Posted on 01/20/2012 2:23:36 PM PST by tom h
Six House Democrats, led by Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio), want to set up a "Reasonable Profits Board" to control gas profits.
The Democrats, worried about higher gas prices, want to set up a board that would apply a "windfall profit tax" as high as 100 percent on the sale of oil and gas, according to their legislation. The bill provides no specific guidance for how the board would determine what constitutes a reasonable profit.
The Gas Price Spike Act, H.R. 3784, would apply a windfall tax on the sale of oil and gas that ranges from 50 percent to 100 percent on all surplus earnings exceeding "a reasonable profit." It would set up a Reasonable Profits Board made up of three presidential nominees that will serve three-year terms. Unlike other bills setting up advisory boards, the Reasonable Profits Board would not be made up of any nominees from Congress.
The bill would also seem to exclude industry representatives from the board, as it says members "shall have no financial interests in any of the businesses for which reasonable profits are determined by the Board."
According to the bill, a windfall tax of 50 percent would be applied when the sale of oil or gas leads to a profit of between 100 percent and 102 percent of a reasonable profit. The windfall tax would jump to 75 percent when the profit is between 102 and 105 percent of a reasonable profit, and above that, the windfall tax would be 100 percent. The bill also specifies that the oil-and-gas companies, as the seller, would have to pay this tax.
Kucinich said these tax revenues would be used to fund alternative transportation programs when oil-and-gas prices spike.
"Gas prices continue to rise, creating a hardship for the American people," he said. "At the same time, oil companies are making record profits gouging their customers. This bill would tax only the excess profits and create forward-thinking transportation alternatives."
Specifically, he said the money would be used to fund a tax credit on the purchase of fuel-efficient cars and set up a grant program for mass transit programs when oil-and-gas prices are high.
The bill does not estimate the size of these grants or the amount of money that might be collected through the tax.
Co-sponsoring the bill are five other Democrats: Reps. John Conyers Jr. (Mich.), Bob Filner (Calif.), Marcia Fudge (Ohio), Jim Langevin (R.I.), and Lynn Woolsey (Calif.).
There will be hundreds of millions of new drivers in Asia and other places. Deal with it. Price controls would eventually be followed by rationing.
How about a Reasonable Congressional Retirement Board?
I hope all goes better for you. (I cannot DO anything)
bts
Your idea of gorgeous and mine are a bit different I think, she looks like she got hit with the ugly stick right in the face heh.
and how about we add: Washington politicians - plus stop 'legal-illegal' insider trading?
That is such a scandal of enormous import - but, of course, too many of them have used it so we can't count on them to do anything but bury it - and their lap dog, the MSM, certainly won't pursue it - after all, it isn't as newsworthy as a 10-15 year old non-story of an embittered ex-wife. (Actually, all that little episode reveals is why Newt probably left her. A very little person, she is.)
Instead of drilling, increasing the supply of oil, driving down the world market to a reasonable level, hence, limiting profit, they’d rather crawl into corporate and/or our shorts and regulate......screw up the economy deliberately and regulate.
Having their cake and eating it too.....
Patience serves up a really good “Crow Pie”.
Actually I am. And yes,some of it does get delivered after being sold ten times or more, other contracts expire. Futures contracts determine the price of oil at a predefined price at a predefined time. The problem is that too many people that have no interest in the actual oil itself, are buying and then selling the contracts. Its killing our economy just so a some individuals can make money off the rest of us. Why should every barrel of oil be sold over and over just to fill the pockets of speculators while it sucks the living daylight out of our economy. Its a matter of national economic security.
If the government would tell me I can't sell my futures to any willing buyer offering the highest price, why not just have the government specify what price the contracts have to sold for? You know, since the ends justify the means and all.
Anti Dog Eat dog?
There will be buyers. Those who process and or use the oil. The government doesn’t need to set prices. Its just that the artificially high prices will no longer be present. We will also quit making huge donations of money to countries that don’t like us very well, that supports their evil ways.
That is typical liberal fact distortion. They never mention margins or profit percentages because the oil market is pretty competitive, and margins are modest; liberals only mention the profit in billions of dollars, because THEN they can make it sound unreasonable, as in headlines such as ...
"Oil Companies Realize Billions in Additional Profits Due To Crude Shortage"
... even though that might only amount to an additional 1% profit margin.
Try using that logic on Hollywood, and the media won't even run with the headline, by the way.
Well, whenever I "debate" female looks on Free Republic I find that males come in two categories: those who think that the only women they describe as attractive are supermodels; and those who are more reasonable. Sounds like you're in category 1, not 2. The category 1 men are dreaming anyway because their own wives or girlfriends are far more normal looking but online they pretend they have a higher standard of beauty.
Sure Kucinich's wife is middle-aged and already has a few wrinkles, and her features aren't perfect, but she's a head-turner and if she walked into an evening garden wearing a long dress, you know you'd turn your head and gape at her because she's be the prettiest woman there.
Futures contracts do not always have bad results. Southwest purchased jet fuel futures contracts before 2008 and as a result, they had higher profits during 2009 and 2010 as the price of jet fuel exploded. Their finance department made some very good judgments. Somebody else took it in the shorts, no doubt, but I'm happy that Southwest was profitable so I could get lower airline fares.
The answer is not regulating futures markets; the answer is letting people that really use oil, like Southwest, to have a chance to participate in these markets so as to minimize their risk.
I want less government in our national life and business. Period. I do not believe in benevolent government.
I totally agree. Southwest uses the oil, therefore taking delivery. No problem. They are the ones that need to buy them, not someone who has no intention of ever using or even needing the oil with the only purpose of running the price up or shorting it down creating an artificial market. IMO
What makes you think it was a mistake, or that they didn’t learn?
What makes you think it was a mistake, or that they didn’t learn?
They’ll skip that and go directly to Directive 10-289.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.