Shell Oil Company

Help Support Steer Planet:

Doc

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 13, 2007
Messages
3,636
Location
Cottontown, Tennessee
  I just paid $3.16 for diesel & $2.89 for regular unleaded gas. This morning , lead off story on the news is Shell made $27.6 BILLION in profit!!!!! Now tell me how this makes sense? ???
 

kimbaljd

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 31, 2007
Messages
476
Location
Alvin
2.70 unleaded 3.05 diesel here in south Texas. This gas increase has really put a big squeeze on my budget. Sad thing is, what can you do other than gripe?
Try this link out I added.

http://www.gasbuddy.com
 

Show Dad

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 7, 2007
Messages
5,127
Location
1 AU from a G2 yellow dwarf star
Great link K!

As for oil company profits, they might not be so high if they were allowed to drill (very expensive) and build more refineries (expensive). The problem is not their profits but the government's control which is having the effect of pooling the cash.
 

knabe

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
13,639
Location
Hollister, CA
profit margin supposedly is around 8-10%. 

the other reason the number probably looks so big compared to years past is becauase the companies are more consolidated now, they have grown through acquisition.

the other reason they have profits so high, is that compared to the past, they are investing less in new capitalization because they can't drill anywhere compared to years past.  with this cost taken out, it's pretty easy to rationalize paying one'self a high salary.

once again, thank the environmentalists and democrats for jacking these profits up, in addition to giving them, and obviously other industries, tax breaks, subsidies etc.

it's not the oil companies fault for making a profit everyone wants to make themselves.

profit is not evil, it's simply a reward for giving consumers what they want.

try this on for size, reduce carbon emission by 80%.  how is that going to be possible?  who is the real villain?

 

showsteerdlux

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Messages
1,765
Location
Western NC
kimbaljd said:
2.70 unleaded 3.05 diesel here in south Texas. This gas increase has really put a big squeeze on my budget. Sad thing is, what can you do other than gripe?
Try this link out I added.

http://www.gasbuddy.com
Dang your cheap compaired to us. $2.97 for regular and 3.35 for diesel
 

Bawndoh

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 17, 2007
Messages
720
I am in Saskatchewan, and for a long time gas has been well over $1/litre, which is comparable to $4/U.S. Gallon.  Diesel is higher.  Now take that!!  (with a grain of salt).
 

knabe

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
13,639
Location
Hollister, CA
around 3.20 for regular in gilroy CA.

check out prices in SF or hawaii.  ugh.

must              not                  drill                  for                        oil                        in                          the                        us,                espcially              off                the                coast                    of                              ca,                                    fl,                                  or                                      alaska                                        must                                  resist                                        even                              if                  it                          hurts                                  the                                  poor                                        the                                      most                                      because                                they                          will                            vote                                dem                                no                                  matter                                          what                                  cuz                                          edwards                and                            the                          dems                          care                            about                                them                              so                            much
 

Joe Boy

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 31, 2007
Messages
692
Here in North Texas we are paying 2.83 at Wal-Mart, 2.91-3.01 every where else and road diesel is 3.21 at Wal-Mart and 3.35-3.41 every where else.

We deserve higher gas and fuel cost, as we voted two oil men into the White House.  When we had a lover in the White House, it was affordable.  We have made Hallaburton and Oil companies rich the last 6 and half years.  I hope we can get two farmers in the White House, but none of them have the money to run.

Our fertilizer here is approaching $650 per ton.  Even with anhydros.  Seems the Chinese are buying it all and it is a bi-product of oil.  That was the reason given for sheet-rock, steel, plywood, and cement going up too.  The Chinese are buying everything with the dollars going out of the United States.  We owe them the largest portion of our national debt.  I got tired of Hillary and Obama talking about who was the most black last week while the economy is headed south fast.  Edwards was by far the best of the three and now he has stepped aside. 

George W. Bush has been the most prolific spender ever as president and many republicans have forgotten that the first six years of his services was with a house and senate who were majority from his same party.  McCain has opposed the president's policy several times and is a good candidate.  Many have slurred the democrat party for spending but all their spending has never equalled what was supposed to be a conservative leadership who rewarded the rich with less taxes to create job and stimulate new state of the ark facilities, but the money was kept from circulations, no new jobs, and more jobs have gone overseas.  When Bill Clinton left office we had a surplus for the first time in many years.  Our congressman asked us what to do with it.  I was at the meeting and told him that two things I felt like would be right:  1.  To put back into the social security what Mr. Reagan had taken out and Mr. Thorneberry told me by law they could not do that.  2.  I told him to use it to pay the national debt.  Everyone of here who paid taxes were refunded money.  That might have gotten votes but it did not help any of the situations that should have been given priority.  Mr. Clinton and the republican controlled  House and and senate were the most conservative presidency we have have had.  Mr. Clinton was so conservative in his financial leadership that many republicans said he is coping our ideas, and many democrats were saying he is too conservative for us. 

One attorney friend of mine, a democrat,  said, "We need to elect the house and Senate of one party and the presidency of another and maybe that way they will not mess it up worse."  There might be some merit to what he has said.

My son will not vote for anyone not on the republican ticket because he says they stand for morality.  I asked him then why did we not get some of the moral issues past while the republicans controlled both houses and the presidency?  I told him many republicans run on moral issues for a sham.  Many democrats have been defeated that were very moral and stood for morality on every side.  I would guess from many of the scandals that have come from our politicians that morals are an issue with both parties.  Morality is telling the truth.  When I ran for office, some would not vote for me because I would treat all people equally.  Actually, a church had a meeting and asked their members not to vote for me because I would treat the poor and rich; people of position and those from the wrong side of the track, white and black, white and Mexican, alike.  I took that as a compliment, because that was moral.  Morality is saying and doing what you say, not just having illicit affairs.  Those who signed the contract with America and are still in office have no morals, as their promise was a three term office.  Oh yes, the act that defined marriage as between one man and one woman was past and signed while Bill Clinton was president, but has not been enforced by his successor.

Let all of us pray that who ever is elected will lead our country in the best way to insure our continued prosperity and great future.
 

knabe

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
13,639
Location
Hollister, CA
good post joe boy

the constitution was set up so NOTHING (well ok, as little as possible) could get done.  the barriers preventing this have fallen, and there is no difference between the two parties.  it's debatable whether clinton left a surplus, and obviously bush compassionate conservatism has nothing to do with conserving anything.  he's the worst thing that ever happened to the republican party and pretty close to being one of the worst presidents ever.  i'm pretty sure any president would have done something after 911, and i would have preferred we would have restricted ourselves to afghanistan and not relied on others in tora bora.

the no flyzone thing was working, the oil for food was not, the kurds deserve autonomy, just like the israelis and palestinians, though not two islands in israel, and should involve a  muslim country giving up territory as well, but definately no the golan heights as this is a strategic missile launching point and too hard to resist for hard line muslims.

i haven't seen too many politicians stand for anything other than more government.  it's a business now.
 

Show Dad

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 7, 2007
Messages
5,127
Location
1 AU from a G2 yellow dwarf star
High oil prices reflect the rise in demand not who's in the White House. It could just as easily be said that the real spike in oil prices happened after the Dems gained control of Congress. And thus the flip side would be, that when viewed in a historical context, Ronald Reagan gave us the cheapest.

The cause is us people.

I vote for more nuclear power. Fission is the future.
 

knabe

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
13,639
Location
Hollister, CA
i agree with sd as well, though creating artificial shortages is part of the problem.

supply is not allowed to react domestically to the demand.  It is a function of who is in congress, the coastal commission in CA and similar groups and the governors who appoint them.

when clinton signed all that "clean" coal out of being used and allowed us to be dependent on indonesian coal, this also imposed an artificial shortage and WAS dependent on who was in the white house.  one has to only look at taking resources off the table.  nuclear is being hurt by an artificial waste problem also created by an artificial concern over "spent" fuel rods the french somehow deplete more than we do and have less concentrated waste.

facts don't get in the way.
 

kimbaljd

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 31, 2007
Messages
476
Location
Alvin
I am not going to defend Bush in any way, but I think it is completely funny how everything that is wrong with America and the World for that matter is his fault. For so many people to say that he is a stupid man seems kind of absurd that he would be able to cause all this terror and havoc on the world that he has.
 

OH Breeder

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2007
Messages
5,954
Location
Ada, Ohio
SD said:
High oil prices reflect the rise in demand not who's in the White House. It could just as easily be said that the real spike in oil prices happened after the Dems gained control of Congress. And thus the flip side would be, that when viewed in a historical context, Ronald Reagan gave us the cheapest.

The cause is us people.

I vote for more nuclear power. Fission is the future.
Have to say to a point that may true. But, it is also artificially elevated and manipulated by the reserves and the stock market.
 

Joe Boy

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 31, 2007
Messages
692
I think every president we have ever had in my lifetime got blamed for what happen in the world.

I don't like the media for always pointing to the President, what ever one has been in office, and blasting away with both barrels.

I have always tried to vote for the person who I thought would help America the most.  I have voted for Republicans, Democrats, and Independents in my life time.  

I also think most people are blind to what the candidate they voted for has as weaknesses.  If we have show cattle we should know the animals strengths and weaknesses but in candidates we seem to think it means we failed if the candidate has a fault.  We do not use that logic with employees and that is all an elected official is.  I voted for Nixon and Reagan once.  I think that Nixon did more for farmers and worked with both sides of the isle than any republican or democrat in my lifetime.  I feel that Clinton worked with both sides but he was not as strong in helping the farm community.  Carter got great prices for the farmers but his interest rates under his administration hurt the farmers and when the prices dropped during Reagan's term those high interst rates killed the farmers who owe lots of money.  I know the interest rates went to the lowest that they had been in years under Reagan, but the prices dropped first then the rates followed and for those on the cutting edge this was a killer, because they had borrowed money to build hog parlors and milk barns and could not make the big payments.  I was on the AMPI board at the time and the dairy industry was really hurt especially for young families who did not have lots of parental help.  We were really dumb and gave everyone running for the final elections contributions and got no votes in either house.  I tried to tell them this would not work, but no one listened.

We also have a tendency to pass on e-mail junk mail cutting a candidate that we do not like without checking it out to see if it is true.  We call this morality????
I got one this week and three last week from "Christian" people and asked both of them to look it up and read it on snopes.  One wrote back and said the flag was green for one of the 4 things they had sent me, so they were right.  They never read it to see what it said.  I am not for the candidate in question but think honesty in our own dealings far out weighs what some body wrote about a candidate.

I do not like the party system because when it comes to push or shove, many candidates will vote the way the party says, rather than what the voters in their district want.  My friend was elected to the state house and he told teachers how he would vote on some issues, but when those hit the floor he voted the other way and was reminded that his party had paid a quarter million to get him to beat the incumbent.  He had the integrity to call and tell the teachers why he voted the way he did.  Had he been really honest he would have voted in agreement with what he told his constituents and told the party if they did not like his vote they could find another candidate the next term.  We have one Senator in Texas I really like, Kay Bailey Hutchinson.  She does exactly what she says and says what she feels.  I think that too much attention is paid to hired guns in Washington and the state capitals in America.  If I were in office, I would not listen to the Farm Bureau or Exxon, but to Tom, Jill, Sue, Mary, Paul, and Bill.  For that reason, I will never be elected.

P. S.  Fuel prices escalated before the democrats got control of either house.  The point I was making is that rural America is in trouble unless we can elect candidates that will have a genuine concern for our future.  Oil people got that done, but will we.  I certainly do not believe Mr. Bush is responsible for terror in the world.  I was and continue to be 100% behind getting after Ben Laden.
 

shorthorns r us

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 9, 2007
Messages
900
Joe Boy said:
 I think that too much attention is paid to hired guns in Washington and the state capitals in America.  If I were in office, I would not listen to the Farm Bureau or Exxon, but to Tom, Jill, Sue, Mary, Paul, and Bill.  For that reason, I will never be elected.

this is why i think the beltway should be dismantled.  move'm home, put their office on main street and get'em a high speed internet connection and a web cam.  i think that bumbing into their constituents would do this country a whole lot of good.  big business is done that way everyday and all around the world.
 

knabe

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
13,639
Location
Hollister, CA
SRU said:
  move'm home, put their office on main street

it was originally set up this way.  just like every other piece of government our founders set up to curb the excesses of government, it has been dismantled incrmentally.

the public refuses to get involved in local politics at a level sufficient to overcome the generational cycle of the parties which easily exceeds individuals life cycle.

with basically no local accountability, the obvious has happened.

the founders valued local government, and it was difficult to get TO washington, and there wasn't a long enough legislative session to make endless subsidies.

issues were usually larger in scope, rather than time to think about fining someone $70,000 for burning in their fireplace.

interesting clinton said the other day we need to curb growth to curb global warming.  only one thing is necessary for that, a static population.





 
Top