GOP taxes the middle class

[Junior1942]

I told you guys it would happen.  This is just one of many to come.  Big Oil pays zilch, and the middle class pays through the nose.
http://news.yahoo.com/gop-may-ok-tax-increase-obama-hopes-block-124016578.html

[subdjoe]

I told you guys it would happen.  This is just one of many to come.  Big Oil pays zilch, and the middle class pays through the nose.
http://news.yahoo.com/gop-may-ok-tax-increase-obama-hopes-block-124016578.html

No taxes?  You really should read something other than Kos.

(CNSNews.com) – In commenting on the talks about deficit reduction and raising the federal debt limit, President Barack Obama said he wanted to eliminate tax deductions for oil and gas companies “that are making hundreds of billions of dollars.” However, he did not mention that the top three U.S. oil companies alone paid $42.8 billion in income taxes in 2010, according to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

At his June 29 press conference at the White House, Obama said, “There’s been a lot of discussion about revenues and raising taxes in recent weeks, so I want to be clear about what we’re proposing here.  I spent the last two years cutting taxes for ordinary Americans, and I want to extend those middle-class tax cuts.  The tax cuts I’m proposing we get rid of are tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires, tax breaks for oil companies and hedge fund managers and corporate jet owners.”

“f if we choose to keep tax breaks for oil and gas companies that are making hundreds of billions of dollars, then that means we’ve got to cut some kids off from getting a college scholarship,” said Obama. “I think it’s only fair to ask an oil company or a corporate jet owner that has done so well to give up a tax break that no other business enjoys.”

The top three oil companies in the United States are ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips and Chevron. According to the SEC filings of those companies, as analyzed by Forbes, ExxonMobil’s pretax income in 2010 was $52 billion, from which it paid $21.6 billion in income taxes worldwide, leaving a net income of $30.5 billion. That equals a tax rate of 45 percent, which is 10 percent above the statutory corporate rate of 35 percent.

America is the single largest consumer of oil products, yet our retail prices are very average in the world market, despite excessive federal taxation. Who is gouging whom?

Where does all the money go?

Based upon a $3.00 gallon of gasoline, the average break-down is as follows.

Gasoline Retailer $.01 cents per gallon
Oil Company $.08 cents per gallon
Refining $.29 cents per gallon
Marketing/Distribution $.32 cents per gallon
Taxes $.59 cents per gallon
Cost of crude $1.71 per gallon (delivered)

Maybe there should be some delving into the huge tax breaks and incentives, both state and federal, that the movie industry gets.

[us920669]

JR, I think you're right here in the narrow sense of the word - right about the payroll tax, not about Big Oil. They pay plenty, and if they have to pay more they will just raise the price of their products.


The whole distinction between payroll and income taxes is misleading.  Everyone's taxes should be cut, but government spending should be cut a lot more.  Bush actually suggested eliminating the $106k top stop on payroll taxes, but got shouted down without a fair hearing. 

[Junior1942]

JR, I think you're right here in the narrow sense of the word - right about the payroll tax, not about Big Oil. They pay plenty, and if they have to pay more they will just raise the price of their products.


The whole distinction between payroll and income taxes is misleading.  Everyone's taxes should be cut, but government spending should be cut a lot more.  Bush actually suggested eliminating the $106k top stop on payroll taxes, but got shouted down without a fair hearing.

You need to Google a Big Oil welfare benefit called "Depletion allowance."  Exxon-Mobile, for example, pays ZERO USA income taxes.  Do you pay USA income taxes?

[subdjoe]

Are you saying that all depreciation allowances should be eliminated?  Or only those on the oil industry?  That is all the depletion allowance is. 

And again addressing the claim that oil companies, specifically Exxon, pay no taxes:

In the Nov. 30 speech,  Sanders said that the government wasn't doing enough to hold companies such as ExxonMobil accountable. "These people want to cut back on the powers of the EPA and the Department of Energy so that ExxonMobil can remain the most profitable corporation in world history while oil and coal companies continue to pollute our air and our water. Last year, ExxonMobil made $19 billion in profit. Guess what. They paid zero in taxes. They got a $156 million refund from the IRS. I guess that is not good enough. We have to give the oil companies even more tax breaks."

When we asked Sanders' office for a source of his claim that the company "paid zero in taxes," they pointed us to page 92 of the company's "10-K" form filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 26, 2010. The form does indeed include a line that suggests that the company was refunded  $156 million in income taxes to the federal government in 2009. But there are two caveats that need to be included when citing this figure.

What does the number actually mean?

Douglas A. Shackelford, a tax professor at the Kenan-Flagler Business School at the University of North Carolina told PolitiFact that the $156 million number refers "to the U.S portion of the current and deferred income tax expense." But he added that this number does not refer to the cash taxes paid by Exxon to the U.S. government.

"It is a (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles) number, not a figure from their U.S. corporate tax return," Shackelford said. "The actual income taxes paid by the Exxon to the U.S. government is confidential information. It is not reported in their financial statements."

The company agreed with that description. "The U.S. income taxes reported in the financial statements include more than ExxonMobil’s tax bill for 2009," said Exxon spokesman Alan Jeffers. The financial statements, he said, "reflect financial transactions related to U.S. federal income taxes booked by the corporation during the year and include finalization of the taxes for prior years."

For instance, the liberal Center for American Progress quoted Jeffers saying that the company's tax figure for 2009 was heavily influenced by a holdover tax issue from 2008 that was technically recorded on its 2009 books. "ExxonMobil was required to bolster its pension plan by $3 billion when the market went down in 2008," wrote CAP's Sima J. Gandhi. "This overpayment reduced the amount of taxes owed in 2008, but the tax adjustment wasn't made until one year later, which led to an overpayment and the refund in 2009."

The three-year tax numbers listed on the 10-K do seem to suggest that the company's 2009 tax bill was unusual. In 2007 and 2008, the equivalent tax totals on the 10-K were $4.5 billion and $3.4 billion, respectively, which suggests that some unusual factor reduced the ExxonMobil tax bill into negative territory for 2009.

While the company is not obligated to publicize its tax return, and thus the actual amount it paid in taxes, ExxonMobil has voluntarily released a figure for its actual federal income tax bill in response to media requests that questioned why the company reported a negative tax liability in 2009. Jeffers told PolitiFact that the "U.S. income tax expense for 2009 activities was approximately $500 million." The company declined to provide documentation for this number, however.

U.S. income taxes aren't the only taxes ExxonMobil paid

According to the 10-K, ExxonMobil remitted $6.3 billion in sales taxes, $110 million in state income taxes, and $1.5 billion in "other taxes and duties." All told, the company's tax liability according to its 10-K was $7.7 billion. (These numbers are not necessarily totals actually paid but derived using generally accepted accounting principles.) And that only counts taxes paid in the U.S. It paid an additional $70 billion-plus in taxes to foreign governments in 2009, $15 billion of which was for income taxes.

The company does receive credit on its U.S. taxes for many of these foreign tax payments, which helps keep its domestic tax bill lower than it would otherwise be -- a complaint of many of its critics, who would like to see a curtailment of such benefits. Another criticism is that the company is (legally) able to shield some of its income by steering it through subsidiaries based offshore.

Sanders spokesman Will Wiquist said that "some have argued that these facts are not accurate because the company paid state and foreign taxes and because they lawfully wrote off the foreign taxes when paying their American federal taxes. Clearly, that is not the point of this statement by Sen. Sanders. He is arguing that the law should be changed to make companies like Exxon pay U.S. income taxes on their massive profits."

We agree that the tax policy toward companies like ExxonMobil is a fair subject for debate, but we do think that Sanders' articulation of the facts in his floor speech was misleading, because he omitted several important caveats, including a failure to note that the $156 million number only refers to one specific type of tax -- U.S. income taxes. To his credit, Sanders did make that distinction in a June 9, 2010, speech, saying that ExxonMobil "reported to the SEC that not only did it avoid paying any federal income taxes, it actually received a $156 million refund from the IRS."

Still, while focusing on the negative-$156 million figure and saying that the company "paid zero in taxes" in 2009 was eye-catching, it is, at best, misleading. And it ignores the fact that the company paid hundreds of millions in state income taxes, sales taxes and other types of taxes. We can't verify the company's claim that its net tax was $500 million in 2009, but it's incorrect for Sanders to say "paid zero in taxes." We rate his claim False.

You might want to do some research before spreading the lies of the class-baiters for them.

[Junior1942]

Are you saying that all depreciation allowances should be eliminated?  Or only those on the oil industry?  That is all the depletion allowance is.  .......

And again addressing the claim that oil companies, specifically Exxon, pay no taxes:
You might want to do some research before spreading the lies of the class-baiters for them.

I didn't say that Exxon-Mobil pays no taxes.  I said they pay zero USA income taxes.  They pay billions in income taxes to foreign countries due to wells, etc., in those countries, but they pay not 1¢ in USA income taxes due to the USA's depletion allowance.  Obviously, you Republicans would rather pay more USA payroll taxes to keep Exxon-Mobil from paying ANY USA income taxes.  You'll soon get your "rather"!

[subdjoe]

Are you saying that all depreciation allowances should be eliminated?  Or only those on the oil industry?  That is all the depletion allowance is.  .......

And again addressing the claim that oil companies, specifically Exxon, pay no taxes:
You might want to do some research before spreading the lies of the class-baiters for them.

I didn't say that Exxon-Mobil pays no taxes.  I said they pay zero USA income taxes.  They pay billions in income taxes to foreign countries due to wells, etc., in those countries, but they pay not 1¢ in USA income taxes due to the USA's depletion allowance.  Obviously, you Republicans would rather pay more USA payroll taxes to keep Exxon-Mobil from paying ANY USA income taxes.  You'll soon get your "rather"!

To quote you from your initial post: " Big Oil pays zilch,"

Same for Microsoft:

In 2010, Microsoft continued to use tax loopholes by shifting income to Ireland, then the Netherlands, then to Bermuda – practices called Double Irish and Dutch Sandwich. “The method takes advantage of Irish tax law to legally shuttle profits into and out of subsidiaries there, largely escaping the country’s 12.5 percent income tax,” Bloomberg News reported in October.

Microsoft also spent big to defeat an income tax bill:

But despite the acute problems faced by universities and students trying to afford an education, Microsoft general counsel Brad Smith said Microsoft has no regrets about opposing Initiative 1098, a ballet measure late fall that would have established a state income tax on wealthy residents to raise money for education.

Microsoft donated $75,000 to defeat the income tax, with the company’s billionaire CEO Steve Ballmer kicking in an additional $425,000.

And while Smith said Microsoft would not be philosophically opposed to a state income tax, I-1098 would have put the state at a competitive disadvantage my making it harder to attract talent, he said.

On Tuesday, tech giant Microsoft announced to the world that it would be purchasing Internet communication service Skype in an all-cash, $8.5 billion acquisition deal.

One fact that has gone underreported about the deal is how Microsoft structured it to keep its taxes as low as possible. As the Wall Street Journal’s Ronald Barusch notes, Microsoft and Skype saved billions of dollars in taxes because Microsoft used its foreign profits to purchase Skype, which also happens to base its corporate headquarters in a major tax haven itself, Luxembourg.

Doing so allowed Microsoft to avoid paying taxes on its profits at the U.S. corporate tax rate of 35 percent. So how much does Microsoft pay on the profits it makes overseas in tax havens based in places like Ireland, Bermuda, and Singapore? To find the answer, we can turn to the University of Southern California’s Edward D. Kleinbard. In a paper titled “Stateless Income,” Kleinbard analyzed Microsoft’s overseas earnings. Kleinbard noted that in 2010, Microsoft has $29.5 billion in earnings overseas, and that the tax cost of these earnings if they were brought back to the U.S. would be $9.2 billion:

    For example, Microsoft Corporation’s Financial Statements in its 2010 Annual Report indicated that the company has $29.5 billion in “permanently reinvested earnings” outside the United States (that is, after foreign-tax earnings of foreign subsidiaries that Microsoft does not currently intend to repatriate to the United States). Microsoft also noted that the tax cost of repatriating those earnings to the United States would be $9.2 billion.

The $9.2 billion would amount to paying a rate of 31 percent. The missing four percent would come from foreign tax credits — meaning, the taxes the company paid overseas. That means the effective corporate income tax rate for Microsoft for its overseas profits is a paltry 4 percent — almost 9 times lower than the U.S. corporate income tax rate. In its last quarterly statement, Microsoft noted that “$42 billion of its $50.2 billion in cash and short term investments was held by its foreign subsidiaries.”

Unsurprisingly, Microsoft is part of a coalition of companies advocating for a repatration tax holiday, which would allow them to bring money they have stashed offshore back to the U.S. at a dramatically lower tax rate.

But Microsoft isn’t the only company involved in the acquisition that has been getting a sweet deal with overseas profits. As stated before, Skype’s office is based in Luxembourg. The effective corporate income tax rate in Luxembourg? 0.4 percent (See “The Revenue Effects of Multinational Firm Income Shifting, Kimberly Clausing). MarketWatch’s Therese Poletti notes that Skype’s financial disclosures show “dizzying array of offshore entities and holding companies associated with its biggest investors.” The private equity firm Silver Lake, which owns 39 percent stake in Skype, is also a major tax dodger. “Two of the three Silver Lake Funds which own shares in Skype are based” in the Cayman Islands and George Town in the caribbean. eBay, which “retained a 30% stake in Skype, giving investors a return of about $1.4 billion,” uses eBay International AG unit for its Skype ownership. Despite being an American company, this unit is based in Bern, Switzerland.

While many in the financial world are unsure of the results of the recent acquisition, there is clearly one group that won’t be benefitting: U.S. taxpayers who will continue to watch supposedly “American” businesses exploit the tax code and set up tax havens to avoid paying taxes in our country.

Why no outrage about Microsoft?

Oh.......


wait......


yeah......


Microsoft is a big backer of the DNC. 

[mcwoodduck]

JR, I think you're right here in the narrow sense of the word - right about the payroll tax, not about Big Oil. They pay plenty, and if they have to pay more they will just raise the price of their products.


The whole distinction between payroll and income taxes is misleading.  Everyone's taxes should be cut, but government spending should be cut a lot more.  Bush actually suggested eliminating the $106k top stop on payroll taxes, but got shouted down without a fair hearing.

You need to Google a Big Oil welfare benefit called "Depletion allowance."  Exxon-Mobile, for example, pays ZERO USA income taxes.  Do you pay USA income taxes?

And General Electric that supported Obam paid $0 on 5 Billion in profit.  Well, they use the tax code to their advantage.  Gasoline is a strange comodity as it is taxed on multiple levels with specific taxes.  Also as a tax is a cost to a company, and the selling price of gas being as high as it is, I for one am glad that the oil companies are not paying taxes on their profits.  If the profits on a gallon of gas is 4 cents and the taxes are  $ 1.30  Why are you not mad at the government?  After all the gas company has to explore for resources, pull those resources out of the ground, and in many cases have to pay fees, and fines to the government (indirect taxes) then they have to refine the resources into useable fuels and distrubute those fuels to retailers for us to buy.  Every step of the process employs people, needs equipment (that employs others to make, sell , repair that equipment), raw materials mined and processed by others.  Everyting being taxed along the way adding to the cost of a gallon of fuel.  The higher prices of fuel adds to costs of all other products.  So sure let's add a Million in taxes to Exxon.  Raising the costs of fuel, raising the costs of shipping, raising the costs of food, robbing more of your purchase power, hurting the middle and lower classes and the elimination of the middle class.  We will have Royals (government and uber rich) and surfs (citizens there to provide Government what they want and need rather than the other way around) in other words back to the middle ages. Your small minded tax the rich class warfare hoping to even the paying field and make all equal is never going to happen.  If you make all equal it is never that we are all Millionaires, we all end up like the poor and our standard of living declines.

[us920669]

I'm right much a dummy on computers but I have had lots of experience as a taxpayer.  The tax codes are so complex, especially for corporations, that you can make it look like anyone either pays or doesn't pay.  Usually, everybody pays.  Bottom line, taxes are too high but government spending is way too high.  Raising taxes even a little bit will increase spending by a lot since government acts like an irresponsible teenager with daddy's credit card.

[mcwoodduck]

I'm right much a dummy on computers but I have had lots of experience as a taxpayer.  The tax codes are so complex, especially for corporations, that you can make it look like anyone either pays or doesn't pay.  Usually, everybody pays.  Bottom line, taxes are too high but government spending is way too high.  Raising taxes even a little bit will increase spending by a lot since government acts like an irresponsible teenager with daddy's credit card.

one small thing is raising taxes will cut income as well making it so more borrowing would be needed.

[ironglow]

Are you saying that all depreciation allowances should be eliminated?  Or only those on the oil industry?  That is all the depletion allowance is.  .......

And again addressing the claim that oil companies, specifically Exxon, pay no taxes:
You might want to do some research before spreading the lies of the class-baiters for them.

I didn't say that Exxon-Mobil pays no taxes.  I said they pay zero USA income taxes.  They pay billions in income taxes to foreign countries due to wells, etc., in those countries, but they pay not 1¢ in USA income taxes due to the USA's depletion allowance.  Obviously, you Republicans would rather pay more USA payroll taxes to keep Exxon-Mobil from paying ANY USA income taxes.  You'll soon get your "rather"!

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  And GE made over 20 billion $$ profit last year..didn't pay a dime to the US..and B. Hussien appoints Jeff Immelt, CEO of GE as his  "jobs Czar".
   How many tax cheats does Obama have in his cabinet ?
 
  BTW:
   You ought to get it straight concerning "payroll taxes" .  For the most part, for those you are talking about, who may not even pay income tax.."payroll taxes" is a misnomer.. "Payroll taxes" are such things are social security, medicare and unemployment fees, which are more logically compared to insurance policies...financing their own benefits or likely benefits..not really like a govt tax on income.

[Junior1942]

I'm right much a dummy on computers but I have had lots of experience as a taxpayer.  The tax codes are so complex, especially for corporations, that you can make it look like anyone either pays or doesn't pay.  Usually, everybody pays.  Bottom line, taxes are too high but government spending is way too high.  Raising taxes even a little bit will increase spending by a lot since government acts like an irresponsible teenager with daddy's credit card.

one small thing is raising taxes will cut income as well making it so more borrowing would be needed.

So you're for increasing with-holding taxes on working Americans and against eliminating a loophole which allows Big Oil to pay zero USA income taxes?  By the way, they got that loophole back when oil was $2 a barrel. 

[mcwoodduck]

I'm right much a dummy on computers but I have had lots of experience as a taxpayer.  The tax codes are so complex, especially for corporations, that you can make it look like anyone either pays or doesn't pay.  Usually, everybody pays.  Bottom line, taxes are too high but government spending is way too high.  Raising taxes even a little bit will increase spending by a lot since government acts like an irresponsible teenager with daddy's credit card.

one small thing is raising taxes will cut income as well making it so more borrowing would be needed.

So you're for increasing with-holding taxes on working Americans and against eliminating a loophole which allows Big Oil to pay zero USA income taxes?  By the way, they got that loophole back when oil was $2 a barrel.

I am for lower taxes across the board!  Some smart men realized that adding taxes on the fuel supply will create inflation. 
Are these concepts you do not understand?  does your wanting no one to get ahead, to have more than you have get in the way of simple concepts like supply and demand, risk and reward?  I know by your writtings that Oppertunity Cost is far above your head.  I know by your writting that, innovation and technoligical advancements and the creation and elimination of jobs too is beyond your ability.  Much like the Diesel electric train eliminated the fireman in the cab, and those small minded men were unwilling to retrain into other jobs.  Instead, ticket and freight prices reflected a third person in the cab that did nothing.

[ironglow]

  Brilliant strategy Junior,,,
  So B Hussein raises taxes 50% higher on "big oil".. then we pay $4.55 per gallon , instead of $3.86 per gallon.
 
  Isn't that called... "cutting off your nose in order to spite your face" ?
 
  Or is "robbing Peter to pay Paul" more appropriate ?    ...DUH
 
  Just join the rest of us and demand that your fuehrer stop the crazy spending !

[Junior1942]

Eliminating Big Oil's 15% depletion allowance ON CRUDE OIL PRODUCTION with have zero effect on pump gasoline prices.  Gasoline refineries buy crude oil on the world market.  Exxon-Mobil makes $1,000,000,000 per month in profit and pays $0.00 in USA income taxes.  Imagine what Chevron and all the rest make..... and don't pay.
They get away with $0.00 income taxes for two reasons: (1) the depletion allowance and (2) money given to Republicans in Congress in order to keep (1) on the books.  You Republican voters are about to start paying more payroll taxes so Big Oil can keep paying less.  I'd be fine with more payroll taxes if only Republicans paid them!

[us920669]

You keep talking about Exxon Mobile.  How about Conoco Phillips and all the others.  Raise taxes on them and all US gas will cost more but US companies will be dis-advantaged.  I used to shake my head when I heard how much more Europeans pay for gas.  That was because of taxes, and look what it has got them.  Even compared to ours, European economies are a smoking hole in the ground now.


Listen, you're a good guy - I like Delta Blues too - but you sure don't know much about economics.  It's not your fault, a lot of effort went into making you that way, but Google Murray Rothbard and check out some of his work.  For a little more tame approach, check out F A Hayek.  They can teach you that money to an economy is like blood is to a body.  Take out enough and it will weaken and die.

[Junior1942]

You keep talking about Exxon Mobile.  How about Conoco Phillips and all the others.  Raise taxes on them and all US gas will cost more but US companies will be dis-advantaged.  I used to shake my head when I heard how much more Europeans pay for gas.  That was because of taxes, and look what it has got them.  Even compared to ours, European economies are a smoking hole in the ground now.

American oil companies paying income taxes on crude oil production will have zero effect on world crude oil prices, and, therefore, would have zero effect on gasoline prices.  How many times do I have to repeat that?

[us920669]

As many times as you want but that wont make it true.  What if we saddled Exxon Mobile with the whole US debt.  How much would our gas cost then.  I modified Post 15 while you were typing - be sure to check it out.

[mcwoodduck]

You keep talking about Exxon Mobile.  How about Conoco Phillips and all the others.  Raise taxes on them and all US gas will cost more but US companies will be dis-advantaged.  I used to shake my head when I heard how much more Europeans pay for gas.  That was because of taxes, and look what it has got them.  Even compared to ours, European economies are a smoking hole in the ground now.

American oil companies paying income taxes on crude oil production will have zero effect on world crude oil prices, and, therefore, would have zero effect on gasoline prices.  How many times do I have to repeat that?

Really?  Are you that big of a dolt?  How can adding taxes not raise prices?  A tax is a cost to a company.  If  it costs a company $1 to make a gizmo and it wants a fair margin of 30%  the sell price would be $1.43  (Margin is not the same as precentage) so if I now ihave ot pay taxes on the profits of the gizmo, let's just say 10%.  I still need the 30% margin in order to pay back the loans I have for starting the business and pay stock holders as well as create a reserve to use for research and development as well as legal claims against the gizmo.  And at 1.43 each I can sell 100 Million a year = 43 Million in profits.  Now my costs are 1.043 each unit. 1.043 /.7 = 1.49 each.  At a $1.49 for some reason I can only sell 75 Million a year = 111, 750 a year in income rather than the 143 with out taxes.  There may be many reasons why we only sell 75% with a slight price increase it may be subsitute goods (a widget is 1.46 and just as good as the gizmo) it could be satisfaction, that at 1.43 you want one at a 1.49 it is not worth it to you and you are willing to spend $.01more to get another good precieved to be better.  Would they buy two of the Zots for the same $1.49 even though they are not the quality?  Will they buy the imported product that has cheaper labor making them and get three for the same $1.49?
Now at making 75million I only need 20 guys to make it them rather than the 25 I have now.  Do I cut 5 guys?  Do I put all on a 35 hour work week?  Cutting their pay will it cut my costs enough to lower my price or absorb the tax and keep the price the same and just have a shortage of goods? 
Are you really that Stupid to think economics are a zero sum gain?  That no mater the cost the same amount will still be purchased, that increasing taxes on needed items to fuel the economy will have no effect on other prices as the costs to move or make raw materials, labor, and finnished products around.  After all you have X amount of money and if the fuel it takes for you to get to work goes up that is going to make you have to spend less elsewhere or figure out a new source of income, that will come with it's own costs.
I will make you a deal.  If you go to your local community college and take an Econ 101 class, so you can learn costs and price structure, supply and demand,  The ultilazation of Capital and resources, and get a B- or better in it, I will pay for the class.
 

[briarpatch]

Junior, there again your handlers have sent you to school with an empty lunch box and no books. 

[Junior1942]

.......I will make you a deal.  If you go to your local community college and take an Econ 101 class, so you can learn costs and price structure, supply and demand,  The ultilazation of Capital and resources, and get a B- or better in it, I will pay for the class.

I have a 3.97 GPA for five years of college.  I could get a B- in that class and attend only 1/2 of the classes. You need the class, not me.  The price of gasoline is based on the world price of crude oil paid by the gasoline refineries.  That price is mainly determined by OPEC and some valves in the Middle East and Russia.  Whether a USA oil well owner pays income taxes on the production from his wells has nothing to do with the price of gasoline.  But whether that oil well owner enjoys the benefits of a 15% off-the-top tax loophole depends totally on the number of Republicans in office.  And, I must add, the number of Republican voters who believe right wing spin is Gospel 1010.

[BUGEYE]

In recorded history, every time a cost has been added to the producer of a product,  the consumer price has gone up.
they are not charities.  they are in business to make money.  of course, democrats ain't too bright.

disclaimer---- I have no idea what juniors political affiliation is.

[Lost Farmboy]

 

I have a 3.97 GPA for five years of college.  I could get a B- in that class and attend only 1/2 of the classes.

 

 
This explains a lot. 

[billy_56081]

One has to be mentally challenged to want to tax corporations. Who pays these taxes? The CONSUMER! THe liberal parasites seem to have an insatiable appetite for stolen money.

[nomosendero]

I have a 3.97 GPA for five years of college.  I could get a B- in that class and attend only 1/2 of the classes.

 

 
This explains a lot. 

Yes it does. I graduated from one of those Lib Universities & then I got out in the real world &
the REAL learning began.

[DDZ]

Liberals can not comprehend that increased taxes on rich guys, lear jet owners, yacht owners, corporations, and anyone they add to the tax more list, is a tax on everyone else. Its a waste of time to even try and explain it to them. All you get in return is "they don't pay their fair share". Like everyone else should be entitled to the fruits of their labor, just because they have more. 

[mcwoodduck]

.......I will make you a deal.  If you go to your local community college and take an Econ 101 class, so you can learn costs and price structure, supply and demand,  The ultilazation of Capital and resources, and get a B- or better in it, I will pay for the class.

I have a 3.97 GPA for five years of college.  I could get a B- in that class and attend only 1/2 of the classes. You need the class, not me.  The price of gasoline is based on the world price of crude oil paid by the gasoline refineries.  That price is mainly determined by OPEC and some valves in the Middle East and Russia.  Whether a USA oil well owner pays income taxes on the production from his wells has nothing to do with the price of gasoline.  But whether that oil well owner enjoys the benefits of a 15% off-the-top tax loophole depends totally on the number of Republicans in office.  And, I must add, the number of Republican voters who believe right wing spin is Gospel 1010.

Well clearly the underwater basekt weaving and the physical education classes are agreeing with you.  Broaden your horizens and take some economics, government, and constitutional law classes.
Republicans are about freedom.  Personal freedom to do what you want and do use your proprty as you see fit. 
Democrats are about control.  They limit your personal freedom, limit what you can do with your property and create problems in gaining power.  They think that they know better what you should do with your life and with your property, the property they allow you to keep. 

[carbineman]

.......I will make you a deal.  If you go to your local community college and take an Econ 101 class, so you can learn costs and price structure, supply and demand,  The ultilazation of Capital and resources, and get a B- or better in it, I will pay for the class.

I have a 3.97 GPA for five years of college.  I could get a B- in that class and attend only 1/2 of the classes. You need the class, not me.  The price of gasoline is based on the world price of crude oil paid by the gasoline refineries.  That price is mainly determined by OPEC and some valves in the Middle East and Russia.  Whether a USA oil well owner pays income taxes on the production from his wells has nothing to do with the price of gasoline.  But whether that oil well owner enjoys the benefits of a 15% off-the-top tax loophole depends totally on the number of Republicans in office.  And, I must add, the number of Republican voters who believe right wing spin is Gospel 1010.

Junior do not feel bad. There are liberals out there that had higher GPA's than you that have been sucked in by that class warfare that the democrat party pushes. A relative of mine is a retired teacher and she has bought into that pitting of one group of people against another, thinking that the guy working at the car wash isn't paying for her lavish early retirement, and thinking that the rich in world should. She thinks that 100% taxation on anyone making over 125M would be alright. Last year she worked, she made 90M with salary and benefits. She had a 4.0 college GPA, so don't feel bad about your ignorance on economics. It is prevalent all across the fruited plain........

[sidewinder319]

If these losers spent more time improving their lives they would have more. It seems they spend hours proving why the rest of the world caused  them to be failures. Anyone who thinks they are improving their lot by reading and repeating negative Blogs about Big Business is very wrong. The reason you have very little is that you have never learned how to direct your own life. And you are judging how to tax and run Multi National Corporations, Really???

[ironglow]

  Junior;
       You may have the education you are speaking of but the half of the classes you didn't attend..must be the same half your instructors also didn't attend !
    Not hard to figure out; even when the neighboring farmer's wife sells he fresh country eggs, she has to take into account ALL expenses.  Cost of chicks, starter feed, housing, cleaning, laying mash, roost treatment, loss in hens ..every expense.  When she gets done, and and figuring in her time & labor...if she is not making a worthwhile profit, she may as well butcher the hens off and put them in the freezer.  It's insane to produce and lose money on each unit !
   Corporations are even more diligent about keeping track of costs..and that includes ALL costs..and the final price is set accordingly...DUH !