It's Official--Romney and Ryan for 2012!!!

[georgephillip]

Robert Reich (The Ryan Choice)

 

[Intense]

Where do you see Mitt or Paul in "The Fountainhead"?

Personally, Ellsworth Toohey reminds me more of John D. Rockefeller than Harold Lasky.
Let's ask Bob to settle this one:

"Social Darwinism offered a moral justification for the wild inequities and social cruelties of the late nineteenth century.

"It allowed John D. Rockefeller, for example, to claim the fortune he accumulated through his giant Standard Oil Trust was 'merely a survival of the fittest… the working out of a law of nature and of God.'”

In terms of the "pyrotechnical display of the fascist mind at its best" is John D. or Mitt R. or Paul R. or RR your "sacrificial victim?"

Where do you see Mitt or Paul in "The Fountainhead"?

I don't know that I do. Romney could be a Hank Rearden. Ryan could be the main character in Anthem, Equality 7-2521, but that's just projection.

Personally, Ellsworth Toohey reminds me more of John D. Rockefeller than Harold Lasky.

No comparison, Rockefeller had everything, Tooley had nothing of his own.

Let's ask Bob to settle this one:

Let's not.

"Social Darwinism offered a moral justification for the wild inequities and social cruelties of the late nineteenth century.

"It allowed John D. Rockefeller, for example, to claim the fortune he accumulated through his giant Standard Oil Trust was 'merely a survival of the fittest… the working out of a law of nature and of God.'”

In terms of the "pyrotechnical display of the fascist mind at its best" is John D. or Mitt R. or Paul R. or RR your "sacrificial victim?"

Rather than Social Darwinism, I would Credit Alexander Hamilton's corruption with Big Business and Big Government for the resulted abuses. Starting as far back as the corrupt Whiskey Tax, that brought about the Whiskey Rebellion. Further, the Unholy alliances with the Richest among us, with Big Government, be it unfair Trade Laws, Monopolies, etc. Hamilton's National Bank. His Philosophy was that the end justifies the means, when it came to Government Power and Regulation. I don't view it as Fascist, though Fascism is just one of the many Brands of Totalitarianism.
Statist Progressivism demands Loyalty to the Hive, Self Sacrifice is Mandates. "2+2=5 for as long as I say it does." No One escapes, once you submit. Fuck up, and you Will be thrown under the bus.

 

[Foxfyre]

Sometimes I think one of our politcal parties has no shame. To equate Paul Ryan's views on American exceptionalism, original intent of the Constitution, and concept of unalienable rights as 'social Darwinism' is really REALLY digging deep into the mud to manufacture an accusation. It would be funny if some folks weren't buying into that kind of rhetoric and had no moral qualms about spreading that kind of intentional lie.

 

[georgephillip]

Sometimes I think one of our politcal parties has no shame. To equate Paul Ryan's views on American exceptionalism, original intent of the Constitution, and concept of unalienable rights as 'social Darwinism' is really REALLY digging deep into the mud to manufacture an accusation. It would be funny if some folks weren't buying into that kind of rhetoric and had no moral qualms about spreading that kind of intentional lie.

I notice you didn't mention his budget which is another massive cut in benefits to the poor and elderly.
It's another giant tax cut for the 1%
It will effectively eliminate Medicare and Medicaid.
It won't reduce the national debt at all.
And it's offered by a political hack who's getting richer from doing favors for his rich wife's fracking family.
Sounds like exceptionalism most Americans can't afford.

 

[Foxfyre]

Sometimes I think one of our politcal parties has no shame. To equate Paul Ryan's views on American exceptionalism, original intent of the Constitution, and concept of unalienable rights as 'social Darwinism' is really REALLY digging deep into the mud to manufacture an accusation. It would be funny if some folks weren't buying into that kind of rhetoric and had no moral qualms about spreading that kind of intentional lie.

I notice you didn't mention his budget which is another massive cut in benefits to the poor and elderly.
It's another giant tax cut for the 1%
It will effectively eliminate Medicare and Medicaid.
It won't reduce the national debt at all.
And it's offered by a political hack who's getting richer from doing favors for his rich wife's fracking family.
Sounds like exceptionalism most Americans can't afford.

That is defnitely open for honest debate, but the way I read the Ryan budget, it is nowhere near the assault on Medicare and Medicaid as unrestrained spending, impending bankruptcy, and government generated increasing costs as is what Obamacare offers. I don't know whether the Ryan is the best plan, and if it is not, somebody will no doubt offer a better one, but it at least addressses the real problems and offers a means to begin the difficult process of reform.

This also has absolutely nothing to do with American exceptionalism and unalienable rights which was what I was discussing in my post.

 

[Ernie S.]

Sometimes I think one of our politcal parties has no shame. To equate Paul Ryan's views on American exceptionalism, original intent of the Constitution, and concept of unalienable rights as 'social Darwinism' is really REALLY digging deep into the mud to manufacture an accusation. It would be funny if some folks weren't buying into that kind of rhetoric and had no moral qualms about spreading that kind of intentional lie.

I notice you didn't mention his budget which is another massive cut in benefits to the poor and elderly.
It's another giant tax cut for the 1%
It will effectively eliminate Medicare and Medicaid.
It won't reduce the national debt at all.
And it's offered by a political hack who's getting richer from doing favors for his rich wife's fracking family.
Sounds like exceptionalism most Americans can't afford.

Perhaps you can substantiate your claims?

 

[georgephillip]

Sometimes I think one of our politcal parties has no shame. To equate Paul Ryan's views on American exceptionalism, original intent of the Constitution, and concept of unalienable rights as 'social Darwinism' is really REALLY digging deep into the mud to manufacture an accusation. It would be funny if some folks weren't buying into that kind of rhetoric and had no moral qualms about spreading that kind of intentional lie.

I notice you didn't mention his budget which is another massive cut in benefits to the poor and elderly.
It's another giant tax cut for the 1%
It will effectively eliminate Medicare and Medicaid.
It won't reduce the national debt at all.
And it's offered by a political hack who's getting richer from doing favors for his rich wife's fracking family.
Sounds like exceptionalism most Americans can't afford.

Perhaps you can substantiate your claims?

I can try, Ernie.
Here's one I heard about on my local Pacifica radio station last Sunday.
I haven't seen it reported elsewhere, but I try to avoid corporate media.

"Statements of Economic Interest (SEI) recently released by Congressman Paul Ryan (R-Janesville), when compared to previous years’ SEI show a clear pattern – the more influence he has on the Congressional Budget process, the more stake he (through his wife Janna (nee Little)) has gained in Oklahoma mining interests.

"This family interest is led by Ryan’s father-in-law, Dan Little; and is currently making millions leasing rights to energy giants engaging in extensive natural gas shale fracking.

"The financial conflicts at work here are direct. Ryan’s budget gives $43 Billion in tax breaks to the companies and processes the Little family (and Ryan) profit from. The policy conflict is the expansion of fracking, which the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) is promoting through powerful Legislators like Ryan."

Paul Ryan – Fracking Baron with clear conflicts of interest | Badger Democracy

 

[Jackson]

Gentle Reminder - this thread is in the CDZ

The news was obviously officially 'leaked' yesterday evening (Friday) that Mitt Romney would announce his VP pick today. And that pick would be Paul Ryan of Wisconsin. In the last hour, Romney and Ryan made that official with a formal announcement.

So I would have lost a bet that it would be Marco Rubio. I did not think it would be Ryan. In truth, last night I was disappointed mostly because I really wanted Rubio.

But now that I've had some time to think about it, the only conclusion I can come up with is that Mitt Romeny is 100% serious about economic reform and he picked the most logical person to help do that. And, if they are elected, I am optimistic that they will make a difference.

So we have Mr. Businessman plus Mr. Economics as the official ticket. What do you think? A good one? Or not?

I don't think it was a good choice. It was a great choice. It put the focus on the campaign just were it should be...... on the economy.

Obama has been turning cartwheels to avoid the subject and this is what everyone is now talking about....even the liberals. There will be no doubt that debate issues will be surrounding the economy now just where Obama's head was in the sand.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I notice you didn't mention his budget which is another massive cut in benefits to the poor and elderly.
It's another giant tax cut for the 1%
It will effectively eliminate Medicare and Medicaid.
It won't reduce the national debt at all.
And it's offered by a political hack who's getting richer from doing favors for his rich wife's fracking family.
Sounds like exceptionalism most Americans can't afford.

Perhaps you can substantiate your claims?

I can try, Ernie.
Here's one I heard about on my local Pacifica radio station last Sunday.
I haven't seen it reported elsewhere, but I try to avoid corporate media.

"Statements of Economic Interest (SEI) recently released by Congressman Paul Ryan (R-Janesville), when compared to previous years’ SEI show a clear pattern – the more influence he has on the Congressional Budget process, the more stake he (through his wife Janna (nee Little)) has gained in Oklahoma mining interests.

"This family interest is led by Ryan’s father-in-law, Dan Little; and is currently making millions leasing rights to energy giants engaging in extensive natural gas shale fracking.

"The financial conflicts at work here are direct. Ryan’s budget gives $43 Billion in tax breaks to the companies and processes the Little family (and Ryan) profit from. The policy conflict is the expansion of fracking, which the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) is promoting through powerful Legislators like Ryan."

Paul Ryan – Fracking Baron with clear conflicts of interest | Badger Democracy

Ryan’s budget gives $43 Billion in tax breaks to the companies and processes the Little family (and Ryan) profit from.

Sounds interesting. What are these special tax breaks?

 

[georgephillip]

Perhaps you can substantiate your claims?

I can try, Ernie.
Here's one I heard about on my local Pacifica radio station last Sunday.
I haven't seen it reported elsewhere, but I try to avoid corporate media.

"Statements of Economic Interest (SEI) recently released by Congressman Paul Ryan (R-Janesville), when compared to previous years’ SEI show a clear pattern – the more influence he has on the Congressional Budget process, the more stake he (through his wife Janna (nee Little)) has gained in Oklahoma mining interests.

"This family interest is led by Ryan’s father-in-law, Dan Little; and is currently making millions leasing rights to energy giants engaging in extensive natural gas shale fracking.

"The financial conflicts at work here are direct. Ryan’s budget gives $43 Billion in tax breaks to the companies and processes the Little family (and Ryan) profit from. The policy conflict is the expansion of fracking, which the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) is promoting through powerful Legislators like Ryan."

Paul Ryan – Fracking Baron with clear conflicts of interest | Badger Democracy

Ryan’s budget gives $43 Billion in tax breaks to the companies and processes the Little family (and Ryan) profit from.

Sounds interesting. What are these special tax breaks?

You're confused about tax breaks for oil companies?

"That’s because the tax code is stuffed with a host of subsidies for oil and gas. These subsidies are delivered through the tax code but they are essentially no different from government spending programs that provide money directly."

Big Oil?s Misbegotten Tax Gusher: Why They Don?t Need $70 Billion from Taxpayers Amid Record Profits

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I can try, Ernie.
Here's one I heard about on my local Pacifica radio station last Sunday.
I haven't seen it reported elsewhere, but I try to avoid corporate media.

"Statements of Economic Interest (SEI) recently released by Congressman Paul Ryan (R-Janesville), when compared to previous years’ SEI show a clear pattern – the more influence he has on the Congressional Budget process, the more stake he (through his wife Janna (nee Little)) has gained in Oklahoma mining interests.

"This family interest is led by Ryan’s father-in-law, Dan Little; and is currently making millions leasing rights to energy giants engaging in extensive natural gas shale fracking.

"The financial conflicts at work here are direct. Ryan’s budget gives $43 Billion in tax breaks to the companies and processes the Little family (and Ryan) profit from. The policy conflict is the expansion of fracking, which the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) is promoting through powerful Legislators like Ryan."

Paul Ryan – Fracking Baron with clear conflicts of interest | Badger Democracy

Ryan’s budget gives $43 Billion in tax breaks to the companies and processes the Little family (and Ryan) profit from.

Sounds interesting. What are these special tax breaks?

You're confused about tax breaks for oil companies?

"That’s because the tax code is stuffed with a host of subsidies for oil and gas. These subsidies are delivered through the tax code but they are essentially no different from government spending programs that provide money directly."

Big Oil?s Misbegotten Tax Gusher: Why They Don?t Need $70 Billion from Taxpayers Amid Record Profits

You're confused about tax breaks for oil companies?

No, I just know that when liberals whine about "tax breaks", they're usually talking about deducting business expenses, which is what businesses do.

Percentage depletion ($11.2 billion over 10 years)

That's awful! An oil company buys a well with $1 billion of oil in it and gets to write off some of the value of the oil they extract every year.

Domestic manufacturing deduction for oil production ($18.2 billion over 10 years)

Aren't liberals all about buying in America and getting rid of the nasty free trade agreements? That's okay, you can get rid of this one.

Expensing of intangible drilling costs ($12.5 billion over 10 years)

What's this mean?

This means they can take immediate deductions for these costs rather than spreading the deductions out over the useful life of the wells, which is the normal tax code rule for other types of investments.

Well, I think all companies should have 100% expensing, so let's make this one universal.

Taking deductions immediately means the companies lower their tax bill in the first year, in effect getting an interest-free loan from the government.

Only if you believe all the money belongs to the government. I believe this will instead cause a big boost in investment in equipment which will boost US GDP and employment.

It's nice that they finally got rid of the ethanol subsidy, now they just need to kill the mandate.

 

[freedombecki]

Ryan’s budget gives $43 Billion in tax breaks to the companies and processes the Little family (and Ryan) profit from.

Sounds interesting. What are these special tax breaks?

You're confused about tax breaks for oil companies?

"That’s because the tax code is stuffed with a host of subsidies for oil and gas. These subsidies are delivered through the tax code but they are essentially no different from government spending programs that provide money directly."

Big Oil?s Misbegotten Tax Gusher: Why They Don?t Need $70 Billion from Taxpayers Amid Record Profits

You're confused about tax breaks for oil companies?

No, I just know that when liberals whine about "tax breaks", they're usually talking about deducting business expenses, which is what businesses do.

Percentage depletion ($11.2 billion over 10 years)

That's awful! An oil company buys a well with $1 billion of oil in it and gets to write off some of the value of the oil they extract every year.

Domestic manufacturing deduction for oil production ($18.2 billion over 10 years)

Aren't liberals all about buying in America and getting rid of the nasty free trade agreements? That's okay, you can get rid of this one.

Expensing of intangible drilling costs ($12.5 billion over 10 years)

What's this mean?

This means they can take immediate deductions for these costs rather than spreading the deductions out over the useful life of the wells, which is the normal tax code rule for other types of investments.

Well, I think all companies should have 100% expensing, so let's make this one universal.

Taking deductions immediately means the companies lower their tax bill in the first year, in effect getting an interest-free loan from the government.

Only if you believe all the money belongs to the government. I believe this will instead cause a big boost in investment in equipment which will boost US GDP and employment.

It's nice that they finally got rid of the ethanol subsidy, now they just need to kill the mandate.

I nominate Toddsterpatriot to the National Treasury Department Chairmanship!

 

[georgephillip]

You're pockets probably aren't deep enough.
Here's what Mr. Treasure Secretary left out of his assessment of "Percentage depletion"

"The oil and gas industry maintains that this is not a special tax break because other companies receive similar deductions. But the percentage depletion method permitted for oil and gas is fundamentally different and more favorable. In some cases, it can eliminate all federal taxes for these companies."

Saying that all money doesn't belong to the government doesn't change the fact that without government money loses all of its value.

Big Oil?s Misbegotten Tax Gusher: Why They Don?t Need $70 Billion from Taxpayers Amid Record Profits

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You're pockets probably aren't deep enough.
Here's what Mr. Treasure Secretary left out of his assessment of "Percentage depletion"

"The oil and gas industry maintains that this is not a special tax break because other companies receive similar deductions. But the percentage depletion method permitted for oil and gas is fundamentally different and more favorable. In some cases, it can eliminate all federal taxes for these companies."

Saying that all money doesn't belong to the government doesn't change the fact that without government money loses all of its value.

Big Oil?s Misbegotten Tax Gusher: Why They Don?t Need $70 Billion from Taxpayers Amid Record Profits

In some cases, it can eliminate all federal taxes for these companies."

That's awful. Exxon still managed to pay $31 billion in income tax in 2011. Chevron $20.6 billion. ConocoPhillips $10.5 billion. Maybe they haven't heard of the percentage depletion method?

Saying that all money doesn't belong to the government doesn't change the fact that without government money loses all of its value.

LOL! So what?

 

[georgephillip]

How much US Federal Income Tax did Exxon pay in 2011?
Maybe it hasn't heard of the US Navy?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

How much US Federal Income Tax did Exxon pay in 2011?
Maybe it hasn't heard of the US Navy?

Why don't you tell me?

 

[georgephillip]

How much US Federal Income Tax did Exxon pay in 2011?
Maybe it hasn't heard of the US Navy?

Why don't you tell me?

$41.1 billion in profits.
17.6% tax rate.
??

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

How much US Federal Income Tax did Exxon pay in 2011?
Maybe it hasn't heard of the US Navy?

Why don't you tell me?

$41.1 billion in profits.
17.6% tax rate.
??

"In some cases, it can eliminate all federal taxes for these companies."

I guess not in this case.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

How much US Federal Income Tax did Exxon pay in 2011?
Maybe it hasn't heard of the US Navy?

Why don't you tell me?

$41.1 billion in profits.
17.6% tax rate.
??

Exxon pays a lower tax rate than the average American. Between 2008-2010, Exxon Mobil registered an average 17.6 percent federal effective corporate tax rate, while the average American paid a higher rate of 20.4 percent.

ThinkProgress should show their work because liberal math is notoriously weak.

 

[freedombecki]

Here's what Mr. Treasure Secretary left out of his assessment of "Percentage depletion"

"The oil and gas industry maintains that this is not a special tax break because other companies receive similar deductions. But the percentage depletion method permitted for oil and gas is fundamentally different and more favorable. In some cases, it can eliminate all federal taxes for these companies."

Saying that all money doesn't belong to the government doesn't change the fact that without government money loses all of its value.

Big Oil?s Misbegotten Tax Gusher: Why They Don?t Need $70 Billion from Taxpayers Amid Record Profits

You're pockets probably aren't deep enough.

I could probably find a stamp. I'm a citizen. You think the founders wrote a Constitution for Princes, Lords, Dukes and Earls to make all the nominations? Think again. And think, "They wrote it for the people."