1. Hello,


    New users on the forum won't be able to send PM untill certain criteria are met (you need to have at least 6 posts in any sub forum).

    One more important message - Do not answer to people pretending to be from xnxx team or a member of the staff. If the email is not from forum@xnxx.com or the message on the forum is not from StanleyOG it's not an admin or member of the staff. Please be carefull who you give your information to.


    Best regards,

    StanleyOG.

    Dismiss Notice
  2. Hello,


    You can now get verified on forum.

    The way it's gonna work is that you can send me a PM with a verification picture. The picture has to contain you and forum name on piece of paper or on your body and your username or my username instead of the website name, if you prefer that.

    I need to be able to recognize you in that picture. You need to have some pictures of your self in your gallery so I can compare that picture.

    Please note that verification is completely optional and it won't give you any extra features or access. You will have a check mark (as I have now, if you want to look) and verification will only mean that you are who you say you are.

    You may not use a fake pictures for verification. If you try to verify your account with a fake picture or someone else picture, or just spam me with fake pictures, you will get Banned!

    The pictures that you will send me for verification won't be public


    Best regards,

    StanleyOG.

    Dismiss Notice
  1. anon_de_plume

    anon_de_plume Porn Star

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    50,169
    LOL! So now talking directly about the subject is diversion...

    You too funny space alien!
     
    1. View previous comments...
    2. anon_de_plume
      You don't like opinions. You just claim the other person is diverting and shout "dismissed"...

      But whatever, dude!
       
      anon_de_plume, Dec 11, 2022
      stumbler likes this.
    3. shootersa
      Shooter will point out diversion attempts as you try them. Your temper tantrums are fun to watch.
       
      shootersa, Dec 11, 2022
    4. anon_de_plume
      Except you're almost always "claiming" it's a diversion when is really something you'd rather just ignore. Kind of like all those questions you don't answer.
       
      anon_de_plume, Dec 11, 2022
      stumbler likes this.
    5. shootersa
      No, it really is a diversion. Its why shooter points it out.
       
      shootersa, Dec 11, 2022
    6. anon_de_plume
      In your opinion.
       
      anon_de_plume, Dec 11, 2022
      stumbler likes this.
  2. stumbler

    stumbler Porn Star

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    106,324
    There is no sense it addressing the lies again that the US IS not e nnergy independent. I think I have already done that about a dozen times. And a 30 second Google search is all it takes to prove it.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. shootersa

    shootersa Frisky Feline

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Messages:
    85,897
  4. stumbler

    stumbler Porn Star

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    106,324
    Always click on the links. And never believe right wing false propaganda blogs.


    Energy
    U.S. Energy Independence Has Grown

    Oct 1, 2022,06:00am EDT

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2022/10/01/us-energy-independence-has-grown/?sh=1fde395b657e



    Examining U.S. ‘Energy Independence’ Claims
    Posted on March 9, 2022


    https://www.factcheck.org/2022/03/examining-u-s-energy-independence-claims/


    Updated Feb 19, 2022 - Economy & Business
    The U.S. is now energy independent
    https://www.axios.com/2022/02/17/us-energy-independent-petroleum
     
  5. stumbler

    stumbler Porn Star

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    106,324

    Just to update the gas station on the south side appears to have won the gas war. Their price is now $2.19 per gallon and no one else is willing to dive that low. But they may have to. I reward the station with the lowest price because in a small way its a way to stick the other stations with their overpriced inventory. But from what I saw yesterday everyone in town must have been thinking the same thing beaus the lines were so long they almost went into the streets. And that is at a station I think has close to 20 pumps.

    Also oil trued to rally earlier this week but is now back in the low $70's per barrel. And that is because US oil inventories came in much higher than predicted.


    But even though the price of oil and gas is gong down its not enough and fast enough for President Biden and he is keeping the heat on the.



    'They ain't seen nothing yet': President Biden has accused oil companies of 'war profiteering' and threatened them with a new windfall tax. Will it help with gas prices?

    Sigrid Forberg
    Fri, December 16, 2022 at 5:00 AM MST


    [​IMG]
    'They ain't seen nothing yet': President Biden has accused oil companies of 'war profiteering' and threatened them with a new windfall tax. Will it help with gas prices?
    In the wake of scorching inflation and Russia’s war in Ukraine, major gas companies like Chevron and Exxon Mobil are raking in profits. And it’s got President Joe Biden hot under the collar.

    [​IMG]
    In November, days before the midterm elections, Biden launched an attack on the industry, calling their record profits "a windfall of war," not the result of anything "new or innovative."

    And now, his international energy envoy is calling on oil companies to think of American consumers.

    “I think that the idea that financiers would tell companies in the United States not to increase production and to buy back shares and increase dividends when the profits are at all-time highs is outrageous,” Amos Hochstein told the Financial Times. “It is not only un-American, it is so unfair to the American public."


    "You want to pay dividends, pay dividends. You want to pay shareholders, pay shareholders. You want to get bonuses, do that, too. You could do all of that and still invest more. We are asking you to increase production and seize the moment.”

    With gas prices still elevated, and an expensive winter ahead, Biden says he’s ready to force these oil companies to act — but while his words for these companies may be strong, he may not have the power to back them up.

    Don’t miss
    Biden doesn’t mince his words
    Biden has been waging a battle with oil companies over the last few months, but he escalated it in November when he called on them to “act beyond their narrow self-interest,” to “invest in America by increasing production and refining capacity” on behalf of “their consumers, their community and their country.”

    And if they don’t? Biden warns they’re going to face “a higher tax on their excess profits and … higher restrictions.”

    The president didn’t elaborate on what those restrictions might be, but promised his administration would work with Congress to evaluate all the available options.

    “It’s time for these companies to stop war profiteering, meet their responsibilities in this country and give the American people a break,” Biden added.

    Oil companies fire back
    While gas has dropped from a record high of over $5/gallon in June, it’s still currently hovering around $3.21. And that, along with a dangerously low oil supply and a dwindling diesel stockpile is clearly weighing on Biden.

    Read more: The 10 best investing apps for 'once-in-a-generation' opportunities (even if you're a beginner)

    But oil companies argue they’re already contributing to the cause. Exxon Mobil’s CEO Darren Woods took a moment during the company’s third-quarter earnings call on Oct. 28 to address Biden. “There has been discussion in the U.S. about our industry returning some of our profits directly to the American people,” Woods said. “That’s exactly what we’re doing in the form of our quarterly dividend."

    The president didn’t take kindly to that, tweeting his response a few hours later: “Can’t believe I have to say this but giving profits to shareholders is not the same as bringing prices down for American families.”

    Any taxes would face an uphill battle
    Biden appears to be proposing a “windfall” tax to redistribute profits to American consumers still paying out the nose at the pump. But even with Biden’s backing, there’s no guarantee he’ll be able to pass a new corporate tax. For that, he’d need support from Congress and with a Senate divided in half between Republicans and Democrats, that seems unlikely.

    He does seem prepared to compromise, though. According to a report in Bloomberg, Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm addressed oil and gas executives in Washington on Wednesday at a meeting of the National Petroleum Council, an outside federal advisory group with members from Exxon Mobil Corp. and Royal Dutch Shell Plc.

    “We are eager to work with you,” Granholm said, adding that fossil fuels are likely to be around for a while.

    She also acknowledged the administration has "butted heads" with the industry, referring to it as the “elephant in the room." And with growing demand and a shortage of diesel in the Northeast, she says the administration is aware fossil fuel production will need to increase soon.

    Still, the president isn’t likely to back down entirely. In November, Exxon and Chevron, two of the country’s biggest oil companies, reported hefty profits for the fourth consecutive quarter. That same day, in a briefing from the White House, Biden pointed out that six of the largest companies “made $70 billion in profit” in just 90 days.

    Appalled that all that money was going back to their shareholders and executives, Biden issued a promise: “I’m going to keep harping on it. [These companies] talk about me picking on them, they ain’t seen nothing yet. I mean it. It outrages me.”

    https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/aint-seen-nothing-yet-president-171500112.html
     
  6. shootersa

    shootersa Frisky Feline

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Messages:
    85,897
    Figures never lie, but liars figure.
    The Trump administration was pro energy independant and took action to get the US to that point and keep us there.
    The Biden administration is anti fossil fuels and took misguided action to get us away from fossil fuels without having a viable alternative in place.

    a page of leftist yammer to prove a lie.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  7. stumbler

    stumbler Porn Star

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    106,324
    Biden administration to buy 3 million barrels of oil to replenish reserves
    [​IMG]
    Zack Budryk
    Fri, December 16, 2022 at 11:31 AM MST


    The Department of Energy will purchase 3 million barrels of oil to replace withdrawals from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) amid high energy prices, it announced Friday.

    The Biden administration presented the purchase, which follows a bidding process that began in October, as an opportunity to buy the oil at a fixed price and repurchase it for less than the average of $96 per barrel it sold for.

    “Relative to conventional purchase contracts that expose producers to volatile crude prices, this new approach, when used at scale, can give producers the assurance to make investments today, knowing that the price they receive when they sell to the SPR will be locked in place,” the Energy Department said in a statement. “Today’s notice will pilot this new approach by starting with a purchase of up to 3 million barrels of crude oil.”

    After oil prices soared earlier this year following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the Biden administration withdrew a record 180 million barrels from the SPR. The administration announced a plan in May to solicit bids to buy back about one-third of the barrels withdrawn.

    - ADVERTISEMENT -

    Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm said in the spring that the buyback process would be timed to decreased oil prices.

    “As we are thoughtful and methodical in the decision to drawdown from our emergency reserve, we must be similarly strategic in replenishing the supply so that it stands ready to deliver on its mission to provide relief when needed most,” Granholm said in May.

    The buyback to replenish the withdrawals is distinct from congressionally required SPR sales to raise revenues. The Energy Department has projected it will sell around 265 million barrels through those sales by fiscal 2031.

    Republicans have signaled the House Oversight and Reform Committee will scrutinize the SPR releases under the new GOP majority next year, with 13 Republican committee members in October requesting documents relating to the releases.

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/biden-administration-buy-3-million-183121225.html
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  8. shootersa

    shootersa Frisky Feline

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Messages:
    85,897
    Quick climate related question:
    So how much more environmental damage did selling our strategic oil to china so they could haul it away so we could buy more so it could be hauled here. As opposed to having US refineries buy our oil and refine it here for, you know, American needs?

    Asking for a friend......
     
    • Like Like x 2
  9. stumbler

    stumbler Porn Star

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    106,324
    Joe Biden made the oil trade of the year

    Tim Fernholz
    Mon, December 19, 2022 at 9:11 AM MST


    [​IMG]
    President Joe Biden speaks into a microphone, with the words "Plan to lower gas prices by at least $1 per gallon" projected behind him.

    It worked.

    Gas prices were a major story in 2022: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine roiled energy markets and some predicted the US dollar might be subsumed by a new, commodity-backed trade currency.

    Instead, it appears the US government made the oil trade of the year: Releasing 180 million barrels of crude from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve between March and the end of this year in an effort to blunt the effect of rising prices, the US government appears to have made about $4 billion, as prices have fallen dramatically over the course of the year.




    Selling when crude oil prices were high, the US captured billions in value. By one widely-used measure, the price of crude oil in Texas peaked at about $124 a barrel in March, and the average price during the SPR sales period was about $96; today that oil costs just $73 per barrel.

    These are paper profits, to be sure: The US is still aiming to refill the reserve, and prices may rise as it does so. On Dec. 16, the Department of Energy put out a request to purchase 3 million new barrels of crude, after releasing about 200 million barrels in 2022. There are currently about 382 million barrels still in reserve.

    Why did Biden release oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve?
    The use of the SPR helped the US weather geopolitical storms by moderating increases in energy prices driven by sanctions against Russia after it invaded Ukraine in February. A
    t the same time, the nations that coordinate as the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries plus other aligned countries (OPEC+) have curtailed production in an effort to protect the value of their fossil fuel resources by slowing the fall in prices.

    The SPR releases appeared to have a material effect on gas prices: After peaking in June at a national average of $4.80 a gallon, American gasoline prices have fallen back to $3.10. That’s higher than immediately before the pandemic but lower than average prices in the first half of the 2010s, before the widespread adoption of fracking turned the US into an oil-producing powerhouse.


    Whether you see OPEC’s October decision as an attempt to influence US domestic politics or not, the SPR has helped insulate both Americans and the rest of the world from high energy costs. While much has been made of the decision’s effects on US markets, the releases meant lower prices globally. Russian president Vladimir Putin was apparently confident he could use his country’s oil production as a weapon against Ukraine’s allies, but the arrival of winter (and the rising cost of heating) have yet to collapse their resolve. That’s in part thanks to the SPR releases and other efforts to increase energy supplies.

    The real trick is buying low
    Releasing oil when prices are high is a pretty straightforward tactic. Now, some economists and policy analysts want the SPR to use its market influence more broadly. Employ America has argued that the SPR should use futures contracts to put a floor on the price of crude oil, which would realize those profits but, more importantly, help achieve a stable level of production.

    Oil companies in the US were reluctant to invest in new drilling this year even as prices shot up; investors preferred them to spend free cash on stock buybacks after years of losses generated by over-production. Now, the DOE has said it will develop rules to buy oil futures at a price level of around $70. That could reassure oil companies that they won’t be undercut by OPEC if they invest in oil that is more costly to extract from the ground.

    Some environmentalists haven’t been thrilled about this idea, since all things being equal it will lead to more oil usage and more carbon dioxide emissions. Advocates adopt a kind of climate realpolitik, arguing that abundant supplies of fossil fuels are politically and economically necessary to transitioning to a carbon-free economy: Something has to power the production of renewable infrastructure and keep the economy humming until decarbonization. If energy prices weren’t stabilizing now, the Federal Reserve would likely be hiking interest rates faster, making a recession (and the human misery that entails) more likely.

    In the near term, oil watchers are focused on China’s decision to move away from its harsh anti-covid policies. Re-opening could lead to higher prices if demand from Chinese consumers and companies grows, but it’s difficult to predict how rising cases of the virus will affect their behavior.

    That’s one reason why those oil futures contracts make sense for the DOE: They can book their profits and give oil producers some guidance going forward. But if a recession does come next year, the price of oil may plunge even further, leaving the government looking a bit foolish. That may be a price worth paying if it helps increase energy supply, but that’s also why some people are skeptical about government agencies speculating like commodity traders.

    https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/joe-biden-made-oil-trade-161100302.html
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  10. shootersa

    shootersa Frisky Feline

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Messages:
    85,897
    $4 BILLION?
    How much has biden given away?
    $5 TRILLION?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. Bron Zeage

    Bron Zeage I am a river to my people

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2014
    Messages:
    13,658
    In my neighborhood, you can get 34 gallons of gas for one Trump NFT digital trading card.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. stumbler

    stumbler Porn Star

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    106,324
    'You're not the best at math': Gas prices expert mocks Lauren Boebert's attack on Biden

    Brad Reed
    December 20, 2022


    [​IMG]
    Lauren Boebert (Photo by Michael Reynolds for AFP)

    An expert on gas prices mocked Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) on Tuesday for launching a nonsensical attack on President Joe Biden's recent decision to restock the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

    A couple of days ago, Boebert attacked Biden for buying up 3 million oil barrels to restock the reserve after he sold off an estimated 180 million barrels earlier this year in an effort to lower spiking gas prices.

    "Trump stocked up our reserves at record-low prices," she wrote on Twitter. "Then, Biden emptied it out to get through the midterms. Now, he’s going to stock it back up at a MUCH higher price."

    But Patrick De Haan, a gas price tracker who in the past has been critical of Biden for not doing enough to boost gasoline supply, pointed out in response that the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is now buying back oil barrels at a significantly lower rate than what is sold them for earlier this year.

    IN OTHER NEWS: Here's how to overcome the 'serious First Amendment troubles' that would come with prosecuting Trump: experts

    "Average selling price $96 [at the time of the sales], including some sales close to $120, and the price today is $75," he wrote in response. "You're not the best at math."

    He also noted that the Strategic Petroleum Reserve saw a net decline in barrels during Trump's tenure, dropping from 695 million barrels in 2017 to 634 million by 2021.



    https://www.rawstory.com/lauren-boebert-2658990768/
     
  13. odi144

    odi144 Porn Star

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2021
    Messages:
    2,276
    Under $4 a gallon for the first time in years
     
    1. conroe4
      OH YEAH!!! Let's all sprain our arms patting ourselves on the back.

      none of this shit was necessary.
       
      conroe4, Dec 29, 2022
      odi144 likes this.
  14. silkythighs

    silkythighs Porn Star

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2019
    Messages:
    35,662
    Two gas stations near me now showing $2.89 most others Major chains are at $3,15
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. stumbler

    stumbler Porn Star

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    106,324
    We are still having a gas war where I live. The prices are all over the place. The lowest is $2.09 with the highest at $2.49.
     
  16. writerz01

    writerz01 A Gentleman.. But not always

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2014
    Messages:
    13,770
    I paid $3.55 this morning. Cheapest in quite a while. Now the refineries will supposedly close to do maintenance and the price will go back to $4.00 or more.
     
    1. odi144
      Try $7 or more.
       
      odi144, Dec 29, 2022
  17. shootersa

    shootersa Frisky Feline

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Messages:
    85,897
    So Shooter spent the last week in California.

    $5.79 in California
    $4.05 in Nevada
    $3.89 in Utah
    $2.89 in Colorado near I-70, $2.45 at our usual gas station.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. stumbler

    stumbler Porn Star

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    106,324
    Biden administration proposes approval for major Alaska drilling project
    by Rachel Frazin - 02/01/23 11:42 AM ET

    Share

    Tweet



    [​IMG]
    Getty Images
    The Biden administration took a step toward approving a controversial project that would lock in oil and gas drilling in Alaska over a 30-year period.

    The administration indicated it is likely to approve the Willow Project, a major ConocoPhillips endeavor that would produce up to 629 million total barrels of oil.


    The environmental impacts review released by the Interior Department on Wednesday said the project could result in 278,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide over the project’s 30-year lifespan. That’s the equivalent of driving 59,900 cars for a year.


    The latest in politics and policy. Direct to your inbox. Sign up for the Energy and Environment newsletter

    A prior draft review laid out a range of options for the project, but this step signals the department is proposing to approve the project. Final approval could be as soon as 30 days after this penultimate step.

    Under the final environmental review, the Bureau of Land Management selected an alternative that would include three oil well pads where drilling would occur. The department said the option it ultimately selected intends to “reduce the amount of surface infrastructure” for the project and lessen impacts on caribou and other wildlife.




    In a statement, the Interior Department said publication of the document and selected alternative “is not a decision about whether to approve the Willow Project.” It suggested its final decision could ultimately reject the project or defer some drill sites.

    “The Department has substantial concerns about the Willow project and the preferred alternative as presented in the final [supplemental environmental impact statement], including direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions and impacts to wildlife and Alaska Native subsistence,” the department said.

    Proposing to move ahead with the project has garnered both criticism and confusion from environmental advocates, who say the project locks in many more years of oil production when the world needs to switch to carbon-free fuel sources.


    “We’re talking about 2060 here,” said Jenny Rowland-Shea, director for public lands at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank, noting that the project is expected to take some time to come online.

    “That’s a long time for this to be in place at a time when scientists and the administration are urging that we need to be transitioning away from fossil fuels,” she added.

    Environmental advocates urged the administration to reverse course before issuing its final decision.


    “Biden will be remembered for what he did to tackle the climate crisis, and as things stand today, it’s not too late for him to step up and pull the plug on this carbon bomb,” Earthjustice attorney Jeremy Lieb, who has challenged the project in court, said in a statement.

    He called the project “drastically out of step with the Biden administration’s goals to slash climate pollution and transition to clean energy.”

    The administration’s move was not necessarily a surprise, as Biden administration lawyers in 2021 defended the Trump-era approval of the project. However, when Interior Secretary Deb Haaland was a member of Congress, she signed onto a letter that was critical of the project.


    “Now is not the time to be fast tracking permitting for a massive new oil development project,” said a 2020 letter signed by Haaland and four other members of Congress. The lawmakers also urged the federal government to not “open additional acreage to new oil and gas projects.”

    While the project was approved under the Trump administration in 2020, a court struck that down in 2021.

    Judge Sharon Gleason said at the time that the underlying environmental review for the project was inadequate, including the assessment of the project’s climate impacts. She axed the Trump administration’s approval of the project, and sent it back to the Biden administration for further study.


    ConocoPhillips said in a statement that it “welcomes” the administration’s proposal Wednesday.


    “We believe Willow will benefit local communities and enhance American energy security while producing oil in an environmentally and socially responsible manner,” Erec Isaacson, president of ConocoPhillips Alaska, said in the statement.

    Isaacson added the company is “ready to begin construction immediately” once a final decision is issued.

    https://thehill.com/policy/energy-e...s-approval-for-major-alaska-drilling-project/
     
  19. shavednhard

    shavednhard Porn Star

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2007
    Messages:
    1,294
    $4.99 for diesel in my area of Florida.
    Long rant cutting it short and tin foil hat time. The libs are pushing people like myself out of my truck and work. I average 21mpg in a truck that weighs 7k lbs. I can tow around 20k lbs worth of anything. My cost per job is going up to cover higher fuel cost, customers then have to find alternate ways to get what they need to save money, I'm now out of work and forced to get gov assistance to feed my family.
    This is exaggerated, but not to far off.
    Don't get me started on the minimum wage hike here...
     
    1. stumbler
      Why you poor poor pitiful me eternally wounded little snowflake victim. Go with EV. More towing power and far less expensive.
       
      stumbler, Feb 1, 2023
    2. shavednhard
      Oh yeah, EV is sooo known for long range and towing capability. That's why every hot shotter is using the new... what EV????
       
      shavednhard, Feb 1, 2023
      odi144 likes this.
    3. shootersa
      Hey stumbler, since you're so caring and concerned for your fellow man, perhaps you'd help shavedhard buy an Ev capable of hauling 20,000 LBS?

      What a wonderful hu.an being, stumbler is.
       
      shootersa, Feb 2, 2023
      shavednhard likes this.
  20. stumbler

    stumbler Porn Star

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    106,324
    White House blasts Exxon over historical $56 bln annual profit
    By Trevor Hunnicutt
    and Steve Holland


    WASHINGTON, Jan 31 (Reuters) - The White House on Tuesday expressed outrage on Tuesday at Exxon Mobil Corp's record net profit in 2022 of $56 billion, a historical high not just for the company but for the entire Western oil industry.

    Oil majors are expected to break their own annual records due to high prices and soaring demand, pushing their combined take to near $200 billion. The scale has brought renewed criticism of the oil industry and sparked calls for more countries to levy windfall profit taxes on the companies.



    A White House statement said Exxon's (XOM.N) profit margin was particularly galling as Americans paid record high prices at the pump. It criticized attempts by Republicans in the House of Representatives to push policies aimed at supporting the oil industry.

    "The latest earnings reports make clear that oil companies have everything they need, including record profits and thousands of unused but approved permits, to increase production, but they’re instead choosing to plow those profits into padding the pockets of executives and shareholders while House Republicans manufacture excuse after excuse to shield them from any accountability," the White House said.


    President Joe Biden has blasted oil companies and refiners for much of the last year for enjoying surging profits as gasoline prices soared. In June, he Biden wrote to executives of major oil refiners and complained they had cut back on production to pad profits, according to a copy of a letter seen by Reuters.

    Exxon's CFO Kathryn Mikells responded to growing criticism over the industry's windfall profits and suggested the answer is not increased taxes.


    "We look at the EU tax on the energy sector, and you know, it's just unlawful and bad policy trying to tax something, when what you actually need is for it to increase," Mikells said. "It has the opposite effect of what you're trying to achieve."


    https://www.reuters.com/business/white-house-outraged-by-exxons-record-profits-2023-01-31/