- Joined
- Apr 26, 2007
- Messages
- 2,365
- Reaction score
- 1,221
Well at least its just the oil companies and the cost won't be passed on to the consumer.
Well at least its just the oil companies and the cost won't be passed on to the consumer.
You say that like they don't pass on whatever costs they can by holding more revenue as profits anywaysWell at least its just the oil companies and the cost won't be passed on to the consumer.
I say that because of what you said, not in spite of it. Any cost the government levies to the oil companies will just be passed on to the consumer. This is how the left always fucks over the middle class, crap like this.You say that like they don't pass on whatever costs they can by holding more revenue as profits anyways
So you want to tax the oil companies less, so that they have to directly raise the taxes on income more?I say that because of what you said, not in spite of it. Any cost the government levies to the oil companies will just be passed on to the consumer. This is how the left always fucks over the middle class, crap like this.
the proposal would lead to a more responsible leasing process that provides a better return to US taxpayers.
All I'm saying is this government sanctioned price increase on drilling is just going to cost the taxpayer. Nothing more or less.So you want to tax the oil companies less, so that they have to directly raise the taxes on income more?
There's still supply and demand that *should* be setting prices, companies using public land leases are still beholden to the market oil rate where private land wells and international oil companies are a factor of it.
24% of oil comes from public land lease, and 11% of natural gas is public land. 4.2% increase cost on public results in 1% increase in oil and .5% increase in natural gas costs.
It's not a one for one of "any extra costs just go to the consumer" because public land oil/gas prices are in the same market as private and international. If it was 50+% of oil/gas came from public land and the price increased then I'd agree with you. But that's not the case.
So you want to tax the oil companies less, so that they have to directly raise the taxes on income more?
There's still supply and demand that *should* be setting prices, companies using public land leases are still beholden to the market oil rate where private land wells and international oil companies are a factor of it.
24% of oil comes from public land lease, and 11% of natural gas is public land. 4.2% increase cost on public results in 1% increase in oil and .5% increase in natural gas costs.
It's not a one for one of "any extra costs just go to the consumer" because public land oil/gas prices are in the same market as private and international. If it was 50+% of oil/gas came from public land and the price increased then I'd agree with you. But that's not the case.