Another Liberal myth: Oil compainies get subsidies/tax breaks

What Democrats are calling subsidies is tax deductions on expenditures, like drilling & exploration, EPA regulations costs.
If they don't have these deductions the cost will be passed on the the consumers - we the people.

What about raising taxes on corporations as a means to get them to pay their "rightful share of government"? If a tax is levied on a corporation and if it is to survive, it will have one of several responses or some combination thereof. One response is to raise the price of its product, so customers share part of the burden. Another response is to lower dividends, so shareholders share a part of the burden. And a considerable portion of reduced dividend burden falls on ordinary non-rich people. According to the Tax Foundation, 19 percent of federal tax returns report dividend income but 42 percent of taxpayers older than 65 report dividend income. Therefore, it is people, not some legal fiction called a corporation, who bear the burden of the tax. Because corporations have these responses to the imposition of a tax, they are merely government tax collectors.

The largest burden of corporate taxes is borne by workers. We discover that by asking a simple question, such as: Which workers on a road construction project earn the higher pay, those employed moving dirt with shovels and wheelbarrows or those doing the same atop giant earthmovers? You'd guess the guys operating the earthmovers, but why? It's not because they're unionized or because construction contractors have a fondness for earthmover operators. It's because those workers have more capital (tools) to work with and are thereby more productive. Higher productivity translates into higher wages.

Tax policies that raise the cost of capital formation — such as capital gains taxes, low depreciation allowances and corporate taxes — reduce capital formation. As a result, workers have less capital, lower productivity and lower wage growth. In 1980, Joseph Stiglitz, now a Nobel laureate, said that workers share the highest corporate tax burden in the form of lower wages. A number of economic studies, including that of the Congressional Budget Office, show that workers bear anywhere from 45 to 75 percent of the corporate tax burden. Adding to the burden is the fact that capital has the kind of mobility that labor doesn't. Corporate capital can flee to other countries easily, but workers cannot.

We are now # 1 in the world for Coporation taxes.
 
To Republicans giving the oil companies money is good.

Giving grandma money to pay for her heating oil is bad.
 
speaking of calling people names for no more reason than they dis agree
any time you take welath from me, or Exxon, for nothing in return
that is not a break
now go away, shut up or stop being a damn ass-hole
The government is taking away money from taxpayers and giving it to oil companies.

The Tax Foundation - Local, State and Federal Gas Taxes Consume 45.9 Cents Per Gallon on Average
Exxon Earns Huge Profits, But Also Pays Huge Taxes | TheBlaze.com
looks like to me the govt is taking money from both of us
after the fact of the event, not before
What does the federal gasoline tax have to do with anything. We're talking about direct tax breaks and subsidies to oil companies.

You're attempt to move the goalposts has failed. Again.
 
To Republicans giving the oil companies money is good.

Giving grandma money to pay for her heating oil is bad.

The only threat to subsidized heating oil has been from democrats.

Stick with the facts
 
To Republicans giving the oil companies money is good.

Giving grandma money to pay for her heating oil is bad.

To Chris making stupid statements with no support is good.

Actually thinking about what he is saying is bad.

Maybe Grandma's kids should consider giving her money for heating oil. Oh wait, that would mean they would actually need to care for her. But you can't expect that, but you can criticise unknown conservatives for being less caring than her kids.

You are still a moron.
 
What Democrats are calling subsidies is tax deductions on expenditures, like drilling & exploration, EPA regulations costs.
If they don't have these deductions the cost will be passed on the the consumers - we the people.


Apple needs tax breaks so my iPhone is cheaper! Kraft needs subsidies so their Mac and Cheese will be cheaper!

My gawd the radio has taught you people well.
 
What Democrats are calling subsidies is tax deductions on expenditures, like drilling & exploration, EPA regulations costs.
If they don't have these deductions the cost will be passed on the the consumers - we the people.

What about raising taxes on corporations as a means to get them to pay their "rightful share of government"? If a tax is levied on a corporation and if it is to survive, it will have one of several responses or some combination thereof. One response is to raise the price of its product, so customers share part of the burden. Another response is to lower dividends, so shareholders share a part of the burden. And a considerable portion of reduced dividend burden falls on ordinary non-rich people. According to the Tax Foundation, 19 percent of federal tax returns report dividend income but 42 percent of taxpayers older than 65 report dividend income. Therefore, it is people, not some legal fiction called a corporation, who bear the burden of the tax. Because corporations have these responses to the imposition of a tax, they are merely government tax collectors.

The largest burden of corporate taxes is borne by workers. We discover that by asking a simple question, such as: Which workers on a road construction project earn the higher pay, those employed moving dirt with shovels and wheelbarrows or those doing the same atop giant earthmovers? You'd guess the guys operating the earthmovers, but why? It's not because they're unionized or because construction contractors have a fondness for earthmover operators. It's because those workers have more capital (tools) to work with and are thereby more productive. Higher productivity translates into higher wages.

Tax policies that raise the cost of capital formation — such as capital gains taxes, low depreciation allowances and corporate taxes — reduce capital formation. As a result, workers have less capital, lower productivity and lower wage growth. In 1980, Joseph Stiglitz, now a Nobel laureate, said that workers share the highest corporate tax burden in the form of lower wages. A number of economic studies, including that of the Congressional Budget Office, show that workers bear anywhere from 45 to 75 percent of the corporate tax burden. Adding to the burden is the fact that capital has the kind of mobility that labor doesn't. Corporate capital can flee to other countries easily, but workers cannot.

We are now # 1 in the world for Coporation taxes.

Just to survive
The one thing you make mention of is the stock market
Many-Many 401ks have Exxon in there porfolio

Evry time you harm Exxon, you harm the consumer in ways the liberal will never understand

There "earnings" will be brought in line by the very ways you speak of
again thanks
 
What Democrats are calling subsidies is tax deductions on expenditures, like drilling & exploration, EPA regulations costs.
If they don't have these deductions the cost will be passed on the the consumers - we the people.


Apple needs tax breaks so my iPhone is cheaper! Kraft needs subsidies so their Mac and Cheese will be cheaper!

My gawd the radio has taught you people well.

You define one losing less wealth as a break, we can agree on that
I define loss of welath as just that, loss of wealth

I agree that a lower tax rate will allow Exxon to pass that savings on
there profit margin has not changed, just there revenue

8% of revenue that is 1 dollar is .08
make it that revenue 2 dollars is .16

there you have your record profits
 
What Democrats are calling subsidies is tax deductions on expenditures, like drilling & exploration, EPA regulations costs.
If they don't have these deductions the cost will be passed on the the consumers - we the people.

What about raising taxes on corporations as a means to get them to pay their "rightful share of government"? If a tax is levied on a corporation and if it is to survive, it will have one of several responses or some combination thereof. One response is to raise the price of its product, so customers share part of the burden. Another response is to lower dividends, so shareholders share a part of the burden. And a considerable portion of reduced dividend burden falls on ordinary non-rich people. According to the Tax Foundation, 19 percent of federal tax returns report dividend income but 42 percent of taxpayers older than 65 report dividend income. Therefore, it is people, not some legal fiction called a corporation, who bear the burden of the tax. Because corporations have these responses to the imposition of a tax, they are merely government tax collectors.

The largest burden of corporate taxes is borne by workers. We discover that by asking a simple question, such as: Which workers on a road construction project earn the higher pay, those employed moving dirt with shovels and wheelbarrows or those doing the same atop giant earthmovers? You'd guess the guys operating the earthmovers, but why? It's not because they're unionized or because construction contractors have a fondness for earthmover operators. It's because those workers have more capital (tools) to work with and are thereby more productive. Higher productivity translates into higher wages.

Tax policies that raise the cost of capital formation — such as capital gains taxes, low depreciation allowances and corporate taxes — reduce capital formation. As a result, workers have less capital, lower productivity and lower wage growth. In 1980, Joseph Stiglitz, now a Nobel laureate, said that workers share the highest corporate tax burden in the form of lower wages. A number of economic studies, including that of the Congressional Budget Office, show that workers bear anywhere from 45 to 75 percent of the corporate tax burden. Adding to the burden is the fact that capital has the kind of mobility that labor doesn't. Corporate capital can flee to other countries easily, but workers cannot.

We are now # 1 in the world for Coporation taxes.

Just to survive
The one thing you make mention of is the stock market
Many-Many 401ks have Exxon in there porfolio

Evry time you harm Exxon, you harm the consumer in ways the liberal will never understand
There "earnings" will be brought in line by the very ways you speak of
again thanks

They understand and they don't mind because they always have the power of spin, and the media echo chamber supports their distortions. And they don't like ordinary people being capitalists aka "owning stocks"
 
The government gives them tax breaks and subsidizes their production.

You are a blatant liar. Or stupid. The two are not mutually exclusive.

Deducting legitimate business expenses is not a "tax break," and it certainly isn't a "subsidy."

Face it: you're a sleazy lying dumbass.
 
The government is taking away money from taxpayers and giving it to oil companies.

The Tax Foundation - Local, State and Federal Gas Taxes Consume 45.9 Cents Per Gallon on Average
Exxon Earns Huge Profits, But Also Pays Huge Taxes | TheBlaze.com
looks like to me the govt is taking money from both of us
after the fact of the event, not before
What does the federal gasoline tax have to do with anything. We're talking about direct tax breaks and subsidies to oil companies.

You're attempt to move the goalposts has failed. Again.

No it is not, in fact there is no better way to show how taxes effect and who they effect

Exxon does not really care, its the consumer who pays whether its in
pay
stocks
price at the pump

They do not need a "break" to nor a "subsidy" to do there thing they do to make profit

Obama and the dems have talked baout this as that you and I are getting robbed by the "rich" oil companies, yet that link you claim is moving the goal post clearly shows who is robbing who here
 
The government is taking away money from taxpayers and giving it to oil companies.

The government isn't giving jackshit to oil companies.

You're simply too stupid to understand how you're being duped by Obama.
 
Maybe Grandma's kids should consider giving her money for heating oil. Oh wait, that would mean they would actually need to care for her. But you can't expect that, but you can criticise unknown conservatives for being less caring than her kids.

You are still a moron.

Chris believes that me and you should take care of his grandma so he won't have to soil his hands with the job.
 
Your thread title says that it's a myth that the oil companies get TAX BREAKS.

Do you need someone to define a TAX BREAK for you?

Please define it for us. I'm sure the results will be hilarious.

I have NY on ignore, you know why
let me define a tax break for NY
there is no such a thing

Taking less wealth from one than the federal govt took the year before is not a break.
What the lib cannot grasp is the wealth is yours and mine to start with. That wealth being taken away is part of the deal, but by no means does it mean any-one is getting a break

Work for it
invest for it
give our time for it

And then when its all said and done, you give a protion of that effort, GIVE to the federal govt, which had done nothing to help you get it

And somehow thats a break?
 
Your thread title says that it's a myth that the oil companies get TAX BREAKS.

Do you need someone to define a TAX BREAK for you?

Please define it for us. I'm sure the results will be hilarious.

I have NY on ignore, you know why
let me define a tax break for NY
there is no such a thing

Taking less wealth from one than the federal govt took the year before is not a break.
What the lib cannot grasp is the wealth is yours and mine to start with. That wealth being taken away is part of the deal, but by no means does it mean any-one is getting a break

Work for it
invest for it
give our time for it

And then when its all said and done, you give a protion of that effort, GIVE to the federal govt, which had done nothing to help you get it

And somehow thats a break?
In other words? Government is prohibited in owning ANYTHING...and as such ALL they have belongs TO the people.

All wealth is generated by the people, and government under point of a gun confiscates it to function under thier powers granted BY the Constitution.

It is by our good graces we elect people to be the stewards of OUR WEALTH...by faith.

They for political purposes choose to give it to those that are capable of producing, and won't.

The Producers, are a vanishing breed in these times by design. The Producers are outnumbered.

The Politicians are betraying ALL of us.
 
Please define it for us. I'm sure the results will be hilarious.

I have NY on ignore, you know why
let me define a tax break for NY
there is no such a thing

Taking less wealth from one than the federal govt took the year before is not a break.
What the lib cannot grasp is the wealth is yours and mine to start with. That wealth being taken away is part of the deal, but by no means does it mean any-one is getting a break

Work for it
invest for it
give our time for it

And then when its all said and done, you give a protion of that effort, GIVE to the federal govt, which had done nothing to help you get it

And somehow thats a break?
In other words? Government is prohibited in owning ANYTHING...and as such ALL they have belongs TO the people.

All wealth is generated by the people, and government under point of a gun confiscates it to function under thier powers granted BY the Constitution.

It is by our good graces we elect people to be the stewards of OUR WEALTH...by faith.

They for political purposes choose to give it to those that are capable of producing, and won't.

The Producers, are a vanishing breed in these times by design. The Producers are outnumbered.

The Politicians are betraying ALL of us.

when the leader of those stewards of our wealth states that by some magic he is giving those who earn that wealth a break some how? or that he is some magic, I dont even know how to describe how Obama can stand up in front of god and every-one and claim that these companies are getting a subsidy
I cannot find the words to describe it. I have never seen any-thing so upside down in my life


Your spot on T
 
I have NY on ignore, you know why
let me define a tax break for NY
there is no such a thing

Taking less wealth from one than the federal govt took the year before is not a break.
What the lib cannot grasp is the wealth is yours and mine to start with. That wealth being taken away is part of the deal, but by no means does it mean any-one is getting a break

Work for it
invest for it
give our time for it

And then when its all said and done, you give a protion of that effort, GIVE to the federal govt, which had done nothing to help you get it

And somehow thats a break?
In other words? Government is prohibited in owning ANYTHING...and as such ALL they have belongs TO the people.

All wealth is generated by the people, and government under point of a gun confiscates it to function under thier powers granted BY the Constitution.

It is by our good graces we elect people to be the stewards of OUR WEALTH...by faith.

They for political purposes choose to give it to those that are capable of producing, and won't.

The Producers, are a vanishing breed in these times by design. The Producers are outnumbered.

The Politicians are betraying ALL of us.

when the leader of those stewards of our wealth states that by some magic he is giving those who earn that wealth a break some how? or that he is some magic, I dont even know how to describe how Obama can stand up in front of god and every-one and claim that these companies are getting a subsidy
I cannot find the words to describe it. I have never seen any-thing so upside down in my life


Your spot on T

It's by design and been going on since the 16th and 17th were passed...slow, steady...Obama was elected by the elite to tie the ribbons on it after 100 years.
 

Forum List

Back
Top