Pres Obama just called on congress to end oil subsidies

[Erand7899]

It does seem to be the American way to give tax breaks and such to those who need them the least.

You are aware that the five big oil companies are not the only ones exploring for and producing oil, right? Putting them out of business with a political stunt will really help the job situation.

 

[The Rabbi]

Heh... more specific than 'all of them'? How would I do that?

By specifying them? Or is that asking too much?

Well, I'm not sure what you're fishing for. Do you want a listing of all the tax incentives, exemptions, credits and subsidies currently on the books? I certainly can't provide you with anything like that.

I'd settle for the top two or three.

 

[The Rabbi]

I hope you didn't spend much time thinking of that thoughtful retort.

I was flabbergasted by the utter stupidity of your statement. It was visceral. Like coming on an elephant turd in a city park.

You find the truth to be stupid? most dumbshits do.

No, just your statement, which is far removed from truth.

 

[The Rabbi]

Democrats who voted against received about $5million from oil companies .. Repubs who voted for received about $23million. Sorta puts it in perspective.

Except that oil producing states are generally Republican.
How many Dems get money from dairy and wheat companies?

 

[The Rabbi]

Publication 535 (2011), Business Expenses

Read it and weap, kiddies.

Do you understand what a business expense is and why it is deductible?

 

[Katzndogz]

The democrats are just disappointed that getting to $6.00 a gallon for gas willl take a little longer.

 

[Seawytch]

Democrats who voted against received about $5million from oil companies .. Repubs who voted for received about $23million. Sorta puts it in perspective.

And nobody should be surprised by this. Works the same for Wall Street money and Wall Street reform.

 

[The Rabbi]

Democrats who voted against received about $5million from oil companies .. Repubs who voted for received about $23million. Sorta puts it in perspective.

And nobody should be surprised by this. Works the same for Wall Street money and Wall Street reform.

Which is why Obama took in more wall st money than anyone else?

 

[CausingPAIN]

great...

 

[Skull Pilot]

I have no problem with ending oil subsidies as long as ALL other government subsidies end as well.

 

[Star]

Good on you for noticing that even if Republicans use the lowest low-ball number for oil price externalities, the subsidy that pisses taxpayers off the most --- i.e. the subsidy to big oil that President Obama proposed to end --- only represents about two tenths of one percent of the externalities that "we the people" pay for-----we just aren't paying for externalities at the pump, but pay and pay and pay-----we do.


Unearthing the True Cost of Fossil Fuels Industry gets tax breaks, subsidies, military support in volatile regions, the right to use our air and water like a sewer, and assurance that the government will clean up its environmental messes. Politicians get campaign contributions, a steady flow of dirty energy, and a talking point to brandish about how they kept gas affordable.


Question for righties:
Should we pay for the Gulf gusher via higher prices at the pump or via higher taxes.

How is raising taxes going to lower prices at the pump?

It won't. All that will do is provide more swag to feed useless bloodsucking tics like you.

There is no "subsidy" to big oil. That's pure Marxist propaganda.

You asked then answered your own question-----good on you! But then you go on to claim that the billions of fungible taxpayer dollars that big oil sucks out of the American revenue stream should not be called a subsidy -pewsh!- You're kidding right?


Why do you choose to play semantic games, rather than addressing the billions of dollars we the taxpayers hand over to a mature industry that even [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1zJ-LAaOeI"]they claim they don't need (VIDEO)?[/ame]


Who do you think is paying for carbon based energy screw-ups (externalities) like the Gulf gusher, et al?






Energy Subsidies Black, Not Green

By Tommy McCall

This graphic simplifies thousands of data points painstakingly researched by the Environmental Law Institute on federal energy subsidies to show thee imbalance of U.S. subsidies to climate-damaging fossil fuels over renewables.​

The accompanying paper, Estimating U.S. Government Subsidies to Energy Sources: 2002-2008 sheds insight into the disparities in subsidy amounts.​

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Good on you for noticing that even if Republicans use the lowest low-ball number for oil price externalities, the subsidy that pisses taxpayers off the most --- i.e. the subsidy to big oil that President Obama proposed to end --- only represents about two tenths of one percent of the externalities that "we the people" pay for-----we just aren't paying for externalities at the pump, but pay and pay and pay-----we do.


Unearthing the True Cost of Fossil Fuels Industry gets tax breaks, subsidies, military support in volatile regions, the right to use our air and water like a sewer, and assurance that the government will clean up its environmental messes. Politicians get campaign contributions, a steady flow of dirty energy, and a talking point to brandish about how they kept gas affordable.


Question for righties:
Should we pay for the Gulf gusher via higher prices at the pump or via higher taxes.

How is raising taxes going to lower prices at the pump?

It won't. All that will do is provide more swag to feed useless bloodsucking tics like you.

There is no "subsidy" to big oil. That's pure Marxist propaganda.

You asked then answered your own question-----good on you! But then you go on to claim that the billions of fungible taxpayer dollars that big oil sucks out of the American revenue stream should not be called a subsidy -pewsh!- You're kidding right?


Why do you choose to play semantic games, rather than addressing the billions of dollars we the taxpayers hand over to a mature industry that even [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1zJ-LAaOeI"]they claim they don't need (VIDEO)?[/ame]


Who do you think is paying for carbon based energy screw-ups (externalities) like the Gulf gusher, et al?






Energy Subsidies Black, Not Green

By Tommy McCall

This graphic simplifies thousands of data points painstakingly researched by the Environmental Law Institute on federal energy subsidies to show thee imbalance of U.S. subsidies to climate-damaging fossil fuels over renewables.​

The accompanying paper, Estimating U.S. Government Subsidies to Energy Sources: 2002-2008 sheds insight into the disparities in subsidy amounts.​

4 years later in 2012 the green surpasses the black.

(your chart is from 2008)

 

[Crackerjack]

Global Warming is Real | Climate | Energy | Sustainability is your source.

Fucking partisan shithead.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Global Warming is Real | Climate | Energy | Sustainability is your source.

Fucking partisan shithead.

They are using pre-obama figures.

 

[dblack]

By specifying them? Or is that asking too much?

Well, I'm not sure what you're fishing for. Do you want a listing of all the tax incentives, exemptions, credits and subsidies currently on the books? I certainly can't provide you with anything like that.

You can't even list a single one, can you?

Ahh... ok, I think I see where you guys are coming from. You want to debate the merits of some particular tax incentive - some kind of left/right pissing match?

And you probably think I'm defending Obama or something, eh?

Nah.. that ain't it at all.

See I'm trying to point out the corrupt nature of all these tax incentive schemes. I full well get what Obama's up to here. He's not taking some bold stand against corporate welfare. He's spanking the oil companies because they had the temerity to make too much money. Shame on them!

But what you need to understand is, that's why they give them the tax breaks in the first place - so they can use them later to twist their arms by threatening to take them away. All these preferential "favors" granted by government come with a cost. This is what corporatism is all about - controlling society by divvying up power among all the "vested interests". And it does none of us any good except for the recipients of the tax breaks (those who comply with government demands) and the politicians who grant them.

 

[The Rabbi]

Well, I'm not sure what you're fishing for. Do you want a listing of all the tax incentives, exemptions, credits and subsidies currently on the books? I certainly can't provide you with anything like that.

You can't even list a single one, can you?

Ahh... ok, I think I see where you guys are coming from. You want to debate the merits of some particular tax incentive - some kind of left/right pissing match?

And you probably think I'm defending Obama or something, eh?

Nah.. that ain't it at all.

See I'm trying to point out the corrupt nature of all these tax incentive schemes. I full well get what Obama's up to here. He's not taking some bold stand against corporate welfare. He's spanking the oil companies because they had the temerity to make too much money. Shame on them!

But what you need to understand is, that's why they give them the tax breaks in the first place - so they can use them later to twist their arms by threatening to take them away. All these preferential "favors" granted by government come with a cost. This is what corporatism is all about - controlling society by divvying up power among all the "vested interests". And it does none of us any good except for the recipients of the tax breaks (those who comply with government demands) and the politicians who grant them.

OK, there is no tax incentive scheme. When you understand that, you'll understand our posts.
Deductions and depreciations are actually a legitimate business expense. The unique nature of oil, once you pull it out of the ground it isn't there anymore, means that oil companies have depreciation for their own particular situations. It is no different than a manufacturer depreciating a portion of the cost of a piece of machinery.
In fact oil companies generate huge amounts of revenue for the FedGov as their product is taxed at every step of the way.

 

[Star]

How is raising taxes going to lower prices at the pump?

It won't. All that will do is provide more swag to feed useless bloodsucking tics like you.

There is no "subsidy" to big oil. That's pure Marxist propaganda.

You asked then answered your own question-----good on you! But then you go on to claim that the billions of fungible taxpayer dollars that big oil sucks out of the American revenue stream should not be called a subsidy -pewsh!- You're kidding right?


Why do you choose to play semantic games, rather than addressing the billions of dollars we the taxpayers hand over to a mature industry that even [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1zJ-LAaOeI"]they claim they don't need (VIDEO)?[/ame]


Who do you think is paying for carbon based energy screw-ups (externalities) like the Gulf gusher, et al?






Energy Subsidies Black, Not Green

By Tommy McCall

This graphic simplifies thousands of data points painstakingly researched by the Environmental Law Institute on federal energy subsidies to show thee imbalance of U.S. subsidies to climate-damaging fossil fuels over renewables.​

The accompanying paper, Estimating U.S. Government Subsidies to Energy Sources: 2002-2008 sheds insight into the disparities in subsidy amounts.​

4 years later in 2012 the green surpasses the black.

(your chart is from 2008)

Rather than going into full rightwing whimper, why don't you post more recent and/or better information so the people that post on this M/B can make an informed decision about whether or not renewables are receiving the same kind of government support other transitional energy sources have historically received?


Even if it weren't to early to analyze all the data from the stimulus, I seriously doubt the chart below would show significant change-----historically, subsidies for renewables would still be way behind fossil fuels--and--fossil fuels will always be wayyyy ahead on the cost of externalities.


Again I ask: Should we pay for the Gulf gusher via higher prices at the pump or via higher taxes? and add: should we continue to pay for healthcare via insurance premiums and/or fee for service or pick up a portion of our healthcare tab at the pump?

​

 

[hjmick]

He is trying to bring down gas prices while the pubs work to keep prices high.

Just one more reason for the rw's to want to get wealthy Mittens in the white house so our taxes can subsidies going to Big Business.

Idiot gullible dupes.

What about all the other industries in this country that receive subsidies?

Or were you under the impression that oil companies were the only ones?

And just how will cutting these subsidies cut gas prices? Seems to me they'll just make up the cash at the pumps.

While you're at it, could please explain why Obama voted in 2005 to continue the very same subsidies he now wants cut...

 

[snakedoc]

Didn't Obama vote in favor oil subsidies as a Senator in 2005?

 

[hjmick]

Didn't Obama vote in favor oil subsidies as a Senator in 2005?

He was just making sure they'd be willing to donate to his campaign two years later...