It has come to mind that most people are greedy, while our Lord Jesus, were not greedy, even to sacrifice his blood on the cross of calvary and pray to our father in Heaven to forgive us, not minding the turture and suffer he was passing at the time.

Many has lots to eat and can have enough to keep to their great grand children, but find it difficult, to look at the immediate sufferings of the less privilage ones, lot of people cannot afford a plate of food in a day, while many children are on the road hawking all types things to keep a leaving, without education, tomorrow of these children are unknown, as many will become criminals etc.

It’s time that we share little we have to the poor, we that has concerns cried daily when you see a child ought be in school, hawking and selling all kind of things at the express road, no mining the incoming cars, lories etc. Let see to our tomorrow - today, God bless you and you think over and kill the spirit of greednies, like to hear from you, I remain.

James okon Igwo

Are we still on the CNN link that HP provided? I just want to be sure. Can you link me? I want to be on the same page that you are on.

From cnn.com…

At a Senate hearing last week on record oil profits, Democratic Sen. Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey asked five executives, “Did your company or any representatives in your companies participate in Vice President Cheney’s energy force in 2001?”

Each executive answered the question in the negative.

However, The Washington Post reported Wednesday that a White House document showed some companies did in fact meet with the task force. It said the document showed officials from Exxon Mobil Corp. (Research), Conoco (Research), Shell Oil Co. and BP America Inc., whose executives testified at last week’s Senate hearing, met with Cheney aides.

A Chevron (Research) official also testified at the Senate hearing, but the company was not named in the White House document.

However, the Government Accountability Office has found that Chevron was one of several companies that gave recommendations to the task force, the Post reported.

In a letter to the attorney general, Lautenberg demanded an investigation, saying the new information “casts doubt on the veracity of some of these (executives’) statements.”

Only a percentage of meals, Michael, and the entertainment is arguable. If one is conducting business during lunch or dinner, it ought to be deducted. Many business owners work many hours and conduct business during lunch and/or dinner.

Michael wrote: “Also not eveyrone has the oportunity to set aside money ti invest ins stocks. Far too many Americans live paycheck to paycheck to inverst in the market.”

Yes, and on that same note, far too many Americans choose to go to movies and buy cable and go to bars. Far too many Americans do not make the sacrifices as well. Many American’s make sacrifices albeit, partying, movies, expensive clothing, BMW’s and so forth to set that money aside to start a business.

I might believe you, Michael, however, I know many Mexican and Asian immigrants who shack up together to save a small pile of cash to start their own restaurants. The opportunity is out there, however, many don’t like to live with a dozen other people crammed into a house to make those sacrifices.

Michael wrote: “All businesses have risks, that is the nature of business in itself. brought up a good point on buying fule efficient cars. Not all people can afford to buy a new car. I have a 6 year old VW fully paid off and I can not afford to make another car payment. Wouldn’t it be nice to get a tax break to buy a hybrid.”

Understand….however I heard VW’s are good on gas anyway. Isn’t the VW fuel efficient?

Michael wrote: “companies making record profits do not need more tax breaks. In struggling industries with risks of layoffs like manufacturing companies, I agree with getting a break, but not in this case. This is corporate welfare. It is enabling profitable companies to pocket more money. ”

I do believe that petro companies do need breathers so that the shareholders/directors and owners can feel comfortable in their ‘risk taking’ business decisions to pass on the savings to us, the consumer.

Again, I’m not complaining about the hearing due to public outcry, I’m complaining about the many lazy American’s who don’t understand business.

I disagree with you. Businesses get far more tax breaks than individuals do. Businesses get to deduct all sorts of costs taht individuals don’t get to like Dividends received aportion of meals and entertaining etc. Aggressive depreciation schedules etc.

Also not eveyrone has the oportunity to set aside money ti invest ins stocks. Far too many Americans live paycheck to paycheck to inverst in the market.

All businesses have risks, that is the nature of business in itself. brought up a good point on buying fule efficient cars. Not all people can afford to buy a new car. I have a 6 year old VW fully paid off and I can not afford to make another car payment. Wouldn’t it be nice to get a tax break to buy a hybrid.

companies making record profits do not need more tax breaks. In struggling industries with risks of layoffs like manufacturing companies, I agree with getting a break, but not in this case. This is corporate welfare. It is enabling profitable companies to pocket more money.

I’m sorry Michael, but I agree with that. There is a LOT of risk right now in the petro industry…..people invest their monies and take risks. I think the petro companies need breaks (tax breaks) every now and then in light of what’s going on in the world don’t you think?

Everyone has the opportunity to set aside monies to invest in businesses/corporations and what have you, but many don’t (especially now in light of what occurred on 9-11) because many think it to be too great of a risk.

I really believe that businesses do not get enough tax benefits for what we sacrifice and what we risk. It’s gambling, Michael….business is a gamble and it is what makes the world go around. Make it harder on business and watch us look like the Cuban economy.

Anyway………..back on topic

In light of the world situations……. I think petro companies should be entitled to a bit of a ‘breather’. Let them get comfortable so that they can pass on the savings to us….the consumer.

I don’t particularly like paying over $2.00 per gallon and I hear many, many individuals screaming and yelling about this. The prices have dropped under $2.00 here in the midwest and hopefully they will continue to drop a little bit more.

In the meantime, consumers need to take proactive steps and buy energy efficient cars and so forth to send a message to these petro CEO’s.

On a fair note, and I’m sure HP disagrees with me, I think it’s ok for investigations to be conducted to keep business owners/shareholders aware that inappropriate behavior may land them in a world of sorrow.

I think that’s what makes our democractic country better than most other countries…..public outcry to the officials may call for hearings. I like this. And if the officials don’t have anything to hide, well then they shouldn’t be upset that the hearings are due to public outcry.

However, the senators who were venomous towards the CEO’s is uncalled for and they (senators) who were being ill-willed IS uncalled for and overly dramatic. Que no?

Here is the link

http://money.cnn.com/2005/11/14/news/fortune500/oil_taxes/