Paul Ryan

[Aloha_Shooter]

I just want to reach back and point out that this was a monster burn and Ridge deserves an atomic fist bump for it.

Problem with your idea is that Ridge's post was incomplete and inaccurate. Incomplete in that the last time AWB happened, Congress may have suffered reelection losses but WE THE PEOPLE still suffered 10 years of unconstitutional BS until it expired. Inaccurate because the last time it happened was in California (where Feinstein tried to place M-1 Garands on the list of defined "assault weapons" during the Bush presidency) and it wasn't Romney doing it.

[Ronin13]

You do realize that oil is a world-wide commodity that one country has little impact on, that gasoline prices aren't set by the government, that the oil is owned by the oil companies who much prefer higher prices and that the US is a net gasoline exporter? Sure, we have a set capacity for gasoline refining, and no new refineries have been built lately, but do you want one in your backyard? There's no guarantee that any gasoline production will even go to the US, anyway; the oil companies ship it where they maximize their profits.

You are so right, one country (or 3 in our case) has absolutely nothing to do with gas prices... that's why gas companies are making so very little per liter of fuel because of gas taxes that cut down profits for gas companies (which in turn makes it harder for them to advance), and leads to gross over price. In reality, We are the number 1 petroleum user in the world- by a friggin long shot! But we are a low producer.

At $3.20/gallon almost $.65 of that is tax. So yes, gas prices can be set by government. Also, we're not exporting NEARLY as much as we import. Why would we export anyway? Instead just produce and refine our own oil (little to no import and no export) and we would cut costs significantly.

[Rucker61]

You are so right, one country (or 3 in our case) has absolutely nothing to do with gas prices... that's why gas companies are making so very little per liter of fuel because of gas taxes that cut down profits for gas companies (which in turn makes it harder for them to advance), and leads to gross over price.

Gas companies generally = oil companies. Gasoline isn't the only product in the supply chain that they make their money. In 2011, the five largest oil companies made $117B in profit. The US government also granted a few billion in tax breaks. As far as making it harder, Exxon, for example, had their profits grow by 69% from 2010 to 2011.

In reality, We are the number 1 petroleum user in the world- by a friggin long shot! But we are a low producer.

At $3.20/gallon almost $.65 of that is tax. So yes, gas prices can be set by government.

Federal tax on gasoline is $0.184 per gallon. The rest of the tax is state and local taxes. These are relatively fixed costs. The variability in gas pricing comes from the volatility in production and in oil pricing. Speculators have had more impact in the cost of your gasoline than the feds.

Also, we're not exporting NEARLY as much as we import. Why would we export anyway? Instead just produce and refine our own oil (little to no import and no export) and we would cut costs significantly.

You keep saying "we". It's not "we". It's "they". The oil and gasoline, and the refineries all belong to the oil companies. We don't get to tell them what to do with their business. They export it because it's in their best interests to do so.

[Ronin13]

Federal tax on gasoline is $0.184 per gallon. The rest of the tax is state and local taxes. These are relatively fixed costs. The variability in gas pricing comes from the volatility in production and in oil pricing. Speculators have had more impact in the cost of your gasoline than the feds.

I didn't stutter. Did I specify what kind of tax? No. I simply said TAX. Combined tax averages to .60/3.0.

You keep saying "we". It's not "we". It's "they". The oil and gasoline, and the refineries all belong to the oil companies. We don't get to tell them what to do with their business. They export it because it's in their best interests to do so.

Talking as a country. We as a country, do not count petroleum among our chief exports.

[Bailey Guns]

I just want to reach back and point out that this was a monster burn and Ridge deserves an atomic fist bump for it.

Great. If being wrong deserves an "atomic fist bump", knock yourselves out. But neither of his statements are accurate.

Just like his statement that credit Obama with signing the bill that allowed carry in parks. It's been pointed out over and over that he did that basically under duress to get his pet credit card bill passed. Sure...he signed the bill into law. But he sure as hell didn't do it out of love for the 2nd Amendment. He did it because his pet project was doomed if he didn't.

[Bailey Guns]

The oil and gasoline, and the refineries all belong to the oil companies. We don't get to tell them what to do with their business. They export it because it's in their best interests to do so.

By "we", I'm assuming you're talking about the US gov't? If so, that's the funniest thing you've ever posted.

If not...nevermind.

[Rucker61]

By "we", I'm assuming you're talking about the US gov't? If so, that's the funniest thing you've ever posted.

If not...nevermind.

No, I'm talking about us folks. Most folks here seem to favor a laissez-faire business model, one that operates without goverment interference as much as possible. By that philosophy, saying that we should not export oil or gas but keep it all for our own use is contradictory, unless, of course, one has voting stock in an oil company. As a capitalist, I'm saying that we shouldn't get to regulate where they sell their products. However, since they accept tax breaks, the line is kind of blurred with regards to government interference.

[Sharpienads]

Gas companies generally = oil companies. Gasoline isn't the only product in the supply chain that they make their money. In 2011, the five largest oil companies made $117B in profit. The US government also granted a few billion in tax breaks. As far as making it harder, Exxon, for example, had their profits grow by 69% from 2010 to 2011.

$117B sounds like a lot until you unspin the facts. Oil is big business, and their profit margin is only a very small percentage. I can't remember what it is, but it is very low, somewhere between 6% - 9% (I believe, could be wrong on the number). And who cares if they make a lot of money? That means that the average Joe who has stock in the company, and anybody else that has a 401(k) or other retirement plan makes money. Tax breaks on business is a good thing. It helps a company grow and develop and helps keep prices down. 69% increase in profit margins? So if a company's profit margin is 6% and grew by 69%, now their profit margin is 10.14%. Doesn't sound outrageous to me.

Federal tax on gasoline is $0.184 per gallon. The rest of the tax is state and local taxes. These are relatively fixed costs. The variability in gas pricing comes from the volatility in production and in oil pricing. Speculators have had more impact in the cost of your gasoline than the feds.

Speculation isn't a bad thing. Everybody who invests is a speculator. The major cost of gas is crude oil. Refining, transportation, and taxes make up the rest. Supply and demand is the biggest driving factor for the price of crude. If we encourage production here, gas would be cheap and money could be spent trying to find the next source of energy instead of paying high gas prices and wasting money on "green energy" that the market isn't ready for.

ETA: I found this chart with oil company's profit margins. So far this year, they have been any from -344.8% to 24.84%
http://ycharts.com/rankings/industri...?s=calc&d=desc

Here are some other companies for comparison: http://ycharts.com/rankings/profit_m...1&s=calc&d=asc

But on the original topic, I think Ryan is a good choice.

[ronaldrwl]

DJIA = Dow Jones Industrial Average, the most commonly used method to gauge the health of the economy, based on a select subset of stocks.

This is not true. Not even close. I've been in the market for a long time and dramatic turns in the economy will effect the DOW but so will what's going on in Europe and just about everything else effects the markets. We're in a nearly global economy. One strong factor in 'lifting' the markets now is the belief that obama will be unemployed soon. Just like the market dived 4 years ago when it looked very likely a Dem was going to win the white house. You can love obama all you want but don't think for one minute that business loves him. He hates business people and we hate him.

[Ridge]

Problem with your idea is that Ridge's post was incomplete and inaccurate. Incomplete in that the last time AWB happened, Congress may have suffered reelection losses but WE THE PEOPLE still suffered 10 years of unconstitutional BS until it expired. Inaccurate because the last time it happened was in California (where Feinstein tried to place M-1 Garands on the list of defined "assault weapons" during the Bush presidency) and it wasn't Romney doing it.

And in 2004 Romney signed his state's permanent AWB bill into law.

10 years of that I'm sure sucked (wasn't into firearms at the time). But MA will have theirs forever unless someone passes a law repealing it.