Thank You Exxon!

[Blisspath]

Exxon paid over 30 billion in taxes last year. That is more than the bottom 50% of taxpayers combined. So if you see a Exxon executive today, give them a huge hug and say thank you.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/63131-exxon-s-2007-tax-bill-30-billion?source=side_bar_editors_picks

[MasterSwordUltima]

I hug Exxon executives everyday, so this wouldn't be any different.








Or maybe I'm lying.

Well, whatever though. I'm not going to complain that the executives of a gas station franchise paid 30 billion in taxes. My self-esteem is going to do something though, its gonna go way up. I never thought I'd say this, but...Karma, bitch.

[erm2003]

I want to know how much profit they made last year vs. how much they paid in taxes. If the taxes are actually a significant amount compared to the profit, then I will be impressed.

[Modus Ponens]

It's all there in the linked article, which says they pay something like 41% of their taxable income.

So... yeah. Wow.

[erm2003]

Oh didn't see the link for some reason. Either way, I am just not impressed by oil companies in general. But do those higher taxes mean the prices for us were higher than they should be?

[Cloral]

Yes. Thank you Exxon for helping contribute to global warming. Thank you so much!

[phattonez]

^^Overrated.

Gas companies are out to make more money. It's not like the price is completely out of reason. If we want to do anything about our dependence on them, then we'll increase the gas tax and fund inter and intra-urban rail.

[Daarkseid]

I love this part of the article:


I'm pretty sure that Exxon's tax payment in 2007 of $30 billion (that's $30,000,000,000) is a record,

"In case you filthy proles can't comprehend how much we sacrifice for your worthless selves. Thats nine zeros."

Rich people are assholes.

[Blisspath]

I forgot to link that oil companies average an obscene profit of nine cents per gallon of gas..and gas is cheaper than milk and a helluva lot cheaper than a cup of coffee at Starbucks...what kills me is that the poor government has to find a way to get by on just the 48 cents a gallon tax on gas...I can even comprehend how many zeros that adds up to being. I wonder what they do with the windfall profits that they make?
http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/1139.html

[Icey]

Exxon paid over 30 billion in taxes last year. That is more than the bottom 50% of taxpayers combined. So if you see a Exxon executive today, give them a huge hug and say thank you.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/63131-exxon-s-2007-tax-bill-30-billion?source=side_bar_editors_picks

More plz.

[The Desperado]

30 billion is nothing compared to the $100 billion it would take to reverse the damage they did to the enviroment. But hey, what do you care about the enviroment? You probably haven't left your mothers basement this year to enjoy it anyways.

[phattonez]

^^Did they do it, or was it the people who wanted the oil? A lot of the blame can be put on the consumer. If you didn't need it, then they wouldn't have a business, and you couldn't blame them for your actions.

[Aegix Drakan]

But hey, what do you care about the enviroment? You probably haven't left your mothers basement this year to enjoy it anyways.

...Ouch...

:P well...Actually 1) I still live in the same room I've always lived in, and I plan to move out once I'm done school and get a secure job. And 2) My family and I go on a lot of hikes. We like nature. :P so yeah, I might not play outsie, but I do go out enough to appreciate nature.

[The Desperado]

The process of creating gasoline from the cude oil accounts for a large part air pollution. Not nearly as much as the exhaust from everyones car on a given day, but nasty just the same.

Did you ever wonder why our prices were so low compared to the rest of the world for the longest time? It's because the oil companies kept them low so that over the long run our society became so addicted to it that we HAVE to buy it no matter what they charge us. Visit a housing development that was built in the 90's or even early 2000's. No sidewalks. Our basic infrastructure has been built around cars being our transportation for everything. Yes, consumers are technically to blame because they use the gasoline. But the system has been set up so everyone has to.

(Aegix - I wasn't dissing you. I was talking about Blisspath. Sorry)

[Blisspath]

Oh no..I left my mother's apartment long before I earned my first college degree, started pharmacy consulting, started teaching law and ethics, and even before I got my own sports column..not bad for a momma's boy:)

[The Desperado]

I bet momma's proud. ;)

[Aegix Drakan]

(Aegix - I wasn't dissing you. I was talking about Blisspath. Sorry)

:P I just took it as a general comment about how most of us don't even enjoy nature, yet we think we should protect it. It was a valid point

[phattonez]

If there really was consumer demand for it, then alternatives would be available. Why doesn't everyone have those fuel efficient cars? Why do a lot of people have SUVs? I'm not quick to blame oil companies.

[The Desperado]

Fuel efficient cars are expensive. The average driver would barely be able to afford. Demand for alternatives is growing very fast. In my city, the council is trying to put in street cars. The city used to have street cars before they sold the system to a private company back in the 50's. The company bought the system and then shut it down within the year. FYI, the company that bought the streetcar system was Mobil.

[Aegix Drakan]

The company bought the system and then shut it down within the year. FYI, the company that bought the streetcar system was Mobil.

...Go figure. >_>

[phattonez]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_American_Streetcar_Scandal

Streetcars were already on the decline before this happened.

[mikeron]

When your industry is subsidized to the tune of ten zeros, your income taxes paid don't mean jack.
Anyone who says fuel efficiency is expensive has never heard of the Geo Metro. Welcome to 1989.
Cloral, you need to take it easy or you'll get an ulcer.

[Icey]

When your industry is subsidized to the tune of ten zeros, your income taxes paid don't mean jack.
Anyone who says fuel efficiency is expensive has never heard of the Geo Metro. Welcome to 1989.
Cloral, you need to take it easy or you'll get an ulcer.

Plus there is the fact that a lot of taxes on these companies - not just income taxes - are really paid by the consumer. Sure the statutory, or legal incidence of who pays the tax may be the corporation... but that doesn't mean jack. Demand for gasoline and oil is very inelastic, so that means the economic incidence of the tax lands primarily on the buyer. I'm guessing consumers probably end up bearing like 60-70% of the burden.

So what, I am supposed to thank these guys for getting a slightly smaller share of my money? (Not that I drive a car... I don't. But you get the idea).

[phattonez]

We should raise the gas tax and actually do something useful with it. Right now we are half-assing our roads and our rail system is a joke. If we're going to tax gas, then let's get enough so that it will actually be useful.

[Beldaran]

We should raise the gas tax and actually do something useful with it. Right now we are half-assing our roads and our rail system is a joke. If we're going to tax gas, then let's get enough so that it will actually be useful.

I have an idea, let's stop spending 3987209850928340598230495 dollars a day in Iraq.

[phattonez]

^^That would help too, but do you really trust our politicians to spend that money wisely?

[mikeron]

We should raise the gas tax and actually do something useful with it. Right now we are half-assing our roads and our rail system is a joke. If we're going to tax gas, then let's get enough so that it will actually be useful.
Actually there's plenty of money for road infrastructure, but all of it is siphoned away to be spent on completely unrelated programs.

[phattonez]

Well when I look at out taxes compared to Europe, I see otherwise. What is the money being spent on if it's not infrastructure (gas taxes can go to all transportation infrastructure, not just roads)?

[Icey]

California recently had a proposition that would have disallowed use of funds from certain taxes in the General Fund and would have mandated that they be used in roads etc... sadly, it failed. =/

[phattonez]

Yes, it was a strange one, and I know a lot about it. There is a gas tax fund and that is supposed to go to roads. The spillover fund (which occurs when the increase of gas prices is higher than that of inflation) gives money to public transit. Now, when Proposition 1A was passed not too long ago, it partially closed the loophole which allowed these taxes to be used for general purposes (it allowed the government about 15 years to pay that money back and it could be taken whenever the governor determined an economic emergency). Proposition 91 would have completely closed that loophole, but because of Prop 1A, the supporters told people to vote no on it. There are some theories to why it happened, and I don't know what I agree with, but I did vote yes on 91 and hoped that everyone would have done the same. But it does say something that 41% voted for it when the official vote guide said to vote no on it.

I'm guessing that people voted no on it because it said that it would make some public transit funds less reliable. From what I hear, it wouldn't have done anything to public transit laws, it's just that there are laws in place that allow that money to go to the general fund and prop 91 would not have reversed those laws.