article here
The US gov buys Kuwaiti oil from Halliburton in Iraq for 2-1/2 times what it costs other (Iraqi) companies to import it. Sounds like they're undercutting the Iraqi companies too, but the article isn't clear about that.
The US gov buys Kuwaiti oil from Halliburton in Iraq for 2-1/2 times what it costs other (Iraqi) companies to import it. Sounds like they're undercutting the Iraqi companies too, but the article isn't clear about that.
no subject
Date: 2003-10-30 06:18 pm (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 2003-10-30 09:19 pm (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 2003-10-31 12:24 am (UTC)From:Not quite. They've taxed the industry to the hilt at the border even when the regularity bodies (WTO) have indicated there isn't the proof or basis to do such. American companies who wish to purchase the product have even complained the Government but, it's fallen on deaf ears. The Government is practising protectionism even if it hurts the people who need the product. It protects the big forest companies but, hurts the consumers.
I was thinking of the end user costs and that it would hurt the companies or individuals purchasing the product because they end up having to purchase locally at an inflated price. Over inflated prices.
Half of the scenario you were describing because somebody (taxpayer) ends up footing the bill for political strategy. If your government is selling it at a loss, they'll have to pick up the costs somewhere. As well, what's the reason for your government doing what it's doing? Protectionism?
Much too deep of a topic for this late at night. Hope I've made sense. Must sleep...lol