Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
Sort of a straw man, don't you think? If natty gas vehicles were as available and cost effective as traditional vehicles over let's say the past decade then you may have a point.
My Hyundai gets like 30mpg highway though.
interesting read on climate change...
- Thread starter binö
- Start date
Sort of a straw man, don't you think? If natty gas vehicles were as available and cost effective as traditional vehicles over let's say the past decade then you may have a point.
My Hyundai gets like 30mpg highway though.
stosstruppe
Well-known member
Well this thread has actually been an eye opener. Up until about 10 minutes ago I was fairly resolute in dismissing man's contribution to climate change though hadn't realised the debate on climate change had heated up again relatively recently since Al Gore etc.
Headholio
New member
The 13% came from US taxes actually paid. Exxon reports foreign taxes paid (ok) and deferred taxes, which is bullshit, because those deferred taxes never have to be paid if the money isn't brought back into the US.
Analysis: Gas price spike revives fight over energy taxes | Reuters
mrplunkey
New member
1) A huge portion of their operations are outside the US.
2) US rates are globally uncompetitive, hence Exxon is doing the right thing for its shareholders.
The Al Gore doom and gloom "omg we only have 5 years!!!" bullshit has been a huge disservice. The fact that climate change is occurring is not up for debate anymore. How much of an impact we as humans are having and what the best solutions are should be the topic of conversation, IMO.
1) I know
2) I know. No argument.
I dont blame Exxon for paying as little in taxes to the US as possible. We are giving them that opportunity and, as a publicly traded company, they have to take advantage of it. Them doing so isnt evil. Its good business.
Someone as anti-subsidies/loopholes as you, however, should be arguing for some type of change in the tax code that allows them to benefit to such an extent, correct?
mrplunkey
New member
Being able to operate and recognize taxes overseas isn't a loophole. If the US wants to price themselves out of the global market on taxation, they deserve to suffer the consequences.
But I am anti-loophole. I'd love to eliminate things like exploration subsidies. But let's also eliminate oil import taxes, oil environmental taxes, fuel excise taxes and the whole other mess associated with trying to persecute fossil fuels.
stosstruppe
Well-known member
I get 45-50mpg (also highway) on my Yaris (it's the wife's car I drive, I swear!) so unless as previously mentioned we retard the likes of India, China etc's extreme use of fossil fuels I doubt switching to a car that runs on used bio-oils & good intentions is going to make much of a difference.
As also mentioned, I am also of the belief we should switch to nuclear power more so though there is a lot of opposition to its usage simply by "merit" of involving the word "nuclear".
Headholio
New member
A large part of Exxon profits are Saudi Arabia, which taxes them at a much higher rate than the US (according to tthe Reuters article I posted above).
Personally, Id like the see nuclear and natty gas as a transition plan to something truly clean and sustainable such as solar. I dont think the necessary R&D will happen, however, until somebody fucks with our oil supply and the military gets involved.
Military + government + private industry = quick results. Seems like its all about finding a way to gather the energy outside the atmosphere and "transfer" it down to earth in a safe and efficient manner.
Similar threads
