Farging gas prices

[mussa]

thats it. i am moving to the country. getting a horse and starting a farm. 

[PhillyPhanInDC]

thats it. i am moving to the country.

Don't forget to eat you a lot of peaches.

[Phanatic]

Now that song is stuck in my head.... Thanks!

[PhillyPhanInDC]

Senator rips ex Exxon CEO's retirement package
By Tom Doggett
Tue Apr 18, 4:53 PM ET

Amid record oil prices and soaring gasoline costs, Exxon Mobil's $400 million retirement package to its former CEO is a "shameful display of greed" that should be reviewed by Congress and investigated by federal regulators, Democratic Sen. Byron Dorgan said on Tuesday.

Dorgan said he wants Exxon Mobil officials to appear at a Senate Commerce Committee hearing to explain how the corporation "justifies" giving its former boss, Lee Raymond, such a huge retirement package.

He also said the Securities and Exchange Commission should investigate the deal that "appears to shortchange" shareholders.

"There can be no more compelling evidence that the price gouging and market manipulation which has produced record oil prices is out of control, and is working to serve the forces of individual greed and corporate gluttony at the painful expense of millions of American consumers," Dorgan said.

Dorgan's criticism of Raymond's financial package came on the same day that U.S. crude oil prices hit a record high of more than $71 a barrel at the New York Mercantile Exchange.

Higher crude oil prices are helping to push of up gasoline costs. The Energy Department reported prices jumped 10 cents over the last week to a national average of $2.78 a gallon, up 55 cents from a year ago.

President George W. Bush said on Tuesday he was "concerned" about the impact high gasoline prices were having on families and businesses.

Exxon earned the wrath of many lawmakers when it reported more than $36 billion in profits last year as energy prices paid by consumers soared.

Dorgan said he will push to win passage of his legislation that would impose a windfall profits tax on big oil companies and rebate that money to consumers, unless the companies used their earnings to explore for and produce more energy.

"I think a sensible public policy would insist that the big oil companies either invest those windfall profits in things that will increase our own domestic energy supplies, or we should return some of that money to consumers," Dorgan said.

"Using them to drop $400 million dollars in the pocket of a big oil executive is simply unacceptable," he added.

Exxon Mobil has defended Raymond's retirement package, saying it was pegged to the rise in the company's profit and market capitalization that occurred during his tenure.

[Geowhizzer]

Good for the Senator.  Stop "ripping" and DO something about it.  Alternative fuels, additional drilling (in the short term), whatever.  Sooner or later the fuel prices are going to cripple the economy.

Talk is cheap... unfortunately, gas is not.

$2.97 this morning for regular.

[MadMarchHare]

Wait'll it's over a $100/barrel.  That should be a hoot.

[Wingspan]

Wait'll it's over a $100/barrel.  That should be a hoot.

that's why President Logan wanted Palmer dead.

[MURP]

Exxon Mobil profit rises on soaring prices


Someone who knows what their talking about explain to me how we continue to pay more and more for gas and Exxon continues to make a boatload of profit.  And nothing is done about it. 

[PoopyfaceMcGee]

I'm quickly becoming the "liberal" in my household.  I was complaining to the wife about ExxonMobil making record profits, instead of figuring out ways to be more efficient and/or directly passing on the savings to the consumer, and she was spouting all this stuff about free market and Exxon not being the only oil company, and if consumers really cared, they'd really start finding more ways to get from A to B without driving their Expeditions and Suburbans solo to and from work every day...

Even I draw the line at this point.  Gas prices are downright looney.

[Wingspan]

the free market thing has some validity to it, the oil companies have a right to make a profit. if you want the oil companies to go non profit, that means they will be controlled by the govenment, do you want that? however you can pass laws that force them to limit their profits by turning the money around and putting it back into the costs of refining, etc...

the way to combat it is to reduce your usage. there is no way for a family to get buy eliminating the use. but there are things you can do to reduce your usage and reliance on oil/gas.

if your gas heat is still on...lower the thermostat 2 degrees. although this is really a non issue at this point. but if you have a gas hot water heater, turn the temp down on your heating unit, even a degree helps.

wash clothes in cold water. take shorter showers. (better yet, conserve even more and shower with your wife).

stop using a gas powered mower if you have a lawn. use electice, or even the manual mowers, sure it's more work...but you wont need to buy gas for it.

don't drive so much. there isnt a way to eliminate driving, but you surely can find a way to reduce the amount you do drive. and of course driving a monster that barely sees 20mpg, then you pretty much knew coming into buying the car that this could happen.

[MadMarchHare]

My biggest problem here is that
a.  They have their highest profits ever.
b.  Gas prices are skyrocketing.
c.  We subsidize them for drilling in the billions.

I work for a farging drug company.  We get lambasted daily by the gov't and the media for how expensive our drugs are.  Our profits margins don't begin to compare to the energy sector.  And the gov't sure as shtein isn't subsidizing our research (average expense to bring a drug to market ~700MM).

[qwert246]

I work for a farging drug company.  We get lambasted daily by the gov't and the media for how expensive our drugs are.  Our profits margins don't begin to compare to the energy sector.  And the gov't sure as shtein isn't subsidizing our research (average expense to bring a drug to market ~700MM).

You got your subsidy with the new medicare bill.

[MadMarchHare]

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!

Are you really that farging stupid?  Wait, you're a Skins fan.  That bill ass fargs Pharma only slightly less than importing from Canada.

[qwert246]

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!

Are you really that farging stupid?  Wait, you're a Skins fan.  That bill ass fargs Pharma only slightly less than importing from Canada.

I don't think you understood my humor.
There are over 40mil seniors that are Medicare patients. 
They are projected to utilize 1.8 trillion in drug benefits over the next decade.

The federal government was in a position to negotiate price controls on those drugs.  Isn't it reasonable?  If you were going to spend a lot of money buying something, wouldn't you try to negotiate price?
There is a law in place prohibiting any kind of attempt to negotiate price.  Prices are determined by the drug companies themselves.
It goes against common sense, and benefits only the drug companies

[MadMarchHare]

Okay, simpleton.  Let's try to get your facts straight. 

Hit rate for drugs entering discovery to reaching the market:  approximately 1 in 200.
Cost to push a drug through discovery into development (where they are most likely to hit fatal roadblocks):  about 100-200MM.  Some fall off earlier, some much later.

TORT suits are killing Pharma as well.  While the Vioxx suits MAY have a little validity, suits against drugs such as Rezulin are beyond frivolous.  When you test a drug in 2000-3000 people, and miss a tox that shows up 1 in 100,000 people, you shouldn't be sued into non-existence, which Warner Lambert was.

That one drug has to pay for the other 199.  You want innovation, you gotta pay.  Furthermore, the US gov't (and the oft denounced FDA) requires substantially more safety data than any other country in the world.  Much cheaper to get drugs approved in the EU/Asia.  The ONLY reason they bother to approve drugs here is profit.  See what happens when drugs are made unprofitable.

You want an example, you say?  OK.  Africa, in the late 90s, pushes to defy US and international patent protection on AIDS drugs, claiming they can't afford to treat the epidemic there.  Pharma fights it, but international pressure and bad PR wins out.  Result?  All but one drug company has dropped anti-viral agents as a significant drug discovery platform.

And doofus tried doing the same thing with Bayer's patent on Cipro during the Anthrax scare.  While defending Pharma's right to protect it's patents in Africa.  Result?  Most companies have abandoned anti-bacterials as well.  Good thing, too, since, you know, like 60% of TB cases in Estonia, for example, are incurable by the cocktail of drugs we have now.

You pay to play.  Period.  Pharma is not the enemy.  Go bash lawyers and insurers.