I know, I know. First NASCAR, then U-M football and now this. Zoe's blog has suddenly turned into a sounding board for my personal life, and now my political views. Sorry. This has to be said, if only to help me retain some sanity, which ultimately benefits Zoe. And after this, I promise, it's all Zoe all the time.
.................................................------
I've been addicted to news reports coming out of the Southeast. It's like 9/11 all over again. (Want to read some incredible stuff, both from a journalistic standpoint and a strictly human interest point of view... check out what The New Orleans Times-Picayune has been producing in what is obviously a ridiculously difficult environment.) I won't waste your time fuming about the obvious shortcomings in local disaster planning and national disaster response. If you're not already embarrassed by that, you should be.
What really has me riled is something I read in the Boston Globe. The headline read: "The real looters are the fat oil companies." Here's a quick summary:
In the midst of our country's inspiring unity, much like what happened after 9/11 but faded much too quickly, gas prices instantly shot up past $3 a gallon, with $4 a gallon well in sight. The company I work for was hectically trying to find out how it could feed the newly-homeless and rescue workers. Thousands of other companies around the country were likewise pitching in. Sure, ExxonMobil and Shell each pledged $2 million to relief efforts. British Petroleum and Citgo each kicked in $1 million. But, in reality, they were committing an atrocious crime in the midst of all this charity.
Consider:
Of the word's seven most profitable corporations, four are ExxonMobile, Shell, BP and Chevron. ExxonMobile is the most profitable. Can you say $25.3 billion in profits last year and on pace to eclipse the $30 billion barrier this year. $30 BILLION! $30,000,000,000! ExxonMobile is also the world's most valuable company with a market value, according to Forbes Magazine, of $405 billion.
You think maybe freezing gas prices, temporarily foresaking some of that staggering profit, might have been a little kinder? It certainly would have made more of an impact on our country than the sixth-thousandths of one percent of its profits ExxonMobile donated.
But, wait. Those aren't the truly eye-popping facts from that article. These are:
1) President Bush's recent energy bill gives those gas companies $14.5 billion in tax breaks. Even with my limited understanding of tax law, I'm pretty confident a company making $30 billion in profits probably doesn't really need a tax break. Maybe we could have saved a couple of 141 social services President Bush axed, instead?
2) But here's why gas companies got those tax breaks: In Bush's last two elections, oil and gas companies accounted for 79 percent of his $65.1 million in campaign contributions, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
And if you're still under the impression that we're fighting a war against terror in Iraq, think again. Sadam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11. The real terrorists were hiding in Aghganistan. There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. There's just lots and lots of foreign-controlled oil. Was Saddam an out-of-control madman that should have been stopped? Yes. But there are plenty of other out-of-control political systems around the world that we've decided to largely ignore because there was no financial rationale for getting involved.
Let me back up for one minute. I freely admit that this isn't strictly a Republican vs. Democrat issue. In fact, I recently heard a clip that National Public Radio put together from speeches by the last six American presidents (two Democrats, four Republicans) all saying the same thing: America has to end its dependency on oil and fund the research to find alternative sources of energy. It hasn't happened under anyone's rule. But it sure as hell isn't going to happen under the rule of a President that had 79 percent of his campaign funded by gas and oil companies.
I'll let Derrick Jackson, the writer of the Boston Globe column I'm referencing, to finish up this post:
"Insurance companies are expecting up to $25 billion in claims from Katrina. For ExxonMobil, which is headed to $30 billion in profits, to jack up prices at the pump and then only throw $2 million at relief efforts is unconscionable.
"Stay fixated, if you wish, on the thieves and desperate families who are so much easier to catch on camera than comptrollers electronically stealing your cash. It is not pleasant to see anyone loot a store. But ExxonMobil and big oil are looting the nation, and no one is declaring martial law on them."
Yeah. What he said.
.................................................------
I've been addicted to news reports coming out of the Southeast. It's like 9/11 all over again. (Want to read some incredible stuff, both from a journalistic standpoint and a strictly human interest point of view... check out what The New Orleans Times-Picayune has been producing in what is obviously a ridiculously difficult environment.) I won't waste your time fuming about the obvious shortcomings in local disaster planning and national disaster response. If you're not already embarrassed by that, you should be.
What really has me riled is something I read in the Boston Globe. The headline read: "The real looters are the fat oil companies." Here's a quick summary:
In the midst of our country's inspiring unity, much like what happened after 9/11 but faded much too quickly, gas prices instantly shot up past $3 a gallon, with $4 a gallon well in sight. The company I work for was hectically trying to find out how it could feed the newly-homeless and rescue workers. Thousands of other companies around the country were likewise pitching in. Sure, ExxonMobil and Shell each pledged $2 million to relief efforts. British Petroleum and Citgo each kicked in $1 million. But, in reality, they were committing an atrocious crime in the midst of all this charity.
Consider:
Of the word's seven most profitable corporations, four are ExxonMobile, Shell, BP and Chevron. ExxonMobile is the most profitable. Can you say $25.3 billion in profits last year and on pace to eclipse the $30 billion barrier this year. $30 BILLION! $30,000,000,000! ExxonMobile is also the world's most valuable company with a market value, according to Forbes Magazine, of $405 billion.
You think maybe freezing gas prices, temporarily foresaking some of that staggering profit, might have been a little kinder? It certainly would have made more of an impact on our country than the sixth-thousandths of one percent of its profits ExxonMobile donated.
But, wait. Those aren't the truly eye-popping facts from that article. These are:
1) President Bush's recent energy bill gives those gas companies $14.5 billion in tax breaks. Even with my limited understanding of tax law, I'm pretty confident a company making $30 billion in profits probably doesn't really need a tax break. Maybe we could have saved a couple of 141 social services President Bush axed, instead?
2) But here's why gas companies got those tax breaks: In Bush's last two elections, oil and gas companies accounted for 79 percent of his $65.1 million in campaign contributions, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
And if you're still under the impression that we're fighting a war against terror in Iraq, think again. Sadam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11. The real terrorists were hiding in Aghganistan. There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. There's just lots and lots of foreign-controlled oil. Was Saddam an out-of-control madman that should have been stopped? Yes. But there are plenty of other out-of-control political systems around the world that we've decided to largely ignore because there was no financial rationale for getting involved.
Let me back up for one minute. I freely admit that this isn't strictly a Republican vs. Democrat issue. In fact, I recently heard a clip that National Public Radio put together from speeches by the last six American presidents (two Democrats, four Republicans) all saying the same thing: America has to end its dependency on oil and fund the research to find alternative sources of energy. It hasn't happened under anyone's rule. But it sure as hell isn't going to happen under the rule of a President that had 79 percent of his campaign funded by gas and oil companies.
I'll let Derrick Jackson, the writer of the Boston Globe column I'm referencing, to finish up this post:
"Insurance companies are expecting up to $25 billion in claims from Katrina. For ExxonMobil, which is headed to $30 billion in profits, to jack up prices at the pump and then only throw $2 million at relief efforts is unconscionable.
"Stay fixated, if you wish, on the thieves and desperate families who are so much easier to catch on camera than comptrollers electronically stealing your cash. It is not pleasant to see anyone loot a store. But ExxonMobil and big oil are looting the nation, and no one is declaring martial law on them."
Yeah. What he said.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment