A question for Conservatives

[UGA12]

Not one of the outspoken conservatives has managed to respond to this thread. Either they don't know what to say, or don't think they should respond - I doubt all of them have NOT seen the title of this thread.

Interesting, or perhaps not. opcorn2

I dont think I fit into the group and am no authority on the topic when it comes to oil, but in general it seems only logical that subsidies and tax breaks would be best used for those generating revenue. Now the amounts of these subsidies and tax breaks should obviously be looked at so that those receiving them are not getting the lions share of the reward, but when it comes to subsidies, tax breaks, and other social programs there is a big difference to me in an investment and a gift with little to no ROI. Being a product of subsidies myself (college grants, H.O.P.E., tax credits) I dont see how anyone can argue the Government made a poor investment given that I will repay them 100 fold in my lifetime. I have not looked at any numbers but I am sure our government makes plenty of money off these companies. I assume(and correct me if I am wrong) that in the end this really isnt an economic issue from big oil/governments standpoint, but instead how that affects the rest of us.

 

[Trench]

I feel that i am a fiscal conservative. I am against tax hikes except when balancing budget is a priority as it is now. At the moment, I would like to raise taxes as needed, but also drastically reduce spending. I would undoubtedly like to cut subsidies and tax incentives at the corporate level. How the fuck else are we going to balance this budget?

IMO, the one industry it makes sense to spur on with tax breaks and fed subsidies is alternative energy. Like I have said before, we should cut military presence globally, and use a portion of those funds for alternative energy programs. We need to make alternative energy our space program of the 60's. I would also drill more now, since I realize it will take decades for alternative energy sources to make an impact.

I'll let you liberal vultures go to town on my thoughts now:0008

Excellent post. I agree with most of your thoughts here as well. The only point I would add is that new oil exploration and drilling could take decades to make any measurable impact as well.

As we outpace every other industrialized nation in the world, by a wide margin, in per capita energy consumption, it's our duty as a nation to develop new energy sources and be ahead of the curve instead of behind it. What a world this could be if every dollar spent on bombs and wars was spent on energy and infrastructure.

 

[Chadman]

Cie, I agree with virtually everything you posted. I don't think many liberals disagree with what you posted. I personally am for drilling and increasing our stocks of oil, with an eye on environmental responsibility when appropriate. I also think we HAVE to consider nuclear power for power purposes moving forward, with a big part of that spending for and allowing for safe (as safe as possible) disposal of waste.

I guess my biggest peeve on the tax thing and balancing the budget is cutting taxes on citizens when we are at war. And I've yet to see any evidence - real evidence that I can understand, at least - that these two wars are anything but elective. If they are elective, then they are very much debatable. I just do not see how our current engagements have anything much to do with national security, and that should be the ongoing focus of our military, IMO.

I understand putting money towards renewable energy, to a point. I hesitate to agree to putting money towards much of anything these days, and think our fiscal house is becoming a matter of national security. I was willing to give Obama until this year to start working on that, and I don't think the current budget does nearly enough to address it. I will hold him to task on that, personally, and criticize it when appropriate.

I still maintain we have to consider across the board cuts on everything until we cut down our debt and debt payments. If it's one thing I've learned in my personal finances, is how much money I have to spend on whatever I want when I'm not giving money away on interest payments on existing debt. When we currently pay a large amount of our tax collections servicing debt and not for other useful things, we have a fundamental problem. And until each of us in every state stops to consider the national ramifications of government spending on projects that benefit our little areas of the country, it won't work. We all pay for all of it.

The only way to address that, is to alter how we as a country spend the money we take in. Few agree on how to do it, but unless both sides are willing to face hard realities, we'll never get there, and I do think our standing in the world will be at risk.

 

[yyz]

The only way to address that, is to alter how we as a country spend the money we take in. Few agree on how to do it, but unless both sides are willing to face hard realities, we'll never get there, and I do think our standing in the world will be at risk.

It comes down to the, "NIMBY" sentiment. Everyone knows "we" need to stop spending money.......they just don't want to be the ones to stop.

Like this shit in Wisconsin right now? No one has asked Walker the simpleist question:

Are you going to balance a $3.5B budget SOLELY with cuts to government employees' wages/benefits?

He cannot possibly answer "yes" to that......but NO ONE wants to hear where the greatest amount of that money is going to come from!

He might stick to his game plan of not raising my taxes, but there is no way in hell my community can survive without doing it!

These people are SO stupid if they think they are not going to be touched by what this guy is doing right now.

But, somehow, I'm guessing he is hoping he can deflect the blame to the workers........and from what I have seen.......he should be able to pull that off!

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

How do you feel about cutting federal subsidies and tax breaks for the oil industry?

:0corn

Question to vague--give me specific subsidy and tax cuts and companies your speaking of--and we can make a decision once I see amount and rate of taxes they pay.

Now your turn--

Do you feel lack of values is cause of increasing
illegitimacy and welfare in U.S. if not what do feel is cause.

:0corn

 

[Duff Miver]

Question to vague--give me specific subsidy and tax cuts and companies your speaking of--and we can make a decision once I see amount and rate of taxes they pay.

Now your turn--

Do you feel lack of values is cause of increasing
illegitimacy and welfare in U.S. if not what do feel is cause.

:0corn

Increasing welfare? WTF tree are you barking up, doggie?

:nono:

Increasing illegitimate births? Well, that's a whitey problem, isn't it?:facepalm:

LMAO at your ignorance, doggie. You must be a redneck hillbilly, eh?:mj07:

 

[Mags]

Increasing welfare? WTF tree are you barking up, doggie?

:nono:

Increasing illegitimate births? Well, that's a whitey problem, isn't it?:facepalm:

LMAO at your ignorance, doggie. You must be a redneck hillbilly, eh?:mj07:

Now this is interesting Duff..... DTB said "lack of family values"... but I didn't see anything in DTB's comment that referred to a racial element.

However, your response, with a graph split between white and black, was certainly shown to imply that he was talking about blacks specifically. But his comment doesn't even come close to saying so.You guys are always giving DTB a hard time about being racist - yet it seems that you, Duffy, are the one that tries to inject race into every argument. Why?

FYI - it seems to be, a 10+% overall illegitimate birthrate goes a long way to explaining the issues our country faces today. It appears this has been going on a long time, which helps explain our declining middle class. These kids, in many cases, have little chance and are destined to a life of poverty. This isn't the system's fault - it is a societal issue. And YES, I'm talking about the combined illegitimate rates of birth - black and white alike. It wasn't like this in the "leave it to Beaver days" - and it seems the middle class was doing much better back then, weren't they?

Isn't it possible that this is the reason that the middle class is doing so poorly, rather than the lack of union strength?

Now, how about finding a way to solve the illegitimate baby problem - so kids can grow up with 2 parents more often, with the love and support at home to be able to succeed? If you can solve THAT problem, the rest of the issues will likely go away. AND you'd probably win a Nobel Peace Prize.

 

[Duff Miver]

Now this is interesting Duff..... DTB said "lack of family values"... but I didn't see anything in DTB's comment that referred to a racial element.

However, your response, with a graph split between white and black, was certainly shown to imply that he was talking about blacks specifically. But his comment doesn't even come close to saying so.You guys are always giving DTB a hard time about being racist - yet it seems that you, Duffy, are the one that tries to inject race into every argument. Why?

FYI - it seems to be, a 10+% overall illegitimate birthrate goes a long way to explaining the issues our country faces today. It appears this has been going on a long time, which helps explain our declining middle class. These kids, in many cases, have little chance and are destined to a life of poverty. This isn't the system's fault - it is a societal issue. And YES, I'm talking about the combined illegitimate rates of birth - black and white alike. It wasn't like this in the "leave it to Beaver days" - and it seems the middle class was doing much better back then, weren't they?

Isn't it possible that this is the reason that the middle class is doing so poorly, rather than the lack of union strength?

Now, how about finding a way to solve the illegitimate baby problem - so kids can grow up with 2 parents more often, with the love and support at home to be able to succeed? If you can solve THAT problem, the rest of the issues will likely go away. AND you'd probably win a Nobel Peace Prize.

WTF are you talking about 10%? Try using facts. The unwed mother birth rate is 40%.

* Percent of all births to unmarried women: 41%

Source: Births: Final Data for 2008, table C

And linking that to the decline of the middle class is preposterous.

The middle class is declining because more and more tax burden is shifted from the very rich to the middle class. That is a fact.

If you and doggie ever want to have a discussion based on fact, do let me know.

 

[Mags]

WTF are you talking about 10%? Try using facts. The unwed mother birth rate is 40%.

* Percent of all births to unmarried women: 41%

Source: Births: Final Data for 2008, table C

And linking that to the decline of the middle class is preposterous.

The middle class is declining because more and more tax burden is shifted from the very rich to the middle class. That is a fact.

If you and doggie ever want to have a discussion based on fact, do let me know.

Duffy - I was adding up the birth rates you showed in the graph above - knowing that it did not include all races - which is why I said 10+%....

But don't kid yourself - this is a big issue in why the middle class is doing so poorly. Many kids are growing up uneducated - and there are multiple reasons for this of course, but the lack of strong family environment is the leading one in my opinion.

Given that we've exported many of the non professional jobs out of the US, there aren't many jobs left for these kids. Our economy has shifted from making things to a service sector - and the fact that are kids overall are getting "dumber" is just making the problem worse.

BUT, you didn't address the question - why did you take DTB's general comment and turn it into a racial issue with your charts? Why inject race? Or is this something that is required for liberal discussion?

I'd love to see "middle class" income compared against illegitimate birth rates in our country over the last 50 years.... Don't know for sure, but I'll bet you'll see those trend lines move uniformly in the opposite direction.....

 

[Duff Miver]

in my opinion.

I'm sure you know that opinions are like assholes - everybody has one.

Do let me know when you're prepared to have a discussion based on facts.

 

[Duff Miver]

Here you go, Maggot, some facts. How does this jibe with your opinion that education in the USA is declining?

In case you can't guess, I'm laughing at your opinion based ignorance.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

Duffy - I was adding up the birth rates you showed in the graph above - knowing that it did not include all races - which is why I said 10+%....

But don't kid yourself - this is a big issue in why the middle class is doing so poorly. Many kids are growing up uneducated - and there are multiple reasons for this of course, but the lack of strong family environment is the leading one in my opinion.

Given that we've exported many of the non professional jobs out of the US, there aren't many jobs left for these kids. Our economy has shifted from making things to a service sector - and the fact that are kids overall are getting "dumber" is just making the problem worse.

BUT, you didn't address the question - why did you take DTB's general comment and turn it into a racial issue with your charts? Why inject race? Or is this something that is required for liberal discussion?

I'd love to see "middle class" income compared against illegitimate birth rates in our country over the last 50 years.... Don't know for sure, but I'll bet you'll see those trend lines move uniformly in the opposite direction.....

Thats in the Troll operations manual--redirect when answer is obvious.

See he's using his Huffers graphs again-- bureau of statistics has stats on illegitimacy-crime-drop out rates --and increased spending on welfare--easy place to find the #'s if one wants to.

--I'm trying to ignore our forum troll brothers who no one can verify who or what they are--I'd have thought muffins would have changed name by now after he/she/it been caught with drawers down so often.

Was tempted to ask how that Volvo worked in the hood on those family tradition excursions--and on the mothers taxes--if pic he posted of what he calls SO was correct --that would make mom about 110.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

Question to vague--give me specific subsidy and tax cuts and companies your speaking of--and we can make a decision once I see amount and rate of taxes they pay.

Now your turn--

Do you feel lack of values is cause of increasing
illegitimacy and welfare in U.S. if not what do feel is cause.

:0corn

While I'm waiting for clarification on subsidies -I can answer the tax question now. I definately believe they need bigger tax breaks to come within parity of others.

My reason are based on these facts--
P.S. Note what gumby's boy GE (NBC)

http://finance.yahoo.com/taxes/article/109244/what-the-top-us-companies-pay-in-taxes
What the Top U.S. Companies Pay in Taxes

<!--Yahoo! Finance evergreen article module--><CITE>by Christopher Helman
Friday, April 2, 2010</CITE>






As you work on your taxes this month, here's something to raise your hackles: Some of the world's biggest, most profitable corporations enjoy a far lower tax rate than you do -- that is, if they pay taxes at all.

The most egregious example is General Electric (NYSE: GE - News). Last year the conglomerate generated $10.3 billion in pretax income, but ended up owing nothing to Uncle Sam. In fact, it recorded a tax benefit of $1.1 billion.
Avoiding taxes is nothing new for General Electric. In 2008 its effective tax rate was 5.3%; in 2007 it was 15%. The marginal U.S. corporate rate is 35%.

Mind you, not all global megacorps enjoy such low tax rates. Try to muster some pity for Big Oil. ExxonMobil (NYSE: XOM - News) paid more income taxes than any other U.S. company last year, some $15 billion, or 47% of pretax earnings. Exxon's peers Chevron (NYSE: CVX - News) and ConocoPhillips (NYSE: COP - News) likewise paid out more than half their earnings in income taxes. The oil companies are oddities among the multinationals because many of the oil-rich countries where they do business levy even higher taxes than the U.S.
+++++++++++++++++++++

--and thats the rest of the story--good day :0008


P.S. would have commented sooner but with wool @ 1.63 cent a lb --I thought I'd wait and let em all in.:SIB

 

[Chadman]

Question to vague--give me specific subsidy and tax cuts and companies your speaking of--and we can make a decision once I see amount and rate of taxes they pay.

Now your turn--

Do you feel lack of values is cause of increasing
illegitimacy and welfare in U.S. if not what do feel is cause.

From an article speaking to this:

Mr. Obama specifically proposes to eliminate roughly $4 billion a year in more than a half-dozen tax exemptions for oil and gas companies and an additional $200 million a year in preferences for coal. The tax breaks for oil have a long history ? the so-called percentage depletion allowance for oil and natural gas wells dates to the 1920s ? and have withstood repeated efforts to kill them.

The president proposed a global end to such subsidies at the Group of 20 meeting in 2009, and while most nations endorsed the idea in theory, little has been done. And Mr. Obama will have a tough fight trying to get even these relatively modest proposals enacted over the objections of the oil and coal industries, who argue that such tax treatment is necessary to keep drillers drilling and miners mining.
----------------------------

My point would be, how can anyone espouse the value of free market capitalism and less government intervention and spending less to balance a budget, and then support continuing subsidies to big oil and energy private corporations?

To your question, which I have no idea what it has to do with mine other than to change the subject...

I think THAT is a very vague question, but can try to answer. Not knowing WHAT values you mean (but I can assume what you're getting at), I don't really know. I would always think a deterioration of family and parental values would be a bad thing for the country, and probably would contribute to illegitimacy and welfare. I also think we see a deterioration of corporate and family values at exceedingly high levels, in our legislators, our leaders, which can do irreparable damage to our society.

Hope this helps. :0008

 

[Duff Miver]

Thats in the Troll operations manual--redirect when answer is obvious.

See he's using his Huffers graphs again-- bureau of statistics has stats on illegitimacy-crime-drop out rates --and increased spending on welfare--easy place to find the #'s if one wants to.

--I'm trying to ignore our forum troll brothers who no one can verify who or what they are--I'd have thought muffins would have changed name by now after he/she/it been caught with drawers down so often.

Was tempted to ask how that Volvo worked in the hood on those family tradition excursions--and on the mothers taxes--if pic he posted of what he calls SO was correct --that would make mom about 110.

Huffers graph? Can you read even simple words doggie-dogshit? That's a US Dept of Labor graph.

I give sources for every stat I post, and I use the best available, usually US Govt, and unlike you and Maggot who use your own touchy-feely guesses about the truth.

Volvo? Yep, you bet. A T-5 Turbo which will blow your Bubba F-150 into the weeds, and will still be running strong when that F-150 is being melted into Budweiser cans.

Nope, Mom isn't 110, but thanks for insulting a fine woman who makes your Mama look like the Redneck POS she birthed.

And as to my SO, when are we going to see the papers on that dark-skinned SO of yours? She looks like a wetback to me. Does she press 2 for Espanol?

At least I don't take my drawers down for a brown-eye fucking by every Scott Walker Teabagger...as you do.

 

[Trench]

Was tempted to ask how that Volvo worked in the hood on those family tradition excursions--and on the mothers taxes--if pic he posted of what he calls SO was correct --that would make mom about 110.

You're a real class act, Dogs.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

From an article speaking to this:

Mr. Obama specifically proposes to eliminate roughly $4 billion a year in more than a half-dozen tax exemptions for oil and gas companies and an additional $200 million a year in preferences for coal. The tax breaks for oil have a long history ? the so-called percentage depletion allowance for oil and natural gas wells dates to the 1920s ? and have withstood repeated efforts to kill them.

The president proposed a global end to such subsidies at the Group of 20 meeting in 2009, and while most nations endorsed the idea in theory, little has been done. And Mr. Obama will have a tough fight trying to get even these relatively modest proposals enacted over the objections of the oil and coal industries, who argue that such tax treatment is necessary to keep drillers drilling and miners mining.
----------------------------

My point would be, how can anyone espouse the value of free market capitalism and less government intervention and spending less to balance a budget, and then support continuing subsidies to big oil and energy private corporations?

To your question, which I have no idea what it has to do with mine other than to change the subject...

I think THAT is a very vague question, but can try to answer. Not knowing WHAT values you mean (but I can assume what you're getting at), I don't really know. I would always think a deterioration of family and parental values would be a bad thing for the country, and probably would contribute to illegitimacy and welfare. I also think we see a deterioration of corporate and family values at exceedingly high levels, in our legislators, our leaders, which can do irreparable damage to our society.

Hope this helps. :0008

Drive by media had you and bulk of posters duped into believing oil companies were getting over like fat rats and facts proved just the "extreme" opposite.

We live-we learn or we can :00x7

Putting things in perspective--

States rights is solution-so each side can live with their own consequences.

We'll give all these high tax revenue/job producing orgs that liberals like to villianize a home -

-and cut welfare benefits to one dependent max so they can move to your states for those better benefits--Hell-you may want to even give them collective bargaining rights.

Things would be so simple if each was forced to live on their own merits and convictions.

--question for today
Who makes more on gal of gas the gov or oil companies?

 

[Mags]

Here you go, Maggot, some facts. How does this jibe with your opinion that education in the USA is declining?

In case you can't guess, I'm laughing at your opinion based ignorance.

Graph means nothing. Just cuz kids go to school, doesn't make them smarter necessarily.

Jeez, I look at the kids that "graduate" from MPS in Milwaukee.. .most of them can't even spell "skool"....

Standards are dumbed down from what they used to be. Kids don't study anymore.

I'll take an average kid from the 70's who graduated HS and compare him to one today, and I'll bet the 70's kid has a higher IQ.

In earlier times, only kids that were good students went to college. Now, it seems everyone does - whether they are qualified or not.

 

[Duff Miver]

and I'll bet the 70's kid has a higher IQ.

Some more of your faith-based facts, Maggot?

Where's the proof?

 

[Lumi]

Leave the F-150's and F-250's out of it please :0008

My trucks serve their purpose :toast: