Exxon's record $11.6 B 3 months

[bleach168]

Study showing that ethanol production reduces the price of gas by $.89.

Of course, the price of your cornflakes are higher, so it's probably a wash to consumers. But it is interesting to note that the price of gas should be over $5 a gallon.

[Curtis Pride]

I call BS on any impact of Ethanol to gas prices (forgive me for not believing the unbiased opinion of a farmer's lobby association regarding the value of Ethanol) . The only people on the planet who think that Ethanol provides any value to anyone are the farmers who are getting the subsidies.

It's awful.

here: http://reason.com/archives/2010/11/16/c ... -subsidies
and here: http://reason.com/blog/2010/07/27/again ... -subsidies

[Art Vandelay]

So who is gauging us again?

I don't mind being "gouged" for $0.70 per gallon in taxes. I enjoy roads.

[lastingsgriller]

i think he's saying Exxons total 9% profit is made up of more than just gasoline since oil is used in many other products

No worries here, I'm simply saying I don't believe Exxon's claim that they only make 7 cents per gallon of gasoline.

meh, 7 cents times a bazillion gallons of gas equals out to about 7 zillion dollars a year profit.. which is about right.

[Curtis Pride]

So who is gauging us again?

I don't mind being "gouged" for $0.70 per gallon in taxes. I enjoy roads.

First, you don't actually think that the government earmarks taxes aligned based on their source, do you? Hell, even road toll revenue isn't earmarked for maintenance on the road.

And $0.70 cents is the exact amount that is necessary for roads? Not 50 cents or 5 cents or 2 dollars per gallon? That's the optimum amount of taxes per gallon just because some bureaucrat said so? Am I just not supposed to question how high the taxes are?

My point is people bemoan a company for making profit because they deem it to be excessive, but the money that the government is taking of the transaction dwarves any revenues generated by the company actually creating the value.

[bleach168]

I call BS on any impact of Ethanol to gas prices (forgive me for not believing the unbiased opinion of a farmer's lobby association regarding the value of Ethanol) . The only people on the planet who think that Ethanol provides any value to anyone are the farmers who are getting the subsidies.

It's awful.

here: http://reason.com/archives/2010/11/16/c ... -subsidies
and here: http://reason.com/blog/2010/07/27/again ... -subsidies

Those links don't disprove the study. In fact, one supports the belief that ethanol reduces the price of gas

Cornell University economist Harry de Gorter argues that the renewable fuels mandate combined with the ethanol subsidy actually lowers the price of fuel at the pump

Those links just say that ethanol subsidies are bad; something I do not disagree with.

[Curtis Pride]

Adding to the supply of usable oil (as ethanol does) would obviously reduce the price of gas the pump. More supply means lower price.

However, the massive amount of government subsidies given to the industry, the massive amount of cost incurred to convert the corn into usable fuel, and the massive amount of price inflation as a result of taking so much of the commodity out of the food supply and into the fuel supply means that the negative effects (all consumer costs) of using corn as fuel so far exceed any nominal benefit of having the additional fuel supply that it's laughable.

Alternate energy is great, and is a requirement, but ethanol isn't the answer.

[StlSluggers]

So who is gauging us again?

I don't mind being "gouged" for $0.70 per gallon in taxes. I enjoy roads.

First, you don't actually think that the government earmarks taxes aligned based on their source, do you? Hell, even road toll revenue isn't earmarked for maintenance on the road.

I don't know how it is where you live, but we had some big problems in MO a few years ago when the economy tanked and revenue for road services plummeted because people weren't driving and paying the gas taxes that paid the road.

So... Yes, the gov't does occasionally earmark taxes on their source.

[lastingsgriller]

Am I just not supposed to question how high the taxes are?

seeing that you pay a smaller portion of your income to taxes than any major country in the world (except japan, sometimes), your question should not be how high your taxes are, but instead, how your taxes are being used.

[Curtis Pride]

Am I just not supposed to question how high the taxes are?

seeing that you pay a smaller portion of your income to taxes than any major country in the world (except japan, sometimes), your question should not be how high your taxes are, but instead, how your taxes are being used.

Incorrect premise. Just because most other places do it one way doesn't mean that's the right way.

Also, incorrect research. In addition to Japan, Hong Kong, Australia, New Zealand, South Korea, Ireland, Mexico are all lower. Other countries with far more social services like UK/Canada are not much higher than the US.

Finally, I challenge how a lot of the government spends money, though I guess we are further diverging from the point of this thread, so that's another topic.