I agree that gas prices are so high mainly because we'll pay it, simple as that. And "punishing" oil companies by increasing their taxes is not the answer, but I don't think that rewarding them by decreasing their taxes is justified, either. But really, why do we expect the oil companies, who by definition are in the business of selling oil, to be the ones to develop alternative fuel sources? Seems to me there's a heluva lot of money to be made there, so why doesn't somebody else do it? Just a thought...
Now, I haven't been able to find the Courier-Journal article online that mentions pharmaceutical profits being .20 cents "per sale," and comparing that to the oil companies' .08 cents per gallon, but, with all due respect, I'd like come clarification on that. To me, that sounds like comparing mathematical apples to oranges. because "per sale" sounds like every time I fill a prescription, be it 5 pills or 100, the drug companies average total profit on that sale is .20 cents. If that's what they're saying, then compare that to the last time I went to a gas station, when I put 18 gallons in my Jeep. The oil company made about $1.44 on that sale. I rarely put in less than 10 or 15 gallons at a time, so they're making about a buck per sale from me, on average. But even that isn't really a valid comparison, because I don't buy prescriptions nearly as often as I buy gas (thank God for that!). If we're going to compare the two, let's look at profit percentage. How much of what they take in per year goes to cover costs, and how much is profit? Me, I have no clue on that.



Reply With Quote