Windfall Profit and feel good politics

Government loves money, there’s no joking about that one… and when someone else besides them is raking it in, they get REALLY jealous and start up the “windfall” noise machine to validate the draining of corporate profits “for the people”.

With gas edging $4 a gallon in the US, the topic of the month of May for Presidential Primary season is how to stick it to the man, to make it “fair” for Joe Schmoe on the street. Here is where they play word games. “Fair” is political speech for “it’s time to play Robin Hood!”

Hillary Clinton and John McCain share a plan (while Clinton rides right over it with her added bonus plan of a profit tax) that would repeal the federal 18.4 cent/gallon tax on gasoline which is somehow supposed to save the average American citizen a TON of money. Here’s the thing… they don’t ever GIVE money back or stop taking it, it’s all smoke and mirrors. They may stop collecting one specific tax, but behind the curtain they’ll raise other taxes on similar commodities by a few cents here and there until they’re back where they started… leaving us in EXACTLY the same situation. The only difference being, the dumb masses will be smiling all the way to the voting booth feeling that something was accomplished. Not to mention artificially dropping prices on fuel will only INCREASE demand on the same supply, thus making the issue worse than it already is.

Here’s where Clinton leave McCain’s house and crosses over to hold hands with Sen. Obama… the Windfall Profits Tax. Somewhere in the history of the United States is suddenly became the job of the federal government to tell people and businesses when they hit the wall and were making “too much money”.

Congress is waving the caution flag at the oil industry warning them that heavy taxation on “excessive profits” is on its way (which is funny due to the fact that they’re already raking in 35% from corporate income taxes). Congress seems to think that heavily taxing something will bring in MORE and cheaper fuel for the Americans when nothing could be further from that reality. Carter enacted a windfall profits tax on “Big Oil” in 1980 and the net result from his brilliance was a two fold decrease in domestic oil production from 3% to 6% and a doubled increase in imported oil from OPEC from 8% to 16%. Genius, pure genius!

We have plenty of oil to tap here in the US to begin our process of weening ourself from OPEC and other foreign sources as well as to begin to find ACTUALLY sustainable (not just renewable) fuel sources, problem being that MOST Americans scream bloody murder when you tell them you’re planting an oil rig 200 miles off shore near their beach condo in Florida, or that you’re planning on using a region of Alaska and might upset the migratory patterns of a moose (or alter the habitat of some blind ferret with 8 legs).

Stealing profits from a corporation and then expecting them to invest more of what they now lack, is completely backwards.

  • oh i wish the uk was $4 a gallon….
    try £5 ($10) a gallon… or £1.20 a litre…

    ’stealth’ tax we all hate it…

  • Yeah I feel your pain there, I couldn’t imagine paying $10 a gallon for fuel.

    Our stations around here have started to sneak in Ethanol into the gas and my fuel economy has dropped from ~26MPG to bording on 20MPG… it’s pissing me off and costing me a LOT more than normal.

  • > Somewhere in the history of the United States is suddenly became the job of the federal government to tell people and businesses when they hit the wall and were making “too much money”.

    Well two basic principals before I get to my point:
    1. Government needs tax money to sustain itself and the country.
    2. Increase tax in one area and you *can* lower it elsewhere. And vice versa.

    You seem to be suggesting that the most able tax-payers should pay the same rate as the least able… In which case the single rate would have to be significantly higher than the current lowest eligible rate to equate the same tax revenue.

    I understand that a lot of federal fat could be cut out and bring the US “running cost” down, but you still need money to run the country. You either Robin Hood it, or you rape the poor and lower middle-classes, exacerbating a colossal class divide.

    Believe it or not, but those less able people make up a critical part of your economy. If you have to tax them more, you’re annihilating their spending budgets. Less money to spend means there’s less money the can be recycled into corporate coffers.

    Specifically to do with lowering fuel duties, yes the tax will just be transferred somewhere else, but you have to ask: where and how does that affect the economy?

    Fuel prices are inextricably linked to almost all staples and basic costs. Lower its price and you lower the price (and the buying prices) for lots and lots of people. It reverses inflation – something the Dollar could really do with atm!

    Where this deficit is recovered is the clever part. In short, you apply it to the part of the economy that’s most able to take it. Is that unfair?

    Sure it’s a bit socialist, but you need checks and balances in a global economy to stop it all just going to pot. Your hintings would result in 1000 billionaires and the rest of the US stuck in poverty.

  • The answer is less government not more taxes. I’m not suggesting hiking taxes on anyone.

    The “rich” in this country are already shouldering the burden of 80%+ of the tax burden… so your plan is they need to pay more because “they can take it”?

  • Yes.

    Ultimately lowering your running costs by increasing efficiency and cutting away useless bureaucracy is always going to be best for the country, but that process doesn’t happen overnight and also comes with its own analytical expense.

    You need to keep the economy growing and you just can’t do that by taking too much money out the main consumers’ pockets.

    It’s not “my plan”, it’s just economics. You’re on the brink of economic disaster and the last thing it needs is consumers to stop spending; that’s in everybody’s worst interest.

  • Speaking on the topic of “obscene profits” Maxine Waters let it slip that her goal is to nationalize our oil industries.

    A government take over of private industry to seize their “obscene” profits for their own personal gain. It has NOTHING to do with making things “fair” for consumers, they could care less.

    Our government sees HUGE dollar signs and wants them for their own… BAD.

    It’s the same reason the solution to revenue issues is “tax the rich”… they look at the population, see a segment smaller than ONE PERCENT of your total population that makes what they consider to be “excessive” income and considers it theirs to take.

    Yes an income of $10,000,000 a year is a LOT of money, but it’s not like they dropped out of the 8th grade, and got a job running ExxonMobil.

    Pinning income as “excessive” sets the precedent that there is an implied cap on income.

    THE solution for this government is simple… they need to stop spending like a desperate housewife on a shop therapy marathon with her husbands credit.