Originally Posted By jonvn Thank goodness the Republicans are there to keep us dependent on foreign sources of energy. <a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/12/12/national/w163844S47.DTL" target="_blank">http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/ article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/12/12/national/w163844S47.DTL</a>
Originally Posted By gadzuux I don't understand how 'joe GOP' can support this. As usual, the republicans are using fear as their preferred tactic, and being disingenuous. They're portraying it as a tax "increase" when it's actually the elimination of tax BREAKS to oil companies. >> The oil companies had pressed lawmakers to oppose repeal of the $13.5 billion in tax breaks provided them by Congress in 2004 and 2005. They argued the tax relief was essential as an incentive for domestic oil and gas production and refinery expansion and that rolling back the tax breaks would lead to higher energy prices. << Does anybody actually believe this? The windfall profits of hundreds of billions of dollars flooding into oil company coffers aren't enough? They need massive tax breaks on top of their massive profits? The fuel efficiency standards haven't been changed since 1975. Does someone think it's unreasonable to mandate modest increases over the next ten years or so? Let's look at motivation. What do you suppose the motivation is for the democratic energy bill? Who's the beneficiary? Us - we the people. Now let's wonder who the beneficiaries are of maintaining $13.5 BILLION in tax breaks for oil companies. Who does that help? Who benefits from increasing fuel efficiency standards? Or emission standards? We, the people - and the envioronment that we live in. Who benefits from preventing increases to fuel efficiency of cars and trucks? Who benefits from preventing mandates to reduce carbon emissions? Do you republicans really believe that your elected representatives are acting in your best interests? Or do you think that they're shilling for corporate donations at the expense of the public's interests? Why would anyone ever vote for a republican? I don't understand.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>The fuel efficiency standards haven't been changed since 1975. Does someone think it's unreasonable to mandate modest increases over the next ten years or so?<< This guy does, for one: <a href="http://www.geocities.com/CollegePark/Library/6086/lube_tiger.jpg" target="_blank">http://www.geocities.com/Colle gePark/Library/6086/lube_tiger.jpg</a>
Originally Posted By gadzuux Here's another one ... <a href="http://tinyurl.com/25jqpx" target="_blank">http://tinyurl.com/25jqpx</a>
Originally Posted By fkurucz <<Do you republicans really believe that your elected representatives are acting in your best interests?>> Nope. If anything, they have done their darndest to hurt the middle class. The few (like Tom Tancredo) who do acknowledge that maybe exporting our best jobs isn't good for the middle class are treated like pariahs. <<Or do you think that they're shilling for corporate donations at the expense of the public's interests? >> Yup, while they pay lip service to issues like abortion.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy I always enjoy watching the conservative pundits talk about how alternative energy sources like solar and wind aren't feasible without tax breaks and incentives. Yet, they never acknowledge all the incentives that are doled out to the coal and petroleum industries at the same time. If we don't want to cut the tax breaks on fossil fuels, why not put them in place for zero emission energy sources to at least equal the playing field and see who comes out on top? Of course, you'll never see that as long as Big Oil is at the head of our government.
Originally Posted By woody The environmentalists are the worst hypocrites when it comes to wind power. Many don't want them for aethetics (Senator Kennedy) and inadvertent bird killing or perhaps land use issues.
Originally Posted By gadzuux >> Why do we need a law for everything? << We need to regulate corporations in order for them to respond to the public interest. In the eighties, 'Saint Reagan' espoused the value of allowing "market forces" to incent corporations to meet the needs of public interest. We've seen how well that works out. Fuel efficiencies have actually dropped since then. What's good for GM isn't necessarily good for america - or GM either for that matter.
Originally Posted By fkurucz <<The environmentalists are the worst hypocrites when it comes to wind power.>> Wind power is pretty big out here in Colorado. I purchase 600 KWHR per month. The incremental cost is only 1/2 penny per KWHR, and is still way cheaper than what we paid SDG&E when we lived in San Diego. A European company (Vestas) is building a factory out here to build wind turbines. They will be hiring 600 people.
Originally Posted By Maxxdadd Wha..? I don't get why you are all painting Republicans as the evil ones here. The opening sentence says: "The measure was approved Thursday with strong bipartisan support 86-8 after Democrats abandoned efforts to impose billions of dollars in new taxes on the biggest oil companies, unable by one vote to overcome a Republican filibuster against the new taxes." Why on earth do you think taxation to a specific industry is a good thing? Do you imagine the Oil Companies will change their money making ways once they are taxed, and forgo making profits? Just who do you think those profits go to? Oil Companies and Auto Makers and Energy Companies are owned mostly by stock holders. That's your grandparents, who own stock so they can have income to live beyond Social Security. Those profits probably made it possible for you mommy and daddy to send you to college. Jonvn: its probably a large part of your IRA investment. Taxing the Oil Companies and Auto Makers and Energy Companies will not result in more efficient cars. You people buying cars are the ones that control that. Stop buying high fuel using cars. A tax will only make things more expensive, because that is a bottom line expense the oil company will pass on to the consumer... not absorb. Who taught you guys economics?
Originally Posted By gadzuux It's not a 'tax increase' - it's a repeal of tax breaks that oil companies received in `04 and `05. Why would we want to relieve them of their taxes while their posting obscene profits? Their highest ever?
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << Taxing the Oil Companies and Auto Makers and Energy Companies will not result in more efficient cars. You people buying cars are the ones that control that. Stop buying high fuel using cars. >> I don't care if they keep the tax breaks, but why not make the same tax loophole available to green energy companies? Shouldn't the energy playing field be level?
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << Oil Companies and Auto Makers and Energy Companies are owned mostly by stock holders. That's your grandparents, who own stock so they can have income to live beyond Social Security. >> Do you have any idea how paltry the net worth of 90% of Americans is? People with any significant assets are few an far between. That's the rude awakening that America is in for in the next decade -- all that disposable income that used to be spent by working Americans will deteriorate to nothing when the Baby Boomers retire and shift to fixed income living. And so far, the trend of the earliest Baby Boomers is to take their Social Security at age 62 and exit the work force as soon as possible. You are going to see a large number of Americans scaling back to account for the lack of savings for an entire generation of people.
Originally Posted By jonvn "That's your grandparents, who own stock so they can have income to live beyond Social Security." My grandparents are dead. One of them died in 1920. I don't think she owned any stock in Exxon. But I do! Yay for obscene oil profits!
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy ^^ Yup, you might actually be able to keep up with inflation with that windfall in oil, lol.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <Or do you think that they're shilling for corporate donations at the expense of the public's interests? Why would anyone ever vote for a republican? I don't understand. < 1. So you are telling me that the tops dems ( and other Dems ) are also not in the pockets of big business? That must be why they are fighting to stop the off shoring of millions of American jobs every year to low cost countries - and doing so much to stop the tax breaks for many of those same companies for doing so --gee I missed that. 2/ I will never understand people who think this is a one party phenomenon when it comes to things like this --
Originally Posted By Maxxdadd It's not a 'tax increase' - it's a repeal of tax breaks that oil companies received in `04 and `05. Why would we want to relieve them of their taxes while their posting obscene profits? Their highest ever? Whether its new taxes or a repeal of breaks on old taxes, the results are the same.... you end up paying more. They wont suffer a bit, no matter how obscene you think their profits are. And I would be just as happy to extend tax breaks to green companies as well. Might speed things along in getting more affordable alternatives. As for voting republican? Vbdad is exactly right: the alternative politicians (DEMS) are just as much in bed with special interests as the GOP. interests like organized labor, Insurance companies, and organizations that keep minorities from standing on their own two feet. What we really need isn't going to be found in politicians on either side of the aisle. What we need is for the rules to change. No more riders tacked on to bills that fund ridiculous special intersts. No more frivolous lawsuits. No more redefining terms and rewriting history to benefit special interests. Jon... your grandpa called. he says the last Exxon oil strike was the remains of grandma... the old dinosaur!
Originally Posted By jonvn He called? Odd....he's dead too. They are all dead. Must be a wrong number. Oh, and you too can find any dead American you want! Just go here: <a href="http://ssdi.rootsweb.com/" target="_blank">http://ssdi.rootsweb.com/</a>
Originally Posted By gadzuux >> Whether its new taxes or a repeal of breaks on old taxes, the results are the same ... you end up paying more. They wont suffer a bit, no matter how obscene you think their profits are. << From todays SF Chronicle ... >> Senate opponents of the amendment to revoke tax breaks on oil companies argued that "raising taxes" would just increase the price of fuel (and therefore costs to consumers). First, the same amendment would simply have required oil companies to pay the same taxes as any other company. Second, consumers pay one way or the other, in higher prices for fuel or in higher taxes. It is a zero-sum game, and how we play it is simply a matter of priorities. I would prefer to see the tax breaks go to support technologies that will be useful in the future. << I agree with this. For what reason are we slashing tax obligations for those most able to afford them? And yes - your point is valid too - only people pay taxes. corporations factor their taxes into their profit structure. But that doesn't mean that gas will be cheaper if we provide undeserved tax breaks to oil corporations. If that were the case, why bother taxing any company ever?
