FTA: The 36,000 jobs specifically created to drill for oil and natural gas, refine petroleum or coal products, or for pipeline operation or in gas stations, came in well below "direct hiring" in other industries, which don't enjoy the same tax breaks the Obama administration has been fighting to end for Big Oil.

All that needs to be said. And at the same time how many jobs are lost because of the burden of high energy prices?

There's no doubt that Big Oil is a big employer. We're all aware of the situation in Williston, ND, and that's just one obvious (albeit isolated) example. If fossil fuels went away suddenly tomorrow, it would be a huge blow to the economy and the employment rate. However, statistics like this: "The oil industry was one of the few recession-proof sectors, piling up $290 billion in profits over the last four years, according to Thomson Reuters." really don't tend to support your position that you need tax breaks. When your industry can accumulate record profits during a major economic downturn, perhaps your business is healthy enough for you to shut up and pay your damn taxes. Also, if you weren't able to create more jobs when you're profiting $10 million/hr., it's hard to believe that knocking a few percentage points off your tax rate is suddenly going to cause you start hiring people. I don't think we should be trying to tax or regulate oil companies out of business, but I also think that the industry is mature, stable and profitable enough to no longer need government subsidies. When crude prices drop back down $40/bbl., maybe we can talk. I'll be holding my breath waiting for that to happen.

Those types of jobs do count alongside the Census worker jobs, subby.

DrewCurtisJr: FTA: The 36,000 jobs specifically created to drill for oil and natural gas, refine petroleum or coal products, or for pipeline operation or in gas stations, came in well below "direct hiring" in other industries, which don't enjoy the same tax breaks the Obama administration has been fighting to end for Big Oil.

And at the same time how many jobs are lost because of the burden of high energy prices?

This.

Not to mention how much it just drags the economy down overall.

erupt2001: And at the same time how many jobs are lost because of the burden of high energy prices?

This.

ENERGY prices aren't high.

The prices for things made out of _liquid_ petroleum is high.

At the moment, the prices for gaseous hydrocarbons is incredibly low.

I'll give a simple back of the envelope example:

Imagine the amount of water you could bring to a boil using the heat generated from burning a barrel of oil that cost you US$100 to buy.

To boil the same amount of water using natural gas bought in the same open market place would cost you less than US$17.00 --

Point being, the price you pay for electricity is based on the price of natural gas.

The increase in jobs is based on finding oil.
Not energy.

//caveat - You have to buy your natural gas in the US, as the price in Europe is far more expensive.

errr subby...the BP oil spill was in 2010....not 2011.

/worked the oil spill

But they have so much ad time. How could drilling anywhere be a bad thing?

Ackbar_GastricFluid: How could drilling anywhere be a bad thing?

abhorrent1: Ackbar_GastricFluid: How could drilling anywhere be a bad thing?

I was being facetious. Don't point that thing at me.

So, Obama has increased drilling, and oil industry employment has gone up,. but because he won't let a pipeline pass until the scheduled studies are completed (or drilling in Alaska) , he's personally responsible for high gas prices and the death of jobs in the oil industry.

Ooooooo......kay.

Making jobs for strippers!

Hoorah!

"The 36,000 jobs specifically created to drill for oil and natural gas, refine petroleum or coal products, or for pipeline operation or in gas stations"

Wow really, I guess new convenience store workers count as petroleum industry jobs. It's cute they claim 36,000 jobs are a lot.

For comparison, the solar power industry alone added 50,000 new jobs between 2009 & 2010. Link

Dubya's_Coke_Dealer: So, Obama has increased drilling, and oil industry employment has gone up,. but because he won't let a pipeline pass until the scheduled studies are completed (or drilling in Alaska) , he's personally responsible for high gas prices and the death of jobs in the oil industry.

Ooooooo......kay.

That's not really true. Oil drilling has increased during his administration, but it's in spite of his policies, not because of them. Drilling on federal land has decreased by 11%, while drilling on non-federal land like the Bakken has increased by 12 to 14 percent. Obama's policies have in no way had an effect on drilling in North Dakota other than to make it harder to get out of North Dakota - which has also made it less valuable. ND sweet crude is currently getting about 30% less per barrel than oil in areas where it's easy to take elsewhere.

mod3072: However, statistics like this: "The oil industry was one of the few recession-proof sectors, piling up $290 billion in profits over the last four years, according to Thomson Reuters." really don't tend to support your position that you need tax breaks. When your industry can accumulate record profits during a major economic downturn, perhaps your business is healthy enough for you to shut up and pay your damn taxes.

So basically you're saying there should be an exception carved out of Section 199 for all oil and gas companies? The small refiners too, or just the big vertically integrated ones? What about companies in other sectors like Apple, which also enjoy breaks under the exact same tax law?

What about LIHEAP? The federal government uses tax money to help impoverished house holds to buy home heating resulting in more energy being bought. Should that be done away with?

beer4breakfast: mod3072: However, statistics like this: "The oil industry was one of the few recession-proof sectors, piling up $290 billion in profits over the last four years, according to Thomson Reuters." really don't tend to support your position that you need tax breaks. When your industry can accumulate record profits during a major economic downturn, perhaps your business is healthy enough for you to shut up and pay your damn taxes.

So basically you're saying there should be an exception carved out of Section 199 for all oil and gas companies? The small refiners too, or just the big vertically integrated ones? What about companies in other sectors like Apple, which also enjoy breaks under the exact same tax law?

What about LIHEAP? The federal government uses tax money to help impoverished house holds to buy home heating resulting in more energy being bought. Should that be done away with?

I would be absolutely fine with eliminating special tax breaks for profitable companies like Apple. I only singled out oil companies because that is what the article is focused on. In a time when government budgets are in terrible shape, I don't think that massively profitable companies need to be enjoying special treatment and government subsidies. If Mom and Pop corp. can manage to survive without buying special tax deals from Uncle Sam, I think Exxon-Mobile and Apple can manage to pay their taxes and still keep the lights on.

As for LIHEAP, that's a strawman that has nothing to do with government subsidies to oil companies. Government programs that help poor people not freeze to death /= direct government subsidies to massively profitable companies. Yes, energy companies ultimately benefit from the increased business, but that's not the purpose of the program, and you know it. I'm against the massive subsidies we give to Big Ag as well, but that doesn't mean I think we should eliminate food stamps.

Do the con artists that spring up to leach off every new industry and government handout program count as new jobs?

mod3072: If Mom and Pop corp. can manage to survive without buying special tax deals from Uncle Sam, I think Exxon-Mobile and Apple can manage to pay their taxes and still keep the lights on.

Small companies do benefit from Section 199 which was put into effect to promote domestic production activities.

http://taxes.about.com/od/deductionsc redits/a/domesticproduct.htm

As for LIHEAP, that's a strawman that has nothing to do with government subsidies to oil companies. Government programs that help poor people not freeze to death /= direct government subsidies to massively profitable companies. Yes, energy companies ultimately benefit from the increased business, but that's not the purpose of the program, and you know it. I'm against the massive subsidies we give to Big Ag as well, but that doesn't mean I think we should eliminate food stamps.

No, LIHEAP is an actual subsidy, unlike Section 199:

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Article s/2011/03/02/LIHEAP-The-Lazarus- o f%20-the-Budget.aspx#page1
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/40/35/48 805150.pdf

My point is that people will come out and say they are for ending all oil company subsidies not realizing what they actually are.

I'm not shure whatchure talkin' about but theesh one-eyed shrimp are freakin' aweshum. SHLURP.