Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

philanderer · 10-31-2005, 06:25 PM

Ok to touch on a few points... two dollars for a gallon, while it is still a good deal in comparison with Euro prices is far worse than the price of gas a little less than two years ago or so. In fact there was major media coverage and public outcry when gas hit two dollars and stayed there. So I think you may be suffering from a certain state of habituation there. Don't get me wrong I'm not saying that an extra 80 cents or so a gallon will break the bank, it wont, but it is the reason these companies are reaping massive profit gains...

And I'm not blaiming Bush...any administration would most likely uphold an oil based economy because what is good for big business is usually good for the country. But shouldn't we as conscious voters be weary of putting big oil guns in charge of our energy plans, our environmental protection, etc.? It's not like this administration isn't prone to helping out old friends: who did those energy contracts go to in Iraq (cough Haloburton cough).

And to be honest we can't stop using oil...and personal home consumption itself is a major money drain. The sad fact is that we are hooked. The oil will still come here and still be sold at high prices whether or not one person or twelve stops using oil. You have to remember the oil is already here ready to be sold...it's not like when we decide we need it it is shipped special to us. The supply is here and to keep those big businesses going we will keep buying and be urged to keep buying, because what is good for big business is good for American economics.

Ok so what I really wanted to say...I researched this because no one else did

and BP made 5.23 billion in profit this quarter. Now this is humble considering the record profits of other companies (i.e., exxon) but it still puts BP at a 20 billion dollar profit. Not going too deep into economics here I think if you are going to advertise that you are environmentally aware, or at least trying to be, you should put more than 1/20 your pofit into that research. My main issue is the commercial, NOT the oil issue here in America. In fact forget geography (even though I've mentioned it myself a half dozen times). The commercial was focused on new energy...glorifying its campaign to lead energy in a new direction as if it was the main initiative of the company. However, for this to be true more than 1/20 of the profit should be invested in this initiative right? RIGHT? That's all I am saying...I realize what they are doing is good, but I have to say no one would be quite so satisfied if a cigarette company invested so little of its money into child smoking prevention. I think to make a commercial touting yourself as a leader in new energy you have to care more than BP does...

10-31-2005, 06:25 PM	#10 (permalink)
philanderer Upright	Ok to touch on a few points... two dollars for a gallon, while it is still a good deal in comparison with Euro prices is far worse than the price of gas a little less than two years ago or so. In fact there was major media coverage and public outcry when gas hit two dollars and stayed there. So I think you may be suffering from a certain state of habituation there. Don't get me wrong I'm not saying that an extra 80 cents or so a gallon will break the bank, it wont, but it is the reason these companies are reaping massive profit gains... And I'm not blaiming Bush...any administration would most likely uphold an oil based economy because what is good for big business is usually good for the country. But shouldn't we as conscious voters be weary of putting big oil guns in charge of our energy plans, our environmental protection, etc.? It's not like this administration isn't prone to helping out old friends: who did those energy contracts go to in Iraq (cough Haloburton cough). And to be honest we can't stop using oil...and personal home consumption itself is a major money drain. The sad fact is that we are hooked. The oil will still come here and still be sold at high prices whether or not one person or twelve stops using oil. You have to remember the oil is already here ready to be sold...it's not like when we decide we need it it is shipped special to us. The supply is here and to keep those big businesses going we will keep buying and be urged to keep buying, because what is good for big business is good for American economics. Ok so what I really wanted to say...I researched this because no one else did and BP made 5.23 billion in profit this quarter. Now this is humble considering the record profits of other companies (i.e., exxon) but it still puts BP at a 20 billion dollar profit. Not going too deep into economics here I think if you are going to advertise that you are environmentally aware, or at least trying to be, you should put more than 1/20 your pofit into that research. My main issue is the commercial, NOT the oil issue here in America. In fact forget geography (even though I've mentioned it myself a half dozen times). The commercial was focused on new energy...glorifying its campaign to lead energy in a new direction as if it was the main initiative of the company. However, for this to be true more than 1/20 of the profit should be invested in this initiative right? RIGHT? That's all I am saying...I realize what they are doing is good, but I have to say no one would be quite so satisfied if a cigarette company invested so little of its money into child smoking prevention. I think to make a commercial touting yourself as a leader in new energy you have to care more than BP does...