Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Time to Rein In the Pump Profiteers

By Chuck Collins and Eric Benjamin, AlterNet. Posted August 30, 2006.


Ordinary people may believe that unprecedented global strife is a bad thing. The barons of Big Oil beg to differ.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Chuck Collins Eric Benjamin

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Feeling a little squeeze at the gas pump? You are not alone -- U.S. consumers are expected to pay an additional $200 billion this year for oil and gas products.

These billions, notes Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., amount to a "massive transfer of wealth from average Americans who can't afford it to big oil companies who already were experiencing all-time record profits."

While ordinary Americans are forking over upwards of $3 for a gallon of gas, 15 distinctly unordinary Americans -- the CEOs of the largest U.S. oil industry companies -- are celebrating their biggest paychecks on record.

According to a new report, "Executive Excess," by the Institute for Policy Studies and United for a Fair Economy (PDF)], Big Oil CEOs last year took home an average $32.7 million in compensation -- 518 times more than average oil industry workers in 2005. The ratio for all industries in 2005 between average and highest paid worker was 411 to one, while the average globally in advanced countries is 25 to one.

The Oil Barons' grab even exceeded their excessively paid counterparts at other leading U.S. firms. Their $32.7 million average pay was almost three times higher than the average bloated paycheck of $11.6 million for CEOs at 350 large corporations surveyed by the Wall Street Journal.

The three highest-paid U.S. oil chieftains in 2005: William Greehey of Valero Energy ($95.2 million), Ray R. Irani of Occidental Petroleum ($84 million), and Lee Raymond, outgoing CEO of ExxonMobil ($69.7 million).

At the end of July, ExxonMobil reported a quarterly profit of $10.36 billion, the second biggest gain ever. This follows its record-breaking annual profit of $36 billion in 2005.

When ExxonMobil's CEO Lee Raymond was called before Congress to explain, he stated that rising prices reflect global supply and demand, nothing more. "We are all," Raymond assured Congress, "in this together, everywhere in the world." Except Raymond. Raymond recently retired from ExxonMobil with a Golden Parachute retirement package worth nearly $400 million, including country club fees and use of the company jet. "He is a porker of the first order," observed executive pay expert Graef Crystal.

ConocoPhilips CEO James Mulva explained to ABC News that oil companies only make ten cents on the gallon. High oil prices, not greed, are the cause of skyrocketing prices at the pump, he explained. Big Oil can't control the global marketplace.

But if Big Oil CEOs have no power to influence the cost of gas, then they don't deserve any special reward for industry profits. And even if their performance contributed to the company's profitability, shouldn't broader criteria be used to judge their performance, including their record on the environment?

With these enormous salaries, Big Oil CEOs should be held to account for their failure to dedicate their mountains of excess cash toward seeking new energy sources that move us beyond fossil fuels. They can run green-looking TV ads claiming they are indeed preparing for the future. But when they throw massive windfall profits at chief executives, they seem to be signaling that the coming lean years will be somebody else's problem.

What is good for ExxonMobil and Lee Raymond -- and all the other titans of the contemporary American oil and gas industry -- has not been good for average Americans. According to new wage data reported in the New York Times, "wages and salaries now make up the lowest share of the nation's gross domestic product since the government began recording the data in 1947, while corporate profits have climbed to their highest share since the 1960's." So what can be done about petrol profiteering?

One proposal is to tax oil industry windfall profits and earmark them for public energy conservation projects and efforts to reduce energy costs for the poor. Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., has proposed that a 50 percent tax be applied to profits earned by major U.S. oil companies on the sale of crude oil above $40 per barrel.

Another proposal is to eliminate government tax breaks and massive subsidies for big oil. The independent Taxpayers for Common Sense identified 16 wasteful subsidies for the fossil fuel industry totaling $5 billion a year.

Finally, Congress should take up the question of anti-trust laws in the face of oil industry consolidation. Not since the 1911 break-up of Standard Oil Co. has the country witnessed such a concentration of petroleum power, with 23 major mergers in the last decade.

Big Oil's grip on U.S. politics is strong. Since 1990, they've given $192 million to federal candidates and parties. They have blocked sane energy policy and investments that move our country beyond dependency on oil.

That's why a campaign organized by Oil Change International to "separate oil and state," and encourage members of Congress to give up their addiction to Big Oil political contributions is a key leverage point. It's a practical first step in stopping further looting by the pump profiteers.

Digg!

Chuck Collins is a senior scholar at the Institute for Policy Studies and coauthor of "Economic Apartheid in America: A Primer on Economic Inequality and Insecurity" (New Press, 2005). Eric Benjamin is a research analyst at United for a Fair Economy.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
congress
Posted by: rsaxto on Aug 30, 2006 1:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What Congress should do is create an excess profits tax on all oil & gas & coal and apply all of this cash to research and development of alternative energy sources that do not emit carbon into the air. This would tackle the two biggest problems, global warming and global pollution.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: congress...sickofsleaze Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com
» Wake up sleepy Gene... Posted by: ABetterFuture
Ever see Alternet go after the Upper Class, instead of the corporation? No....
Posted by: rebel_pig on Aug 30, 2006 4:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You have seen many many many headlines on Alternet and similar websites about how we should make corporations PAY, and make them disgorge their profits, and so forth and so on.

But let me ask you something--have you EVER seen a headline on Alternet that screamed "TAX THE RICH!" or "TAX THE UPPER CLASS!".


No, you never have. Why is that?

I come here to Alternet for a reason. Alternet is to soem extent a representative distillation of the philosophies and politics of the American Left/Liberalism/Democratic Party.

The headlines you see here fairly well represent the gist of what the American Left truly is in terms of strategy, goals, etc.
I have been watching and analyzing and studying these headlines for about 2 years. And I often comment on them, too, as some of my detractors/stalkers here well know.
I return to my question--when have you seen a headline story here that screamed "TAX THE UPPER CLASS!"?

NEVER! You have never seen one, and I doubt you ever will. Well, maybe you might see one once a year. But I doubt it. Over a period of a year there are over 1000 unique headlines that are placed in the box at the top of Alternet, and you will almost NEVER see one that directly deals with taxing the upper class or (as I pointed out yesterday) that deals with universal healthcare. Yesterday we saw the first Alternet headline in the box about universal healthcare, well, the first one I had ever seen anyway.

Now, taxing the upper class (aka progressive taxation) and universal healthcare are really what the European Left is all about. Those two ideas are really the CENTERPIECE of European style leftism. The crowning achievement of European style Leftism is progressive taxation and universal healthcare. European leftism ORBITS around those two ideas.

But that is not the case here in America. Our Leftism orbits around...what? What ideas represent the gist of what flows through these daily headlines on Alternet? Understand that, and you will understand why true Leftism is dead in America.

I ask you to join me in this project to understand why there is no left in America. A good part of the answer to that flows through the ideas that are in these Alternet headlines....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Huge profits due to rising oil costs
Posted by: Bic Pentameter on Aug 30, 2006 6:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It always annoys me when members of the haircut crew look right into the camera and tell the American sheeple that oil companies are reaping great profits because of the commodity price of oil on the international market. They almost apologize for charging so much.

ANY moron can deduce for himself that record breaking profits occur when costs are low and revenues are high. It's the price of gasoline at the pump that yields the bonanza.

About 3 years ago I heard, and then read, that the mechanisms were in place to drive the price of gas to $3. No one wanted to believe it. A lot of people I know think I'm a fanatic, anyway. The scheme went like this:

Laws were passed to ostensibly protect the small independent operators from the bigger players. It requires that all gasoline retail for a little more than wholesale cost, so that a big operator can't sell at a loss until his competitor folds. Part II, the clencher, is that wholesale cost is determined 'in part' by the average retail price of the same grade of gas in the same market area during the preceeding period.

Retailers raise the price by 15 or 20 cents at a whack, causing the avarage price to be higher for the period due to the spikes, so they are required to raise the wholesale price. If you will ask station managers how they all know to raise the price by 18 cents at the same time, some get the message by phone, some follow the lead of nearby stations.

Either way, the fix was in. No further collusion is necessary if everyone plays along. The CEO of one company doesn't have to call his counterparts and schedule an increase. As soon as one does it, the others follow suit. These are NOT legitimate market forces. When was the last time you saw one station hold the line and get all of the business he could handle when his competitor raises the price?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Do the Math Folks!
Posted by: mtnclimber on Aug 30, 2006 6:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm getting tired of this type of sensationalism in news. It doesn't give any real facts - just shooting from the hip and expressing feelings. Before we ventilate on a subject we should do the research and get the facts so as not to embarrass ourselves.

1. Do the Math. Nobody likes to pay $3/gallon. However, if we adjust the price for inflation, the $3/gallon is just average for what we have paid over the last 40 yearas. In fact it was higher in the late 70's and early 80's. The profit on a gallon of gasoline is about $0.25 or 4 cents per pound. This is not outrageous. Look at what you pay per pound for food, etc.

2. The price of oil we see on the news is not set by ExxonMobil. It is set by Wall Street. There are speculators, hedge funds, etc. bidding on oil futures and driving the price and the oil companies pay some fraction of that when they have to buy oil.

3. Let's face it, we got used to cheap gas. The prices we paid in the 90's were the lowest gasoline has EVER been corrected for inflation. So what did we do - buy gas guzzling SUV's without realizing that the only direction gasoline cost could go was HIGHER! Aren't we to blame?!

4. ExxonMobil's profits are large - They are a very large company. Do the Math. Their profit is only $0.08 on each dollar of sales. That is our economies industry average. Our credit card companies make a higher percentage.

5. ExxonMobil: Do the Math. 50% of hte gross income buys raw materials - in other words - OIL, Natural Gas, etc. They don't own the oil, they have to pay Sauid Arabia, Venezuela, Mexico, etc.

6. 25% of the Income pays txes - USA, foreigh governments, Excise taxes and Duties. that leaves 25% to pay for expenses, exploration, investment, Dividends and profit.

7. Taxing the oil companies is a stupid idea. They will treat that as a cost of doing business and pass the cost on to us at the fuel pump.

8. Eliminating all the supposed tax breaks listed amounts to only $5 billion per year. This is a small amount considering the size of our economy. It comes out to only a couple cents per gallon!

9. We had all better hope that ExxonMobil does well financially. Thye are the ones who are going to have to find, process and deliver gasoline to us in the future! If we destroy them, we will be shooting ourselves in the foot!

10. We probably all own a piece of them either through stock or investments in a mutual fund. Read your prospectus of any funds and see what they own. Many have 1 -3% ExxonMobil in their porfolio if the are S&P, Index funds, Large Cap, etc.

Let's face it folks. What we want is to drive our cars everwhere with cheap fuel so that we can continue an unsupportable lifestyle. ExxonMobil is doing just what we want them to do and then we get annoyed when the price of gasoline increases. Blame yourself!

All the information used here can be foudn in Annual Reports, 10K filiings with the SEC, Internet sources, etc. We need to understand the facts before we can offer reasonable suggestions as to how to proceed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Do the Math Folks! Posted by: daniel1982
» RE: Do the Math Folks! Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: Do the Math Folks! Posted by: albrechtkrausse
» RE: Do the Math Folks! Posted by: Joshua Holland
» Or ... Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: Do the Math Folks! Posted by: Kathleen
» Yes, do the math ... Posted by: Joshua Holland
» Both right and wrong Posted by: Jesse
» RE: Now we're talking Posted by: Techubus
» RE: Its not about the math! Posted by: existen
» RE: Its not about the math! Posted by: yellow
Read my post from April
Posted by: chaoslegs on Aug 30, 2006 6:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can't link directly to it, so click here and scroll up to the post just before it.

The post is about the bottle neck that is the refinery capacity. Creating artifical bottlenecks is the most effective way to cause an artifical spike in prices by reducing supplies. Think 2001 electricity crisis in California.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Something has to be done to get people out of their cars
Posted by: JimTheAnarchist on Aug 30, 2006 11:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I hate to see these jerks take home such extravagent amounts of money. But anything that makes driving more expensive is not all bad.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE:I agree, but.... Posted by: Techubus
» RE: I agree, but.... Posted by: ConnecttheDots
» RE: I agree, but.... Posted by: Techubus
Market Manipulators Should Be Nationalized
Posted by: rwa on Aug 30, 2006 3:13 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Tricks and fear is all that is keeping oil high:

BP’s Crude, Gasoline Trading Under U.S. Investigation

By Stephen Voss

Aug. 29 (Bloomberg) — BP Plc, Europe’s second-largest oil company, is being investigated by U.S. authorities for possible manipulation of crude and gasoline markets, a further blow to a reputation that’s already suffering from spills in Alaska.

The crude oil inquiry is led by the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which regulates futures markets, and the Justice Department is probing its gasoline trades, BP spokesman Robert Wine in London said. BP is “cooperating fully,'’ he said.

BP and Chief Executive Officer John Browne already face civil and criminal investigations in the U.S., including grand juries that are examining an Alaskan oil spill and a 2005 Texas City refinery explosion that killed 15 people. The U.S. government in June alleged BP traders attempted to manipulate propane prices, a charge BP denied.

“BP is known for being an extremely aggressive trader of crude so it’s an easy accusation to throw at them,'’ said Bruce Evers, an oil analyst at Investec Henderson Crosthwaite in London.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Okay, I went and "did the math", but it still looks like a massive ripoff
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Aug 30, 2006 4:12 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So, ExxonMobil made a 10.36 billion dollar profit, and the sum compensation package for their CEO was a 400 million retirement bonus plus a 69.7 million paycheck for a total renumeration of 469.7 million - which is not counted as part of that 10.36 billion profit, but rather is part of ExxonMobil's 'labor costs' if I understand the accounting involved.

So, what % of 10.36 billion is 469.7 million? Well,
(x%)(10.36 billion)=(.4697 billion)
Solving for x, we find that Exxon's CEO was paid 4.53% of the total profits for the company thanks to the bonus, and excluding the bonus he would have been paid 0.67% of total profits - which raises the question, where did those profits go?

The actual total value of the company is hard to determine, but the top shareholders can be found at http://finance.yahoo.com/q/mh?s=XOM
The names behind those institutional banks and mutual funds seem fairly well-hidden, with the prominent exception of Dick Cheney, who has some tens of millions (50?) invested in Vanguard (see the linked list) through a 'blind trust'.

So where do your gas dollars go? Into the pockets of the Saudi oil princes, the anonymous multi-billionaires, and the Evil Penguin (I mean our Vice-President, as in the Miami variety) and his cronies. This, by the way, is the main reason that the Bush Administration is in reality dead-set against biofuels, renewable energy, and global warming mitigation - now that they've got more-or-less total control over the oil supply, the only thing that could undercut their profits is a drop in demand for gasoline due to electric cars or ethanol and biodiesel fuels.

So, how does the Middle East occupation play into all this? Well, let me refer you to a Greg Palast article on big-oil-and-the-trillion-dollar-war-bonus

here's the kicker:
"More important, the industry has its own reserves whose value is attached, like a suckerfish, to OPEC's price targets. Here’s a statistic you won’t see on Army recruitment posters: The rise in the price of oil after the first three years of the war boosted the value of the reserves of ExxonMobil Oil alone by just over $666 billion. (The devil is in the details.)

Smaller Chevron Oil, where Condoleezza Rice had served as a director, gained a quarter trillion dollars in value. Chevron named a tanker after Rice, but given the firm's change in fortunes once she became National Security Advisor and then Secretary of State, they should rename the whole fleet in her honor. Altogether, I calculate that the top five oil operators saw their reserves rise in value by over $2.363 trillion."


Fun, fun, fun for everyone. This is a main theme in government and military contracting as well - like the 'cost-plus' contract called LOGCAP that the military uses to pay off Kellogg, Brown and Root: Profits are set as a percentage of costs. (This is all covered in detail in Dan Briody's "The Halliburton Agenda".)

Imagine that you hire someone to put a new roof on your house, and your friendly local contractor says, "I'm going to set my profits as a fixed percentage of my costs, and I will determine the costs by myself." The next day, you go out and he's got 50 laborers running around and has purchased enough materials for three new roofs - "Well, let's see," he says, "My costs for your new roof were $150,000 and at a fixed 10% 'cost-plus', my profits are $15,000, so here's your bill: $165,000 for your new roof. I'll be sure to dispose of any unused materials, so we don't leave a mess - no problem - you're welcome!"

The previous poster was right: Do the math for yourself!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Frieden
Posted by: Frieden on Aug 30, 2006 4:45 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The customer dictates the price, period. The little car driver has a grip against the guzzler driver, but no one else, unless the little car driver is dumb enough to live on the edge of the “sprawl”. Then they have only themselves to blame but not the oil business. Above all, keep the government out of the price. It has enough to do just to keep the ship afloat.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Trolls notice
Posted by: larry278 on Aug 30, 2006 5:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
OK, Trolls, check your comments that oil co's are 'only' responding to 'market forces, etc' when the price of gasoline goes up. Dobbs & Blitze's substitutes have been broadcasting [since 5:00 pm edt, 8/30/06] that gas prices are now below $3.00 a gal & headed lower after 9/15/06. The subs have allowed that lower gas prices could 'influence' voters on 11/7/06.
The ever ethical oil co's wouldn't manipulate oil prices just to 'influence' voters & John D Rockafeller didn't buy the NJ legislature to get NJ's tax laws liberalized to the benefit of Standard Oil & incorapate in NJ after NJ's tax laws were liberalized to spite OH for not kow-towing to John D.
It's not easy being green or being a Troll; pimping is getting a bad name too.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How about this?
Posted by: Lincoln fan on Aug 30, 2006 8:32 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The record profits of oil companies isn't due to increased demand. The retail price didn't increase at the same rate as the demand. The retail price increased at the rate of crude price increase. This means that the retail price is a percentage of the price of crude there is also a possibility that profit per gallon is increased because the cost to refine per gallon is relatively fixed. That is it doesn't cost any more to refine a gallon of gas if the price of the same crude is $10 a bbl. or $100 a bbl.

I think that the way to bring the excess profit (assuming it is excess. I'm not arguing about that) under control is to peg the gas tax to the crude oil price. Then as the price of crude goes up the tax would go up and the public would share in the retail price increase.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: How about this? Posted by: yellow
Time To Get Educated
Posted by: NoPCZone on Aug 30, 2006 9:24 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7374585792978336967

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

OR--
Posted by: jende on Aug 31, 2006 12:51 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Or we could boycott oil and gas products and the machines that use them. Sure it would hurt but it would also toughen. When the BO guys see their profits fall, and realize we have their number, they'll do our bidding. Stop wasting fossil fuel. And stop using those damnable monster machines. We have the power to improve the world. Let's use it before it's too late.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Frieden
Posted by: Frieden on Aug 31, 2006 2:07 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Jende understands!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Put oil on the DEEP FREEZE
Posted by: jeffrey7 on Aug 31, 2006 3:23 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We can make deisel out of vegetable oil, Deisel himself used Hemp oil. We can make our cars to run on compressed air.
Instead of corn we could use waste sugar to make sweet alchohol,since E85 gets such poor gas mileage.Sweet alchohol is cleaner and cheaper to make and could sell for cheap enough to make up for it's poor mileage.
We have to wake up from our oil coma!!! This product was forced on us to the detriment of the Planet. Causing the premature death of countless millions of people from emissions and deforming children from excess mercury fallout. Our advanced society has always had 'The price of Progress" as it's model for it's industrial explosion. Now comes the time to 'Pay the Cost'. They have their eyes on YOUR grandchild,because they sure as hell are'nt going to let it be theirs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

rebel-pig is a plant by neo-cons, do not read
Posted by: jolo on Sep 1, 2006 4:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There are tons of programed, neo-cons who go around posting erroneous stories to newspapers and forums like this.

They use phony names, but you can easilt tell their propaganda.

When you see terms like "lefty", or "the left", "the liberals", the attempt is to stop any unification of the people of the U.S. and get the discussion away from the topic and dialogue on issues.What they wanti s to slip us up and then focus on the "Rovian" political jargon where people are labled with a broad brush. It is no different an ethnic slur, where all from that ethic group is labeled with that wide brush as being the same.

We are all Americans and it is essential that we stay on the topics and ignore the attempts of the neocons to stop Americans from have serious dialogue, unifying and attacking specic issues to get our nation back.

I just read, FINALLY, a sane, thoughtful article from t he King of Concersatives William F Buckley about how Bush is NOT a conservative and how wrong the occupation is
I don't know why it has taken so long for people to take off the hat of political labels ans see what is going on.
Nothing pisses a Conservative off more than a President who started with a record suprlus and very quickly turned things about with MASSIVE spending and debt, until we have the largest budget deficit in the this nations history. What is not reported on, is that he keeps increasing geometrically. No end in sight. That coupled with the double destruction of the U.S. as a leader in business, commerce or economic power with the largest trade deficit in its history.
It is rather hypocrytical that to government that is the harshest on how it treats its citizens, has more government ordered executions, has censored tjhe Internet (which Microsoft helped do for them), has reporters from The Times and media from all over the world ijn prisons for years, is the nation that is jacking up our nations Trade Deficit the most.
So why are we working to hard to build up the economy of the country that is the least Democratic, had the most censorship and treats its citizens, AND VISITORS more harshly than any nation on the world. But, we can destroy a nations infrustructure, arrests its leader, keep killing civilians, keep increasing out debt, because we are supposed to be creating a democracy there (wink, wink). Large oil companies and Halliburton can apply for this "democracy.

jon

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]