This seems like an absolute perversion of capitalism where on one side "free" markets allow for such prices and on the other side the government is giving tax money to those same companies.
Again we seem to have a trickle up economy. This can't go on forever.
Fossil fuel subsidies are largely a myth. Don't believe me? Look at how the IMF defines "subsidy": https://www.imf.org/-/media/Files/Publications/WP/2021/Engli...
> Globally, fossil fuel subsidies were $5.9 trillion in 2020 or about 6.8 percent of GDP and are expected to rise to 7.4 percent of GDP in 2025. Just 8 percent of the 2020 subsidy reflects undercharging for supply costs (explicit subsidies) and 92 percent for undercharging for environmental costs and foregone consumption taxes (implicit subsidies). Efficient fuel pricing in 2025
A normal person would construe "subsidy" to mean a cash transfer from one party to another, not some difference between the price actually paid and what you think it should have been, based on some generous externalitites-based estimate. Even the IMF's definition of "explicit subsidy" falls far short of what we commonly construe "subsidy" to mean. I've seen things like LIFO (which firms in other industries can use as well) as a supposed fossil fuel subsidy that needs to be eliminated.
As their "record" profits? They are nowhere near as profitable in absolute or relative terms to FAANG. Go compare their financial statements (they're mostly publicly traded) if you don't believe me.
And tax breaks, and royalty breaks, and exemptions, etc.
any discount or accordance offered to provide an incentive toward particular courses of action a person or organization desires.
>This seems like an absolute perversion of capitalism where on one side "free" markets allow for such prices and on the other side the government is giving tax money to those same companies.
agreed. this is a supply-side problem. it can't be solved by throwing more money on the demand side.
Mostly no. They're doing things like giving some/all people a one-off €300 payment to help with increasing costs. Some governments are also reducing the taxes on fuels. As far as I know, no western government directly subsidizes fuels to consumers.
You are criticizing capitalism for the sins of socialists. Capitalists never advocate for subsidies.
The fact that the some European governments decided to subsidize gasoline is clear socialist move. It was not spurred by the oil lobby. Maybe capitalism has problems, but this is not one of them. This is a socialism problem.
Your claim
> Capitalists never advocate for subsidies.
was very broad and absolute, going beyond any particular industry or even the present day. I'm really not sure but maybe you meant something like "advocating for subsidies is not a capitalist thing to do." In any case I'm not personally interested in whether there is a "capitalism problem" or "socialism problem" going on.