cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Highlighted
Senior Advisor

Re: Rush made the top ten in Yahoo news this morning

Our only problem with caesar is that sometimes republicans come to power with their phoney fiscal policy. Lower taxes does not create jobs. Lower taxes does not produce balanced budgets.

 

Cutting taxes fighting wars and ever increasing militarism and nation building is not condusive to balanced budgets. It is clearly irrational thinking and yet you want to vote for more of the same.

Highlighted
Senior Advisor

Re: Rush made the top ten in Yahoo news this morning


@kraft-t wrote:

Our only problem with caesar is that sometimes republicans come to power with their phoney fiscal policy. Lower taxes does not create jobs. Lower taxes does not produce balanced budgets.

 

Cutting taxes fighting wars and ever increasing militarism and nation building is not condusive to balanced budgets. It is clearly irrational thinking and yet you want to vote for more of the same.


Raising taxes does not create jobs. Increased regulation kills jobs like mining coal and building pipelines.

Highlighted
Senior Advisor

Re: Rush made the top ten in Yahoo news this morning

Coal production is at recent highs.  More oil production will not lower gas prices. Our limiting factor on gasoline production is refinery capacity which a controlled output to raise prices. The pipe line would only offer more exportstion of north american oil.

 

Since Oil companies refuse to pay taxes, I see no reason to expand their profits and I sure as hell don't want to put a dollar in Koch bros pockets.

Highlighted
Veteran Advisor

Re: Rush made the top ten in Yahoo news this morning

I'm begenning to think that the two parties have some sort of secret, unholy alliance, where they argue in public, but in private, are just fine with the status quo.  Since it is pretty obvious that neither party is going to 'win' everything, they sift policies around, so that there is a continual state of turmoil, just enough to blame the other party, but yet not so far out of kilter to make it obvious, they don't really want things different, either.  If one party had total control, and did everything they wanted for 4 or 6 years, they would get the 'blame' for all that went wrong, and I bet the other party would come back in the next elections so strong, it would swing the other way, and then THEY would be blamed for all that went wrong.  The way things are now, they each blame the other side, and not much of substance really changes.  The big decisions just keep getting kicked farther down the road.

 

 

Highlighted
Veteran Advisor

Re: Rush made the top ten in Yahoo news this morning


@kraft-t wrote:

Coal production is at recent highs.  More oil production will not lower gas prices. Our limiting factor on gasoline production is refinery capacity which a controlled output to raise prices. The pipe line would only offer more exportstion of north american oil.

 

Since Oil companies refuse to pay taxes, I see no reason to expand their profits and I sure as hell don't want to put a dollar in Koch bros pockets.


You really should quit making such blanket statements, without doing a little fact checking.  I know the talking points say that, but it is not true (I assume we can agree Forbes is at least a semi-reliable source??):

 

ExxonMobil in 2011 made $27.3 billion in cash payments for income taxes. Chevron paid $17 billion and ConocoPhillips $10.6 billion. And not only were these the highest amounts in absolute terms, when compared with the rest of the 25 most profitable U.S. companies (see our slideshow for the full rundown of who paid what), the trio also had the highest effective tax rates. Exxon’s tax rate was 42.9%, Chevron’s was 48.3% and Conoco’s was 41.5%. That’s even higher than the 35% U.S. federal statutory rate, which is already the highest tax rate among developed nations.

(The lowest taxpayers among the most profitable companies? Automakers Ford and GM, despite $20 billion and $9 billion in net income, respectively, paid a scant $270 million and $570 million in taxes

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2012/04/16/which-megacorps-pay-megataxes/

 

Now, why do you consider a company that already pays more than the 35% Corporate tax rate, to be 'not paying taxes', yet never seem to care to mention companies that get 'special' treatment, like GE, that pays essentially NO taxes?