McCain On Oil -- Replaying

Although the GOP presidential candidate didn't address the question of raising taxes on oil companies, he said the companies "absolutely" should return some profits to consumers. "And they should be embarking on research and development that will pay off in reducing our dependence on foreign oil," he said.

"The point is, oil companies have got to be more participatory in alternate energy, in sharing their profits in a variety of ways, and there is very strong and justifiable emotion about their profits," McCain said.

The issue of oil company profits came up this week in the Senate, where Republicans stopped the Democrats from imposing a tax on windfall profits and taking away billions of dollars in tax breaks in response to the $4-a-gallon price of gas.

In the past McCain has indicated he would consider such a tax proposal, saying he didn't want to see companies making "obscene profits" that distort the market.

I just don't get this -- what is McCain trying to do? If he is trying to be an Obama, "Me Too," guy, well that didn't work too well for Hillary.

The problem is not the oil companies -- it is the government!

DKK

Associated Press -- McCain says gas prices won't drop and could rise

Update:

After having thought a little more about this I am even more confused. While I have long thought John McCain's default reaction was to have government resolve issues, this paragraph is really shocking:

"The point is, oil companies have got to be more participatory in alternate energy, in sharing their profits in a variety of ways, and there is very strong and justifiable emotion about their profits," McCain said.

Every thing he said here is just wrong:

• It is not government's purpose to tell companies what to sell. If an oil company wants to sell oil and only oil they have that right. As a matter of fact if they want to explore for and sell chocolate frosting and ONLY chocolate frosting that is perfectly fine and their right. They do something and they do it well, if they want to diversify that is their decision.
  
• They have no responsibility to, "share their profits," with anyone. They can distribute their profits to their shareholders but they could be held legally liable for, "sharing," their profits with anyone else if it diminishes the value of the company and it's stock. In addition they are precluded from altering their pricing structure as I pointed out here.(That doesn't preclude purchasing good will via charitable gifts or a foundation as part of their fiduciary responsibility and as a business investment that doesn't negatively affect the company's value.)
  
• Of course people are emotional about GAS prices, that is their right, but it is completely inaccurate to suggest that any person is justified in resenting a company's profits unless those profits were gained in an illegal manner. This is just not correct.
  

DKK