A Question on Regulation

Posted by desimarie23 10 years, 10 months ago to The Gulch: General
51 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

Yesterday, in a moment of aggravation, my husband angrily stated that oil companies shouldn't be 'allowed' to profit $35 billion in a quarter. He feels that the government should regulate and basically cap these companies from 'over-profiting.' I was obviously baffled at the statement and stated that the government should never, under any circumstances, have the right to impede or control a person's right to produce or trade and least of all keep anyone from making profit on their production. I asked him why one would go into business in the first place, if not to make profit? I don't believe he actually has any strong opinion on the matter, because he had no rebuttal. We've never really seen eye-to-eye on matters that are political or philosophical in nature. This statement, however, was so off-base to me that I am still in shock.

Anyone have any thoughts on the matter? Am I wrong for being a little disappointed?

All Comments

  • Posted by rv6boxer 10 years, 10 months ago
    He's likely not thought it through, which is common.

    Tell him to stop buying their product(s). If that means walking or riding a bike, so be it. It'll be a good way for him to reassess the value of his car. If he uses home heating oil, stop buying it, too.

    If enough like "thinkers" would follow his lead, sales would decrease and profits would likely suffer. And that would make him happy?

    I find a gallon of gasoline one of the greatest values on earth. Imagine what all has to occur to deliver a gallon to the pump! (Locating it, Drilling, Pumping/Transport, Refining, Delivery to the Merchant, etc.) I think it's remarkable. That gallon of gas then allows me to drive my truck 20 miles to work in air conditioned comfort (or warm and toasty) while carrying up to 1700 lbs of supplies/tools! I make the drive in 25 minutes. It would take me 7-8 hours to walk and I could carry very little.


    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ arthuroslund 10 years, 10 months ago
    Don't be disappointed. Liberals have been well indoctrinated to parrot the old socialist talking points. Logic means nothing to them.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ TomB666 10 years, 10 months ago
    While your free market approach is one that I share, I can see how in this messed up country where lobbyists own most of congress and the administration bows to the highest bidder, your husband might arrive at that conclusion. (Not that I'm cynical or anything.) Does anyone really think there is a free market for oil in the US? Oil companies work to maximize profits within the framework government establishes, not in the market place.

    We have corn in our gas because the corporate farm lobby wants it so. Which leads to a whole set of 'unintended consequences'.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Technocracy 10 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Like the old saying goes...

    There are lies, damn lies, and statistics.

    Whenever the media or politicians begin trying to sling statistics around, its time to grab the hip waders.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Technocracy 10 years, 10 months ago
    I find it sickly ironic that the people that get worked up that the energy companies are raking in unreasonable profits have no problem with the government(s) taxing that same product at a many times higher level than the producer's actual profit.

    Meanwhile the government takes all of that capital while providing absolutely NOTHING of positive value.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by NealS 10 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Yours has to be a difficult situation. I still cannot comprehend how Mary Matalin can get along with her husband, James Carville. They are so politically opposite I'd think just being arond each other would cause an explosion, or at least a fire. My wife and I are completely politically compatible. We both swear at the same nonsense stories (like when Carville talks) on TV News (and we only watch one news channel anymore). Perhaps most of the extereme political nonesense and arguing will go away when we get a real administration running things, one that listens to the people (I can only hope). Take care, and best wishes....
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by NealS 10 years, 10 months ago
    It sounds like you need a new husband. Please post a picture of yourself. (Just kidding [maybe}) If I don't make some stupid comments once in a while I'll go crazy with some of the nonsensical speech we hear today. Ask him, how many dollars (not percentage or some other fact that might put it in perspective) does the government make per quarter on the same amount of production? What does the government do to earn that money, or do with that money, the dollars they make from this industry? They sure aren't fixing the potholes out here where I live in the Seattle area. You actually take your life in your hands when you drive on the streets here. (my last statement is actually meant to be rhetorical [or is it?]. It really has nothing to do with potholes [or does it?] but the implication might be there)...
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by desimarie23 10 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    He HAS seen the movies, but I don't think the concept stuck--based on his statement. I will have him read that article though, thank you.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by desimarie23 10 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Do you think it's possible to explain something logically to a person who obviously isn't using reason to make arguments (no rhetoric)? That's been the question on my mind after reading all of the comments in this discussion. You and I know that the government is taking money that they did not earn, from industries that they should have nothing to do with; what they do with the money is another matter entirely...since they obviously aren't fixing these life-threatening potholes ;)

    Thank you for your response, very entertaining, you hooked me with the first statement lol.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 10 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    often, the disagreement is because there is a lack of knowledge. Emotions play a big role as well.
    straightlinelogic posted a piece on Hazlitt two days ago. someone, in a comment, posted a link to a pdf of Hazlitt's "Economics In One Lesson." It's short and explains alot of the root issues. You can ask that is your husband reads that, you'll read something he provides. Has he seen the movies yet? You can both be entertained and maybe something will stick with him or he'll recognize an inconsistency that will encourage him to check his premise
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by seascape 10 years, 10 months ago
    Gross profit means nothing. How much was risked and what percentage was returned to the company. Would your economically challenged husband return money from the government in years when losses were incurred? The more they make the more goes to investors and reinvestment in New technology keeping prices steady and assuring future products. It is how we have gotten to be the best place on earth to live.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 10 years, 10 months ago
    Fortunately for me, my wife and I are on the same page philosophically. However, I have several family and friends who are 3rd, and 4th generation libs. I love them dearly for many reasons but some of them have "given up" on me. Those that haven't at least provide me with lively discussion and keep my arguing skills well honed.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by desimarie23 10 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    :) fair enough, and I agree. The issue at hand goes much deeper than an uneducated statement on oil profits.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by katrinam41 10 years, 10 months ago
    I agree that companies have the right to all the honest profits they can make. I also agree that you have every reason to be baffled, desimarie23. Husbands can do that to a gal, but it comes with the territory. Mine tends to hit me with things like that for the shock value. When you get back into the discussion with yours, you might mention that the oil company profits (after tax and expenses) also go to not just the "company", but to stockholders like my hubby's pension fund. For some odd reason, I just can't make myself believe that we are some of those fat cat over-profiteers...
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Hiraghm 10 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Hey, since they can't get *me* to shut up, you shouldn't worry about what people think about *your* opinion :)
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 10 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    In arguing with my most prickly cousin, she often will make a statement similar to your husband's and she "Just knows it's right." It is a clear as day to her and she just can't understand why I don't see it no matter how acutely I take it apart. It boils down to what I call Hulkisms. War bad, Peace good. Hulk smash.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 10 years, 10 months ago
    "We've never really seen eye-to-eye on matters that are political or philosophical in nature."
    desi, you have more to worry about than a discussion on reining in oil profits...;)
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years, 10 months ago
    The problem for the oil industry is government interference. People in the oil industry despise government and politics. They view lawyers other than patent lawyers with disdain, with politicians being the worst of the lawyers. People in the oil business tolerate lawyers who protect them from other lawyers. Patent lawyers, on the other hand, are definitely friends. When I lived in MI and IL in the early and mid 1990s, our professional society meeting dinner discussions often revolved about this compromise or that change that was required because of government interference.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 10 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    a couple of things. 1. taxes. For the consumer the gallon of gas boasts .50 per for state and federal at the pump tax. There are lots of hidden taxes all along the distribution chain. Assume another .50. So at least a $1.00 at the pump is due to taxes.
    2.government controlled scarcity. We do not enjoy free markets in oil and gas production
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo