Oil companies for all of their campaign contributions?
And How much money do Bush & Cheney get from the Oil companies that are now making their Billions in profits?
2007-03-01 23:51:54 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Wow, what a question, they are most happy to pay over $4 a gallon so that Mr. Bush and Dead Eye Dick Cheney can live in the big house. Afterall, Bush lowered their taxes. I just think it is a shame that the $20 he give them in tax cuts had to go to gas but what the hey, he lowered their taxes.
2007-03-02 00:09:49 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 5⤋
How do you know this is true? You want this to be true to fuel your hate.
How come we pay less for fuel than the Europeans?
If you buy oil for your home or vehicle you are contributing to make Bush and Cheney rich in your mind. Why are you contributing to their wealth. Ride a bike.
If all the people who feel this is true and stopped using any products from big oil, the demand would lessen and the price would go down. You are part of the problem of high prices. You China, India and the rest of the world.
2007-03-02 00:13:36 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
As a for this republican, they all have their audacity or maybe they just don't care we know what's going on. It's pethetic we are still so dependant on oil. This issue covers every president all the way back to Gerald Ford. I know personally 30 years ago the hoopla around alternative fuels and I feel all the political officials, includeing Clinton has permitted oil comanies hold the American public hostage. Consider the taxes on gasoline and other fuels, the government dosn't care how fuel cost affects us. after bringing home $500 a week ond paying $150 towards gasoline alone, it's all I can do to pay the rent.----Wow, I can't believe the sarcastic remarks being made at you for your question. Hey guys, why can't we ask questions withoout getting all the hostile remarks? This site is just getting wierd.
2007-03-02 00:14:45 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
nicely, a popular protection tension makes use of a /lot/ of petroleum products, exceptionally in an invasion, so i'm confident it became a considerable undertaking. Any income reaped by potential of oil companies from contracts in Iraq would be miniscule whilst in comparison with the charges of the conflict. the actual function oil performs is as a strategic source. u.s. has no selection yet to maintain a powerful protection tension presence interior the midsection east, to gaurantee it fairly is grant of oil. because of the fact, without that grant, it fairly is protection tension might may well be regularly undercut. in basic terms before the 2d Iraq conflict, that presence coated Saudi Arabia. it fairly is been moved to Iraq.
2016-10-17 02:20:54 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Look I believe that the oil companies are out of control. I also believe that oil does not conform to the free market standard. The free market is self correcting because people have choices. Oil does not fit this model because most people cannot choose not to heat their houses or buy gasoline. I further am ready to see government step in and threaten price control, even though I am against government intervention of this type in most cases as it has been proved to be damaging to the economy. The problem is that oil companies are no longer treating consumers fairly and their free market arguments do not hold water. In short they are guilty of price fixing by fiat, because if one station is selling gas for x amount, you can bet every other station in the area will be within pennies of that amount no matter what the price. So therefore there is no real choice or competition which are the hallmarks of the free market.
Now having said that let's get to your specific contentions. You are full of it. The President does not set the price per gallon and the price is not regulated in any form by government. The President also does not have dictatorial power and cannot impose legislation on companies. If you want to say that government is not doing enough in this area to protect the consumers I would agree, but your post lacks foundation and amounts to another veiled attempt to hold the President responsible for something largely beyond his control without first having direct action taken by Congress. Now if Congress were to send a bill ordering price controls to the President and he were to veto it then you might have a valid position. To date this has not happened so the rest is just uninformed speculation without proper foundation or credence.
2007-03-02 00:11:31 · answer #5 · answered by Bryan 7 · 1⤊ 5⤋
Oh no it's the conspiracy zealots at work again!
Try looking at all the taxes they put on our gas, if they did away with those gas would not be as high priced.
I don't feel bad about it at all. What can I do? I got a bettter higher paying job so it doesn't phase me.
2007-03-02 00:03:11 · answer #6 · answered by True Patriot 3 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Sorry; We use a free market economy here; supply and demand and public companies. Your way didn't work all that well; see "Demise of the Soviet Union" for more info.
But thanks for sharing!
You might enjoy the extra $.40-50 you'll be paying for "summer" environmentally friendly gas the next 6 months though!
2007-03-01 23:56:07 · answer #7 · answered by wizjp 7 · 5⤊ 3⤋
The only President getting kickbacks in recent history was Clinton. IE: Wife of fugitive billionaire "donates" to them, Bill give pardon the next day.
2007-03-01 23:55:20 · answer #8 · answered by virginity buster 2 · 4⤊ 3⤋
Your premise that out President has anything to do with oil prices is folly!
2007-03-02 00:28:22 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
WE do what we have to do~How do you feel knowing that it's your fault we can't drill and use OUR own oil which we have plenty of!
2007-03-01 23:58:21 · answer #10 · answered by Classic96 4 · 4⤊ 2⤋