http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44358964/ns/business-oil_and_energy/
This is interesting, and one of the things in a broader term that I bash on at times.
Going back to last week, mergers by two entities that are stable by themselves is bad for the consumer and the worker, which I hit on around the edges with ATT and TM. ATT and TM have no business merging; if one has a better infrastructure than the other then capitalistic theory should take over, and I call the bluff on any "threat" made by either.
On this subject, when all of big oil merged in the 90's, under Clinton's "watch", it cut the competition roughly in half and cut down the amount of investment in infrastructure of existing refineries and capital investment in new projects. I don't believe one minute that Mobil would have folded, or Phillips, or Conoco, etc. if these mergers had not happened.
"Hey, we really need to retrofit that CC unit at the Mobil plant, but let's just run it in the ground cuz we've got Exxon refining capabilities to back it up. Plus, when it goes down gas prices will go up! Win-win! Hey, look over there, a missing white chick!"
And, it increases the likelihood of collusion between less players in the market. We can all see that the price of oil is not the big player here with gas prices. It's all BS, magic 8 ball BS conjuring up a new "excuse" consumers and American workers are getting gouged. Also I don't believe one bit the randomly tossed around "fact" that environmental laws are restricting expansion. There has been little movement on the industry emmission front the last 15 years, with Clinton triangulation and the Bush debacle, and now this train wreck called Obama. We are just seeing a direct result of the narrowing of the supplier side players.
So couple that with the latest slobbering rim job Obama gave the GOP and the oil industry this week:
http://news.yahoo.com/obama-halts-controversial-epa-regulation-143731156.html
So, this will cost the industry $? Where will that $ go? Off into space or up Obama's azz? It will go to the worker and the industry that makes emmission reduction equipment and to the companies and people that engineer and install these retrofits. Yes, some of this cost
may be passed to the consumer but the impact of that would be lessened if there was more competition. What a coincidence. Funny how this just spins around in one big incestuous circle. Now I actually prefer Bush over Obama; at least he was blunt about being a *****; Obama tries to trick you into thinking he is the innocent girl next door, but in reality he is screwing barnyard animals in his room.....
So, this is all BS. Some of the cost may be passed to the consumer as I say, but gas in my area has swung a $1/gallon over the last year over BS reasons, so don't come to me with the "gas or $/kwh will go up 5 cents if this happens" shyt. When one of the talking industry heads farts or some other conjured up BS happens energy prices swing wildly. The consumer would see little effect from enacting the regulations, and what little effect it would have would be wiped out if the fed chairman was seen driving a hybrid around town by our corporate media. The avg. American voter is too stupid to realize this.
The companies just don't want to spend the money; it makes their stock price look better, and they don't have to because the guy down the street isn't. The smaller the pool of players, the more likelihood of collusion. The western oil industry right now is spending next to nothing on new capital projects or retrofits in the US.
Which meanders to the other point that is a hot topic in here; IMO the whole corporate tax issue is nothing more than a ploy to increase liquid on hand, while holding the American worker hostage with the threat to move industry overseas where labor laws are non-existent. Or, threaten to shut down plants etc. which is all BS; they will do no such thing. The American market is still an important one, but not as important as in the past. This is all about the bottom line, a balancing act on how much the American worker can be screwed. Check your morals at the door concerning the middle class American.
I want the tax code structured in such a way to promote business. But, idealistic tax cuts for either corporations or wealthy individuals, do not create jobs if there is no demand. And, the middle class American worker is the one that creates that demand and right now they are getting hammered. The large companies know this elementary fact, but the sympathy is not there for the previous fuel for their well being (the American worker), since other markets are emerging.
This is what it all boils down to, in a nutshell. The American worker is needed less to fuel profitability of this smaller group of companies, with emerging cheap labor and demand markets due to globalization, coupled with friendly tax policy.
Investment in infrastructure that increased revenue from sensible tax policies would create would go a long way to fixing this problem in the economy, but as we all know the two political parties in this country have no incentive to work for the public when the pubic keeps condoning their actions by voting for these prix. Plus, it is hard to undo what has been done the last 20-30 years, so even my suggestion of infrastructure investment would just be a bandaid. That is until wages and other emerging markets equalize with the modern ones, which I doubt will happen in my lifetime.
Sorry for the long thread. Reading all of this shyt this morning stirred me up a bit. I will go drink beer now.