and I hate to agree with Obama, but perhaps taxing a company based on carbon emissions will help increase their efforts to use a "cleaner" process. Cleaner coal is more expensive, so there is less incentive. Now they will have to get on the wagon or GTFO.

Without sounding like a tree hugger, there IS a limit to how much pollution we can produce without having negative side effects. So if taxing people that are serious polluters helps them clean up...I'll back that play.

I also think the GOP is spinning this. Anything that can be twisted will be, sucks, but fact. This is just another BS tactic from a party grasping at straws. Damn I wish McCain had not picked Palin...unrelated I know, but I just can't bring myself to listen to anything she says.

[themadscientist]

We need to be taxed, and as hard as that is to accept, our govt needs money.

I'm Joe Biden and I approved this message

The government has demonstrated that they are addicted to our tax dollars and manage what they get with stunning inneptitude and graft. You want to give them more? Give them your money then, you don't speak for me.

If you were dealing with an alcoholic who is incapable of controlling his consumption would you get him more scotch?

The fact is every day in America people look at what they make, what expenses they have and make hard choices to bring those two amounts into balance, it's called a "budget". If we can do it Washington can too. No more money, well, I guess we won't vote ourselves a pay raise this year, hmmmm?

[smockers83]

Also, and I hate to agree with Obama, but perhaps taxing a company based on carbon emissions will help increase their efforts to use a "cleaner" process.

I didn't read the article, but a tax system on carbon emissions will be much more effective than a cap-and-trade system. It'll be much cheaper to administer, it'll keep prices more stable than a C&T system, and it will prevent government favoritism. A tax system like this already exists, the fees the government charges companies for using the frequency spectrum (cell phone carriers, radio stations, satellite companies, etc). A C&T system is in place in Europe and it really hasn't done anything to curb the problem. Plus, the factor hinging on such a system is that there are technologies to reduce carbon emissions, none of which exist.

[themadscientist]

Maybe we can tax politicians based on the carbon dioxide emissions released daily on the floors of congress. That would pay down the debt by the end of the week!

[480sx]

that they are addicted to our tax dollars and manage what they get with stunning inneptitude and graft. You want to give them more? Give them your money then, you don't speak for me.

If you were dealing with an alcoholic who is incapable of controlling his consumption would you get him more scotch?

You have a good point. Damn good one actually.. How can we trust these fools with more cash. Idk im kinda in a corner with that one.

However im not for increasing taxes forever, just long enough for us to pay down our debt and fix our infrastructure. When the government is slimmed down to the size it needs to be and our deficit is manageable, then we can cut way back on taxes. Fact is, we have a huge deficit now that needs to be addressed. In the long run we will pay a hell of a lot more through inflation if this is not fixed.

Also, our main drain right now is the wars. Its not some socialist policies or anything of the like. Its funny to me that Americans want things like universal health care(in some form or another) ect and dont want to pay for them. Today is not the day we can do this IMO, nor will we be able to do this anytime soon. This is what worries me most about a Obama/Biden ticket, they are going to simply spend all the extra tax dollars they they bring in, and add to the problem. We really just need to hunker down, get out of the wars, cut the cost of government tremendously and pay down debt. Once our economy is strong again then we can *talk* about stuff like universal health care, and other random 'socialist' agendas.

Its kinda like.. A financial strategy with long term goals.

[480sx]

Maybe we can tax politicians based on the carbon dioxide emissions released daily on the floors of congress. That would pay down the debt by the end of the week!

[audtatious]

Your kinda spinning that article, and so is the GOP. Obama is apparently going to try and implement a carbon tax, that will hit power plants the hardest.

There will still be profitable things to do with coal. While it might change the coal mining industry and possibly make it less profitable, it is not going to bankrupt it.

We need to be taxed, and as hard as that is to accept, our govt needs money. We got ourselves into this mess by electing retards, and we all are going to pay for it. This is just one way of increasing tax revenue for the country, and personally its more appealing than say a federal personal property tax or something. It also has the added bonus of possibly helping the environment.

We'v got a national debt in excess of 10 trillion dollars that needs to be paid down, and a crumbling financial system. We really need to stop spending.. But thats a whole other issue.

BTW.. 1000's of dem 'Socialismish' programs would have been a hell of a lot better than the wars we are now engaged in, and probably cheaper. Dems for the longest time have been thought of as the tax and spend, however look at our national debt that has doubled over the last 8 years under a mainly republican controlled government.

No, im not saying dems have the answer or are the right way to go, or that i want to give 'free' money to anyone, just making a point.

Regardless of anything, this will not bode will in areas where they rely on the coal industry to provide for their families.

As far as the last 8 years, the Dems came into power 2 years ago promising to end the war and fix everything. They have not done anything they supposedly set out to do. In regards to the national debt, if the Dems were going to do such a bang-up job then why is our national debt in a further incline?

[themadscientist]

The problem is we never go back, give a politician a buck and he will be back soon enough for another. I say NO! Enough, the spigot is cranked as far open as it is going to go. Americans need to draw a line in their wallet, no more. They need to look at their representatives and make it clear the era of free spending is over. They need to not only deal with current expenses with the revenue inflow they have now but also

pay down the national debt

start putting money back into social security

eventually start reducing tax rates as debt and efficiency milestones are met.

Paying taxes IS NOT PATRIOTIC, it is a necessary EVIL and must be treated as such.

Until the American people develop the sack to start yanking these fools out of their seats of power based on lack of results they will continue to keep coming by to dig in your couch for change.Hold them accountable. After two or three one term Congressmen cycle through they will start to get the idea that they need to quit screwing around with us.

[BusyBadger]

With the French being such fans of nuclear power and the Big O wanting the US to embrace more European (read: Socialist) ways you'd think he'd be pushing for reactors all over the US.

I've never understood the anti-fossil fuel movement when it was also coupled to the anti-nuclear movement. Clean power can be had, but not enough to sustain current demand. I'd love to see how far some Prius driving, latte drinking, pinhead travels after they've charged up their ride from the local windmill farm. in an attempt to hit the local Barnes & Noble and pick up the most recent copy of the Atlantic Monthly. If we're lucky they'll make it to Roscoe's (or the Waffle House for you in the southeast) and see how well spent those welfare cheques are being spent.

If there is a bigger tragedy in the political arena than the GOP being so damned beholden to the "religious right" its the environmentalists being (for the most part) assimilated by the left in an effort to push an anti-capitalist agenda.
Modified by BusyBadger at 9:09 PM 11/2/2008

[480sx]

Its interesting to me how blurred party lines have become. GOP historically was about lowering taxes, no socialist agendas, in favor of limited govt, ect. However they have done nothing to lower taxes for the people who need it most, been a part to the increase in the size of the federal govt, and made a huge 'socialist style' bailout of Wall street. They supported a 700b bailout, again, to the people who caused the problem in the first place. You have to know at LEAST 15 percent of that cash is going to be completely waisted.

In addition, this bail out and the legislation behind it was rushed through congress and the senate in a climate of fear. No one freaken learns..

Im not saying the bailout wasnt needed, im not an economist and dont fully understand it nor have i done any in depth analysis of it.

What about a system that makes it oh so damned easy to start up a recall election to see if there is enough support to kick a candidate out of office. Thad be sweet.. Might empower the public and make politicians work for us.

Regardless of anything, this will not bode will in areas where they rely on the coal industry to provide for their families.

Agreed, but its not going to bankrupt the industry.

As far as the last 8 years, the Dems came into power 2 years ago promising to end the war and fix everything. They have not done anything they supposedly set out to do. In regards to the national debt, if the Dems were going to do such a bang-up job then why is our national debt in a further incline?

This is way beyond dem/repub. We are dropping 10billion dollars a month in Iraq, and not intaking enough cash to feed the war. You cant deal with that kind of green spewing hemorrhage without cutting off the flow.

[smockers83]

I just watched the video linked within the article. A cap-and-trade system won't bankrupt the coal industry. If that's what he thinks, he fundamentally does not understand how the system works.

Taxing carbon emissions is just a revenue opportunity that has yet to be exploited by the government. They have already exploited other easily accessible public goods such as the radio frequencies and such.

[themadscientist]

Agreed, but its not going to bankrupt the industry.

I beleive he was trying to advocate th workers who will lose their jobs because of this. Your comfort is not shared by them.

I thought Obama was supposed to create jobs, not kill them.

[audtatious]

Its interesting to me how blurred party lines have become. GOP historically was about lowering taxes, no socialist agendas, in favor of limited govt, ect. However they have done nothing to lower taxes for the people who need it most, been a part to the increase in the size of the federal govt, and made a huge 'socialist style' bailout of Wall street. They supported a 700b bailout, again, to the people who caused the problem in the first place. You have to know at LEAST 15 percent of that cash is going to be completely waisted.

In addition, this bail out and the legislation behind it was rushed through congress and the senate in a climate of fear. No one freaken learns..

Im not saying the bailout wasnt needed, im not an economist and dont fully understand it nor have i done any in depth analysis of it.

Sux, don't it? I was against the bailout and honestly we probably would have been better off with the first bailout than the one that actually passed with all the earmarks. Yes, the GOP went spend crazy and they are getting their asses kicked out for it. Of course, the Dems are known to be worse than the GOP so the solution does not solve much but give us a few years to put a different face on blame. If I had my way I would put limits on income for politicians so they make a salary for a job and nothing else. This would ensure the elitists would want nothing to do with it and we can get moderate bi-partisans in there who will try to do what is right for the country as a whole.

Agreed, but its not going to bankrupt the industry.

That's not what he said. He said they could try and build more coal plants but the penalties they would have to pay would bankrupt them. If the Gov put an ever-tightening collar on the industry then it would get too expensive to utilize as a viable energy resource.

This is way beyond dem/repub. We are dropping 10billion dollars a month in Iraq, and not intaking enough cash to feed the war. You cant deal with that kind of green spewing hemorrhage without cutting off the flow.

You can't treat that kind of green spewing hemorrhage without cutting unnecessary spending. Instead the Gov keeps flushing more and more money down the rabbit hole. Obama wants to end the war but seems to have the same time line that the current Administration has for getting all the troops back (pretty much the same as McCain) while also promising more and more social programs. Where's the money going to come from? Maybe removing 401k pre-tax dollars, force Americans to give 5% to the SSA for investment with a 3% return and the capability of SSA to manage the money and potentially make 14-20%+ to fill their coffers more (or lose it all or never invest it in the first place like current SS money)? Maybe more gas tax? Maybe penalizing the oil industry? Maybe taking more from successful companies? Maybe taking more from the people themselves?

At what point do we demand and expect to receive fiscal responsibility?

[480sx]

I beleive he was trying to advocate th workers who will lose their jobs because of this. Your comfort is not shared by them.

I thought Obama was supposed to create jobs, not kill them.

Its not comforting to think about anyone losing their jobs, or having their lively hoods put in jeopardy. My point was simple. Palins speech was a blatant attempt by the right to villanize Obama as someone who was going to 'bankrupt' the coal industry which is strait BS.

AUD - “You’re going to hear Sen. Obama talk about bankrupting the coal industry,” she said.

Thats strait from the mouth of Palin, from your link. That is strait BS, all i was saying.

Oh, im ALL for penalizing big oil. Holy crap do i hate Exxon mobile with a passion.. We give those a$$ billion dollar tax breaks to look for oil. Tax breaks so they can make more money, when they are the most profitable industry in the world.

We need to get those massive Camin island accounts back onto American soil and tax them. They 'tax' Americans hard enough, the average American life revolves around cars and gas. Were in a self admitted oil crises(by the oil companies) and they are turning record breaking profit year after year after year? Give me a fvkin break. The only crises they are in is what the hell the excecs and owners are going to do with all that cash.

[themadscientist]

I think the drug companies trump them for moral terpitude.

[audtatious]

AUD - “You’re going to hear Sen. Obama talk about bankrupting the coal industry,” she said.

Thats strait from the mouth of Palin, from your link. That is strait BS, all i was saying.

So? Did you actually look up and listen to what he said? While he did not specifically state that his intention was to bankrupt coal the end result is relatively the same.

Oh, im ALL for penalizing big oil. Holy crap do i hate Exxon mobile with a passion.. We give those a$$ billion dollar tax breaks to look for oil. Tax breaks so they can make more money, when they are the most profitable industry in the world.

Really? Exxon made an average of 8-10% in profit last year. S&P 500 companies were over 14%, Microsoft over 20%, etc. etc. etc. Do you plan to windfall tax them all or are you just biased towards Exxon due to the dollar amount? What about the wide range of people who have 401k and other investments into oil companies, going to have the Gov give them a kick back for their 401k taking a dive after you tax them? When the price of gas goes up in order for the oil companies to try and stay profitable will you want to further penalize them?

[ishkabibble]

What about the wide range of people who have 401k and other investments into oil companies, going to have the Gov give them a kick back for their 401k taking a dive after you tax them?

Pretty lefty question there, Matt.

[themadscientist]

very relavent. CORPERATIONS DON"T PAY TAXES! They pass them on in the form of higher prices. Stockholders pay those taxes in lost dividends. Consumers pay those taxes at the pump. The government is already responsible for a huge chunk of what you pay at the pump and people are raising their hands en masse to volunteer to pay more.

[480sx]

So? Did you actually look up and listen to what he said? While he did not specifically state that his intention was to bankrupt coal the end result is relatively the same.

No, no its not.

Your forgetting, coal is valuable commodity to the rest of the world. It will remain a valuable commodity for as long as humans inhabit this world. Clean burning coal seems to be around the corner. Its believed that you can liquify coal and use it as jet fuel.

Really? Exxon made an average of 8-10% in profit last year. S&P 500 companies were over 14%, Microsoft over 20%, etc. etc. etc. Do you plan to windfall tax them all or are you just biased towards Exxon due to the dollar amount?

15 billion dollar quarters. 15 BILLION DOLLAR QUARTERS. BILLIONS. Your GD right im biased towards Exxon because of its dollar amount, and a slew of other reasons.

At least S&P companies typically provide valuable services to our country. At least Microsoft fuels the worlds hunger for electronics and innovations. What does Exxon do? Provides us with something we all have to have and use every day, as we have for 50+ years. Gouge us when were already hurting. Screw PW sound oil spill victims brutally out of 5 billion dollars in awarded punitive damages over a 15 year appeals battle(flame all you want, that **** was atrocious).

When asked by the US govt if they could help the poor last winter by providing lower cost heating oil what was there response? Flat no. Hugo Chavez(dont really care what his agenda was, just making a point) stepped up and supported our poor with heating oil more than Exxon did. 15 billion dollar quarterly profits and they cant give a TINY bit back to the country that they feed from.

Let alone having their tendrils into everything in politics, along with practically everything else. The money that they give to special interest groups and lobbyists is disgusting. Their regard for the environment( ) sickens me.

The fact that they hoard ~80 percent of their earnings in off shore accounts is one of the reasons this economy is failing. What do you think happens to the majority of the 15 bill they made from us last quarter? It SITS in offshore accounts. Instead of the trickle down theory, i like to refer to it as the sponge theory.

Every cent of which is pure profit to ensure that big oil keeps a lions share of the power. Were in an energy crises and they are recording back to back record breaking profits. They are feeding the crises and lining their pockets with OUR cash. Your defending them like they are doing America some favor by raping us daily.

'Way to go Exxon you guys are capitalists, alright! Way to be real Americans! Fight the Democrats woo keep America free!' Give me a fvking break.

Penalize them?!?! Im talking about taxing them dude.. They pay a smaller percentage to taxes on their earnings than someone making under 50k. If they dont feel like paying their share of taxes and instead increase the price of gas? Then the whole oil sector needs to be publicly owned IMO. Enough is enough.

very relavent. CORPERATIONS DON"T PAY TAXES! They pass them on in the form of higher prices. Stockholders pay those taxes in lost dividends. Consumers pay those taxes at the pump. The government is already responsible for a huge chunk of what you pay at the pump and people are raising their hands en masse to volunteer to pay more.

YEP. What choice do we have BUT to pay though? Exxon knows this. They know they have enough puppets in Washington to make it so that their influence is long lasting and strong.

FYI That picture of Biden with your cruel use of quotes hurt my feelings.

[audtatious]

No, no its not.

Your forgetting, coal is valuable commodity to the rest of the world. It will remain a valuable commodity for as long as humans inhabit this world. Clean burning coal seems to be around the corner. Its believed that you can liquify coal and use it as jet fuel.

So, while we punish our own people for using coal we sell it to other countries for them to pollute? Doubtful as that would be stopped too. The problem with clean coal is how it would be done. Capture process is a huge problem as what do we do with it? Pumping it into the ocean can change the ph balance so that's not a viable option. Pumping it into empty oil reservoirs might work but the side effects of doing so is not known and could cause greater issues at a later time frame (although Norway is doing it now). Wet scrubbers could offer a side effect of allowing the sale of synthetic gypsum that is made from it and there is coal washing to remove the bad minerals....Of course, neither of those deal with CO2, just other impurities that cause acid rain and such.

The problem with clean coal is economics. Today it costs $150-220 per tonne of carbon for capture, $40-60 per tonne for CO2 and after cleaning the coal it is only 35% efficient as per it's uncleaned counterpart.

15 billion dollar quarters. 15 BILLION DOLLAR QUARTERS. BILLIONS. Your GD right im biased towards Exxon because of its dollar amount, and a slew of other reasons.

Really? So, you are all for a cap system on how much corporations make? Should it be based on percentage or dollar amount? Should we institute a welfare-based system to take money from those who are making dollar amounts higher than you like them to and give that money to businesses who are not making as much? What about the 401k and pension plans that are benefiting from their profits?

Who owns "big oil"?http://www.olympiabusinesswatc....html

So, who will be hurt by your actions of penalizing them for making 8-10% profits?

At least S&P companies typically provide valuable services to our country. At least Microsoft fuels the worlds hunger for electronics and innovations. What does Exxon do? Provides us with something we all have to have and use every day, as we have for 50+ years. Gouge us when were already hurting. Screw PW sound oil spill victims brutally out of 5 billion dollars in awarded punitive damages over a 15 year appeals battle(flame all you want, that **** was atrocious).

If you look at who benefits from oil profits via Exxon and others it's not some uber-elitist rich class. So, yes, common middle class folk are reaping benefits of their profits.

When asked by the US govt if they could help the poor last winter by providing lower cost heating oil what was there response? Flat no. Hugo Chavez(dont really care what his agenda was, just making a point) stepped up and supported our poor with heating oil more than Exxon did. 15 billion dollar quarterly profits and they cant give a TINY bit back to the country that they feed from.

That's their call. Should we ask Kroger or Tyson to majorly lower their prices in order to help feed families? No? If we did, what would they say? Get bent? What is the difference between Chavez and our oil companies? Chavez does not have a board nor shareholders expecting them to make a profit.

The rest of your Exxon rant is worthless. You want to punish Exxon then you punish everyone who has an investment. You tax the hell out of them, they raise their cost which the "people" will indirectly pay. You force-set a low profit margin then you pretty much take away their incentive to grow and prosper. You also punish the US citizens who have direct and indirect investments in them.

Why are you not up in arms about the Gov? Exxon just posted a 15B quarter. They paid 38B in taxes to the Gov during that time frame. Then the companies that transported the oil paid taxes, the ones who transported the gas paid taxes, the companies selling additives were taxed (as were those moving and storing additives), the other middlemen paid taxes, the gas stations paid taxes and the people buying gas were taxed. Now they want more taxes simply because of the dollar figure and not revenue percentage?

FYI That picture of Biden with your cruel use of quotes hurt my feelings.

I didn't post a pic.....

[audtatious]

Pretty lefty question there, Matt.

Sarcasm

[480sx]

So, while we punish our own people for using coal we sell it to other countries for them to pollute?

All i said was that it wasnt going to bankrupt the Coal industry as you said. Stay on topic.

Doubtful as that would be stopped too. The problem with clean coal is how it would be done. Capture process is a huge problem as what do we do with it? Pumping it into the ocean can change the ph balance so that's not a viable option. Pumping it into empty oil reservoirs might work but the side effects of doing so is not known and could cause greater issues at a later time frame (although Norway is doing it now). Wet scrubbers could offer a side effect of allowing the sale of synthetic gypsum that is made from it and there is coal washing to remove the bad minerals....Of course, neither of those deal with CO2, just other impurities that cause acid rain and such.

Relevance? Although good general information. The economics of coal in the future will change, obviously. They can deal with it when it rolls around.

Really? So, you are all for a cap system on how much corporations make? Should it be based on percentage or dollar amount? Should we institute a welfare-based system to take money from those who are making dollar amounts higher than you like them to and give that money to businesses who are not making as much? What about the 401k and pension plans that are benefiting from their profits?

Another Aud tangent! Also, stop putting words into my mouth.

Who owns "big oil"?http://www.olympiabusinesswatc....html

Very interesting stuff, i had no idea really.

So, who will be hurt by your actions of penalizing them for making 8-10% profits?

Mostly the executives, and to a lesser degree stock holders. The majority of these stock holders being upper middle class to wealthy.

Please dont discount a 1.5 percent share in a company that pulls 70 million a year. Who also makes it a common practice to buy back shares in the company from investors to increase their share holdings. Remember, their salaries come off the top separate from their share holdings. These are some of the richest men in America, bar none. In addition, part of those profits go to pay off politicians, pay lobbyists , ect for their own warped political agendas, usually swinging towards the right.

That's their call. Should we ask Kroger or Tyson to majorly lower their prices in order to help feed families? No? If we did, what would they say? Get bent?

Indeed it is there call. Are they still bottom feeders for making that call? You bet your A they are.

Funny you bring up grocers. The prices at the store have sky-rocketed on everything because of the increasing price of gas.

Oh btw, food stamps..

You force-set a low profit margin then you pretty much take away their incentive to grow and prosper.

Pfft. Im not talking a freaken cap here, again. Ok, so lets say they had a low profit margin. A low profit margin from 67.4 billion dollars in 08 is still a percentage of... 67.4 billion dollars. Currently that are keeping about 10-12 percent of that.

Also, who cares that the oil companies dont grow? They will always profit and stay afloat, even if they make a single percent. Do you think they are going to close down shop because they only make say.. 5 percent of 70 billion dollars? Think thats not enough incentive for them to find more oil?

Exxon spent less than 1 percent of their profits on alternative energy sources. Imagine if half of that 15 billion they made in profits went to R&D for alternative energy and implementation. Bio diesel, electric cars, ultra efficient hybrids(as japan did with the prius, and what an awesome financial move that turned out to be. Not calling it 'ultra efficient' by any means though..) Could you imagine who would be helped then if we broke our dependency to oil and instead perhaps.. Fueled our trucking industry with WVO? Made break throughs in hydrogen? The technology to break our dependence on oil is here today. Why arnt we doing so? BIG OIL.

[audtatious]

Relevance? Although good general information. The economics of coal in the future will change, obviously. They can deal with it when it rolls around.

You brought up clean coal and I simply expounded on it. It's relevant in regards to the reply that I quoted. Now, if there is no profit in coal due to penalties from Obamas legislation then it won't be around in the future. If the end result is stopping coal from being used due to the amount of "global warming pollution" that comes from it then they sure won't want it being sold to other countries to be used for the same.

Another Aud tangent! Also, stop putting words into my mouth.

No answer, huh? Don't worry, it was a lead-in to the next question anyway.

Very interesting stuff, i had no idea really.

Knowing is 1/2 the battle (GO JOE!)

Mostly the executives, and to a lesser degree stock holders. The majority of these stock holders being upper middle class to wealthy.

No. The majority are middle class. What's wrong with "the rich" making investments which have the opportunity of making them more money? BTW, who is rich? Is it Obamas 250k...errrr....200k range? Bidens 150k range? The latest 120k+ range? Seems to be a moving target in regards to the Democrats (and very telling)

Please dont discount a 1.5 percent share in a company that pulls 70 million a year. Who also makes it a common practice to buy back shares in the company from investors to increase their share holdings. Remember, their salaries come off the top separate from their share holdings. These are some of the richest men in America, bar none. In addition, part of those profits go to pay off politicians, pay lobbyists , ect for their own warped political agendas, usually swinging towards the right.

What's wrong with the executives investing their salaries back into the company? That has nothing to do with a "golden parachute" and will further ensure that they are interested in profit. Are you against all forms of capitalism or just those that actually show to be profitable?

As for lobbyists I agree. I wouldn't have a problem if lobbying was removed from the federal level.

Indeed it is there call. Are they still bottom feeders for making that call? You bet your A they are.

So, what do you propose? Setting regulation that states that those who create businesses are limited to a maximum "X" profit margins and everything else needs to go to providing lower prices for the good of "the people"?

Funny you bring up grocers. The prices at the store have sky-rocketed on everything because of the increasing price of gas.

Oh btw, food stamps..

Oil companies do not set the price per barrel. They also can't be blamed for the price of some food which increased due to corn prices rising due to Ethanol.

Pfft. Im not talking a freaken cap here, again. Ok, so lets say they had a low profit margin. A low profit margin from 67.4 billion dollars in 08 is still a percentage of... 67.4 billion dollars. Currently that are keeping about 10-12 percent of that.

Also, who cares that the oil companies dont grow? They will always profit and stay afloat, even if they make a single percent. Do you think they are going to close down shop because they only make say.. 5 percent of 70 billion dollars? Think thats not enough incentive for them to find more oil?

What about Walmart, Microsoft and others? You seem gung-ho on the oil companies to have a cap based upon dollar value, what about absolute profit margin? At what point should we implement non-capitalistic policy to limit growth?

Exxon spent less than 1 percent of their profits on alternative energy sources. Imagine if half of that 15 billion they made in profits went to R&D for alternative energy and implementation. Bio diesel, electric cars, ultra efficient hybrids(as japan did with the prius, and what an awesome financial move that turned out to be. Not calling it 'ultra efficient' by any means though..) Could you imagine who would be helped then if we broke our dependency to oil and instead perhaps.. Fueled our trucking industry with WVO? Made break throughs in hydrogen? The technology to break our dependence on oil is here today. Why arnt we doing so? BIG OIL.

What technology? Where is it "here today"? Most "common people" can't justify paying 40k for a hybrid and switching completely to Bio impacts other costs.

Should we simply let the Gov tell us where we can or can't succeed? I really don't know why you feel the need to punish the economy as a whole by punishing those who are performing.

[wingFeather]

His coal stance is lame.

Obama will destroy my state's economy