This chart shows who owns shares in oil companies, and in calling for tax increases on "Big Oil" you may be damaging your own portfolio or weakening your pension fund. It's something to consider amid all these sound bites from the main stream media.

http://www.api.org/statistics/earnin...erspective.pdf

Even without looking at the attachment, you can just figure if "Big Oil" is going to be forced to pay more taxes, gasoline prices are going higher to make up for it.

Be careful what you wish for.

Originally Posted by RichieLion

This chart shows who owns shares in oil companies, and in calling for tax increases on "Big Oil" you may be damaging your own portfolio or weakening your pension fund. It's something to consider amid all these sound bites from the main stream media.

http://www.api.org/statistics/earnin...erspective.pdf

It's not in their mental makeup to understand that "Big Oil" is a corporation that has only one responsibility. Their shareholders. Some of the largest shareholders are Stock Mutual Funds, Pension Funds, and individual investors.

If they absolutely can't stand it any more than that, perhaps they should try investing and reaping some of those "Big Oil" profits.

They just hate anything that can be labeled "Big" anything. What they really want is to "Spread the Wealth Around" without any of the risk. You can't fix stupid.

How about if they pay any taxes and maybe take away their 4 billion dollar subsidies. As it stands now their profit margins woudn't even notice. I never will understand why a company that makes billions in profits needs a gov't handout.

Originally Posted by waynet

How about if they pay any taxes and maybe take away their 4 billion dollar subsidies. As it stands now their profit margins woudn't even notice. I never will understand why a company that makes billions in profits needs a gov't handout.

Maybe it has something to do with things like Shell Oil which spent 4 Billion Dollars in R&D and permit applications over 5 years to be denied authorization to drill off Alaska by the EPA because emissions might adversely affect a small Alaskan village 70 miles from the site.

http://atlanticsentinel.com/2011/04/...rilling-plans/

http://www.newsmax.com/US/Shell-oil-...4/26/id/394138

...and that village has a population small enough to fit entirely in 6 school buses.

If we can have the government forcing people to sell their homes in a populated area like the Connecticut shore for the benefit of ONE developer, why can't 245 people put up with a few more trucks and boats for the benefit of 300 million? (Never mind that it might actually IMPROVE the quality of life up there by perhaps creating a few jobs)

please,please,please, 4 billion for permits???? Shell profits 2008-13.9 BILLION,2010-20 BILLION,and 4.9 BILLION for the first 3 months of 2011. To subsidize oil companies is a joke and undefensible by any economic method.