Down with the evil Gas lords II: Kaak's Revenge!

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Velociryx
How do you know if that benefit is maximized with your blinders on?

You don't. You can't.

I don't just assume that the shareholders make the best decision for society like you do. Shareholders are primarily concerned with profit, not the benefit that the company has to society.

I don't make that assumption either, tho I am 100% convinced that IF you had shares in Exxon, you would vote, and you would cast your votes with what you felt was "fair" and "of maximum benefit to society" at the forefront of your mind. Which was my point.

mkay. Well I'm not going to buy stock just to do that.

What are you talking about? Just because they aren't breaking laws doesn't mean society is getting the maximum benefit from them.

That's not why companies exist in the real world (nor should it--benefit to society--be). The sooner you square with that, the sooner everything else begins to make much more sense.

Well if you look at it from societies POV then they do. You just look at things from a capitalists POV though.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Kidicious
I think we just have two different objectives. Some of you simple want more profits for their own sake, and some of the rest of us want lower prices for consumers and higher standards of living for the majority of people. It's no wonder why we don't connect in these decisions.

I love how you superficially grab the moral high ground. I do not want "profits for their own sake". I merely accept that as the market mechanism which occurrs when demand begins to outstrip supply.

Interesting article I read in the Calgary Herald that indicated that Venezuala is only producing at 2.5 million barrells per day while if investment had continued at the pre-Chavez levels, production would now be in the vicinity of 5.5 million a day. They couldn't give an exact estimate but speculated if that production were available today most of this oil spike would not exist

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Velociryx
That looks like bull**** to me. It seems obvious that they are withholding production to make more profits. They pay their top executives at these levels because that's what happens when you make shocking profits.

Since you called bull$hit, so am I.

Cite please.

Show me where you got the data that leads you to the conclusion that big oil is intentionally witholding production.

Or...to put it another way....put up, or shut up.

-=Vel=-

read the thread.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Flubber



I love how you superficially grab the moral high ground. I do not want "profits for their own sake". I merely accept that as the market mechanism which occurrs when demand begins to outstrip supply.

The market mechanism isn't working. If it were the prices wouldn't be that high in the first place, and they would have already built enough refineries.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Kidicious


That looks like bull**** to me. It seems obvious that they are withholding production to make more profits. They pay their top executives at these levels because that's what happens when you make shocking profits.

Great analysis. I just happened to be working on a $4 billion project where the government wanted to make an additional tax and benefits grab. The result was that the project got stalled to negotiate and it was a daily occurance that other projects were trying to poach his people. When the project got shelved, the top managers were reassigned in TWO days and most of the team was gone in two weeks

I work this every day so excuse me if I don't accept your non-acceptance.

[Velociryx]

Okay...since you gave me the smiley with my answer to your "how do you know if benefits to society are maximized" then I'll toss the question back to you.

Tell us, wise one, how YOU would do it? How would YOU know when the benefits to society were maximized?

mkay. Well I'm not going to buy stock just to do that.

Oh I already knew that, Kid. No surprise there at all.

And the reason I knew it is because I understand you. It's much easier to come here and b*tch and whine about it, and hawk your pie-in-the-sky
"economic theories" as the solutions to problems that don't really exist, than it is to take real action against them.

I understand very well.

Believe me.

Well if you look at it from societies POV then they do. You just look at things from a capitalists POV though.

Untrue. Companies don't just spring up from nothingness. They require skilled and daring leadership to get them off the ground. Men and women who are willing to take enormous risks.

If those risks aren't rewarded (by the hope of profits), then the companies would never exist in the first place.

Companies can and do great things for society, but that's not what birthed them, and that's not what will keep them around to continue doing great things.

Again....the sooner you learn it, the sooner everything else makes sense.

read the thread.

Translation: I have no proof, I'm just here to join the pity party.

I see.

-=Vel=-

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Velociryx
Okay...since you gave me the smiley with my answer to your "how do you know if benefits to society are maximized" then I'll toss the question back to you.

Try using a more scientific approach instead of a bunch of sensational nonsense about how daring individuals take great risks and do great things for society.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Kidicious


Why do you jump around like this? We were talking about refining.

Hmm -- lets then talk about refining but that means you have to shut up about "massive profits" since they are predominantly on the upstream side of the business.

In refining the traditional rate of return was 5% and even your own sources showed that the return rate was NEGATIVE as recently as 2-3 years ago before spiking to 18% recently.

Sorry if I don't see massive profiteering if the BEST return you get on billions is 18%.

The low return was the main reason no new US refineries were built. Projected return did not warrant the investment. Now the government could see all the same data as the companies so if all this was so predictable, why did not some government agency build a refinery or two in the "national interest"?


If you want to talk refining , fine talk refining ,. . . .but as soon as you start talking big profits, you are talking the upstream business because right now thats where the big profits are

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Kidicious


The market mechanism isn't working. If it were the prices wouldn't be that high in the first place, and they would have already built enough refineries.

As has been shown to you repeatedly . . . refining margins are not that high. The underlying cause of high gasoline prices is high crude costs and of course taxation

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Flubber


As has been shown to you repeatedly . . . refining margins are not that high. The underlying cause of high gasoline prices is high crude costs and of course taxation

Get your blinders off. I've already shown you that refining margins are at record levels. The 1990s shouldn't be considered, only the current margins. If the market were competitive the margins would not be that large.

[Velociryx]

Try using a more scientific approach instead of a bunch of sensational nonsense about how daring individuals take great risks and do great things for society.

Since the answer provided has nothing to do with the question I posed, I will take that to mean a) you can't read, or if you can, then your reading comprehension is suffering just now, b) you are unable to come up with an aswer to your own question, and so choose to dodge it by deflecting attention back at me, and c) you have absolutely no understanding of what it takes to start and manage a successful business. If you did, you'd realize that the statements I made actually don't express forcefully enough the kind of grit it takes to succeed.

But, I realize that I'm interrupting your whine-fest.

Pray continue.

-=Vel=-

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Kidicious




Try using a more scientific approach instead of a bunch of sensational nonsense about how daring individuals take great risks and do great things for society.

Thats laughable coming from a guy that rejects actual real life experience with "sounds like bull**** to me"

Great scientific approach there.

Oh and what scientific approach did you use to determine refiners are profiteering when every stat says otherwise ( although you probably consider a one year return of 18% as obscene even if preceded by single digit returns for years)

[Velociryx]

Thats laughable coming from a guy that rejects actual real life experience with "sounds like bull**** to me"

Great scientific approach there.

Oh and what scientific approach did you use to determine refiners are profiteering when every stat says otherwise ( although you probably consider a one year return of 18% as obscene even if preceded by single digit returns for years)

Flubber - I can answer that one for the Kid. Cos he knows best.

See...he's got this line in with Miss Cleo and Shirley McLain, and they tell him by whispering in his ear, what's "best" for the world at large, as well as what's true.

The statistics you mentioned? Nothing but a pack of lies. A smokescreen. A clever coverup of the truth.

But Kid knows.

Oh yes....Kid knows.



-=Vel=-

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Kidicious


Get your blinders off. I've already shown you that refining margins are at record levels. The 1990s shouldn't be considered, only the current margins. If the market were competitive the margins would not be that large.

You want to ignore margins for the last 15 years and just consider THIS year when discussing why multi-billion dollar investments are made or not made. That is laughable. Do you realize how UTTERLY silly that approach is?

Oh and your "record levels" is an 18% rate of return . . . hardly high in most industries.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Flubber



Thats laughable coming from a guy that rejects actual real life experience with "sounds like bull**** to me"

Great scientific approach there.

Oh and what scientific approach did you use to determine refiners are profiteering when every stat says otherwise ( although you probably consider a one year return of 18% as obscene even if preceded by single digit returns for years)

Whether or not 18% is obscene is irrelevent. It is telling that the market is undersupplied.