Why Are Conservatives So Resentful Of Americans With Good Jobs?

[Gadawg73]

americans pay the same percentage of their income to SS for the first $106K of earnings. which is currently 4.2%. employers pay 6.2% of the their employee wages up to $106K to SS. there is a difference between an individual and a business. is this concept really lost on you?

are you really arguing this point?

and you actually are finally correct, everyone pays for SS on top of their federal income tax? how has this changed in the last 50 years? this isnt a new concept. income tax is a separate tax from SS.

You are an idiot.
13.3 % is Medicare and social security tax and employees PAY IT ALL no matter if they are self employed or not. The other 1 % is factored in for self employed individuals as we do not get the full tax write off for the $$$ WE PAY.
When a company sits down to fill a job position each year for any employee they say: "This job will pay $60K this year. 48K in salary, 8K in medical benefits and 4K in social security and Medicare payments. How else can I figure out what the pay is for my employees other than figuring in what the TOTAL COST of that employee is.
The great myth in America is "I get my health care paid for by my employer"
No wonder we are behind in the world and wages are down! Workers do not understand that I have to lower their pay TO PAY FOR THE HEALTH INSURANCE AND SOCIAL SECURITY. They are paying it as all I am doing is withholding it from their salary and passing it on to the health insurance company and the government.
As a % of a worker's take home pay health insurance and taxes has had the greatest effect at stagnating worker's wages for the last 40 years than anything else. My "contribution" to their social security is nothing other than DEDUCTING WHAT I WOULD HAVE PAID THEM as I have that calculated into what that job COSTS ME and is worth at the start of each year.
Econ 101. Taught at your local community college. Please take advantage of it.

just keep telling yourself your fuzzy math if the problem.

according the IRS the employer rate for SS is 6.2%, the employee rate is 4.2%. by 1st grade math skills this is 10.4%. no matter how you want to twist it, 6.2 + 4.2 = 10.4. apparently that community college education you got isnt worth much after all.

if you have a problem with your business taxes, you should probably get a better accountant.

No dumb ass:
Employer: 6.2%, Employee 7.65 including Medicare tax = 13.85
SELF EMPLOYED YOU FOOL: 15.3 %.


Read it and weep Moe:
http://www.ssa.gov/pressoffice/factsheets/colafacts2013.htm

Are you really that stupid to believe that someone like me, MBA and owner of 3 corporations does not know the law?
I PAY 15.30%

 

[Gadawg73]

gas prices are determined by the price of oil which is set on the free market as well as supply and demand. he demand of oil worldwide is skyrocketing due to China and India developing and adding more vehicles to the road. all based on free market principles.

Interesting proposition, except of course that factors such as allowable drilling on federal lands, keystone pipeline, off shore permits (often controlled by the states), have a massive impact on oil prices.

The effect of Obama on oil prices has to do with his interference with domestic production.

{ "We cannot drill our way to lower gas prices." This one is just an outright lie, and anyone with any intelligence will tell you that. The liberals will tell you that oil prices are based on the world market and are controlled by OPEC. There are two ways to attack that kind of thinking. First of all; If prices are controlled by the world market and introducing more oil into the market doesn't matter, than why does OPEC increase and decrease production to raise and lower prices? Also, why did oil prices drop sharply after President Bush announced that he was removing the drilling moratorium off of the east and west coasts of America, opening them up to exploration. Don't let Liberals lie to you, supply and demand still control prices. If we increased our oil production by 10 to 20%, oil prices worldwide would plummet.}

Obama is lying about oil production



Did splatter from a pan of bacon burn me? Should I douse myself with kerosine and set myself ablaze? The issue we have is too much government interference, not too little.

and how does the price of gas affect the tax rate individuals pay based on their income level?

The question was the Obama assault on the middle class. The graph illustrates a double edged sword of declining income and sharply increasing energy costs, significantly lowering the standard of living for the Bourgeoisie (the middle class.) My statement is the left continues to wage war on the middle, as it has done since the time of Marx. The Obama tax is designed to burden small business, which we all know it the way up from the lower middle class to the upper classes.

Obama and the democrats are pulling the ladder of success up to keep the riff-raff down.

if you do the market research you will realize that you can not in fact drill your way to lower gas prices. there is not enough oil in on american soil or in american waters such that we would be able to unilaterally affect gas prices. the only way to do so would be to nationalize all the oil and sell it only stateside, thus insulating ourselves from the rest of the world. this in effect is truly socialism.
U.S. Oil Drilling May Not Improve Gas Prices, Study Says
More Drilling Won
What can U.S. do to halt rising gas prices? Not much
FACT: U.S. Drilling Doesn't Lower Gas Prices | Luke Tonachel's Blog | Switchboard, from NRDC
20 Experts Who Say Drilling Won't Lower Gas Prices | Blog | Media Matters for America

the private sector is sitting on thousands of drilling leases that they are not using. if they are truly wanting to drill then they have plenty of land available to do so.
Fact: More than half the federal land leased for energy drilling is unexplored. Energy firms say it wouldn

rising energy costs again are a product of the free market. when demand increases price increases. worldwide there is a high demand for oil, thus oil providers are able to charge what the market will bear. if you want to eliminate the free market just say so, but again at the time you will be endorsing socialism at its finest.

do you have any proof that left is waging said war? clinton raised taxes and grew the middle class more than any president. GWB lowered taxes and contracted the middle class more than any president.

what are you referring to as the "obama tax"?

"do your market research"
from someone that is too lazy to do any research on social security taxes for the self employed and has no clue on the employer/employee costs either.

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

You are an idiot.
13.3 % is Medicare and social security tax and employees PAY IT ALL no matter if they are self employed or not. The other 1 % is factored in for self employed individuals as we do not get the full tax write off for the $$$ WE PAY.
When a company sits down to fill a job position each year for any employee they say: "This job will pay $60K this year. 48K in salary, 8K in medical benefits and 4K in social security and Medicare payments. How else can I figure out what the pay is for my employees other than figuring in what the TOTAL COST of that employee is.
The great myth in America is "I get my health care paid for by my employer"
No wonder we are behind in the world and wages are down! Workers do not understand that I have to lower their pay TO PAY FOR THE HEALTH INSURANCE AND SOCIAL SECURITY. They are paying it as all I am doing is withholding it from their salary and passing it on to the health insurance company and the government.
As a % of a worker's take home pay health insurance and taxes has had the greatest effect at stagnating worker's wages for the last 40 years than anything else. My "contribution" to their social security is nothing other than DEDUCTING WHAT I WOULD HAVE PAID THEM as I have that calculated into what that job COSTS ME and is worth at the start of each year.
Econ 101. Taught at your local community college. Please take advantage of it.

just keep telling yourself your fuzzy math if the problem.

according the IRS the employer rate for SS is 6.2%, the employee rate is 4.2%. by 1st grade math skills this is 10.4%. no matter how you want to twist it, 6.2 + 4.2 = 10.4. apparently that community college education you got isnt worth much after all.

if you have a problem with your business taxes, you should probably get a better accountant.

No dumb ass:
Employer: 6.2%, Employee 7.65 including Medicare tax = 13.85
SELF EMPLOYED YOU FOOL: 15.3 %.


Read it and weep Moe:
Social Security Press Office: 2013 Social Security Changes

Are you really that stupid to believe that someone like me, MBA and owner of 3 corporations does not know the law?
I PAY 15.30%

here is how taxes are calculated for self employed individuals and employee. listen up you might want to know this.

(12.4% [Soc. Sec.] + 2.9% [Medicare]) = 15.5% total

12.4% is made up from 6.2% from the employee and 6.2% from the employer. however the employee rate was lowered to 4.2% temporarily. thus the employer/employee total was actually 10.4% for the last year. thus if youre an employee you would pay 6.2% (currently 4.2%) and 1.45% for medicare for a grand total of 7.65% for the employee (currently 5.45%)

if youre self employed you have to pay for both the employee and employer. this is not a new concept, as the business pays a portion and the employee pays a portion. do you understand any of this?

this is not different for anyone else or any other business. corporations pay the same rates as do LLC's. you need to be able to separate your business expenses from your personal expenses as they are different no matter how much you want to lump them into the same category.

hows that online MBA treating you? because apparently you dont really know much of anything.

 

[Gadawg73]

just keep telling yourself your fuzzy math if the problem.

according the IRS the employer rate for SS is 6.2%, the employee rate is 4.2%. by 1st grade math skills this is 10.4%. no matter how you want to twist it, 6.2 + 4.2 = 10.4. apparently that community college education you got isnt worth much after all.

if you have a problem with your business taxes, you should probably get a better accountant.

No dumb ass:
Employer: 6.2%, Employee 7.65 including Medicare tax = 13.85
SELF EMPLOYED YOU FOOL: 15.3 %.


Read it and weep Moe:
Social Security Press Office: 2013 Social Security Changes

Are you really that stupid to believe that someone like me, MBA and owner of 3 corporations does not know the law?
I PAY 15.30%

here is how taxes are calculated for self employed individuals and employee. listen up you might want to know this.

(12.4% [Soc. Sec.] + 2.9% [Medicare]) = 15.5% total

12.4% is made up from 6.2% from the employee and 6.2% from the employer. however the employee rate was lowered to 4.2% temporarily. thus the employer/employee total was actually 10.4% for the last year. thus if youre an employee you would pay 6.2% (currently 4.2%) and 1.45% for medicare for a grand total of 7.65% for the employee (currently 5.45%)

if youre self employed you have to pay for both the employee and employer. this is not a new concept, as the business pays a portion and the employee pays a portion. do you understand any of this?

this is not different for anyone else or any other business. corporations pay the same rates as do LLC's. you need to be able to separate your business expenses from your personal expenses as they are different no matter how much you want to lump them into the same category.

hows that online MBA treating you? because apparently you dont really know much of anything.

The employer never has to pay anything. All I do is withhold that from my employees just like I withhold the cost of medical insurance.
They are paying it all. Instead of me paying them their 60K a year salary that I have budgeted FOR THEIR JOB for the year, I pay them 60K MINUS the cost of THEIR social security and health insurance costs which leaves them 48K a year.
They pay it, all I do is transfer it.
None of my corporations, or any corporation, has ever paid one cent in taxes, ever.
PEOPLE pay taxes. I all do is collect FROM PEOPLE with increases in the cost of my services.
If you do not know that corporations NEVER pay taxes then you know nothing about business.
Every corporation has their tax obligation as a % of their costs fixed IN THEIR PRICE TO THE CONSUMER. Why? So THE CONSUMER pays the tax and we just collect it.
Same as sales tax where you buy everything. The proprietor of that business NEVER pays the tax, he just collects it and passes it on.
Econ 101 for dummies.

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

No dumb ass:
Employer: 6.2%, Employee 7.65 including Medicare tax = 13.85
SELF EMPLOYED YOU FOOL: 15.3 %.


Read it and weep Moe:
Social Security Press Office: 2013 Social Security Changes

Are you really that stupid to believe that someone like me, MBA and owner of 3 corporations does not know the law?
I PAY 15.30%

here is how taxes are calculated for self employed individuals and employee. listen up you might want to know this.

(12.4% [Soc. Sec.] + 2.9% [Medicare]) = 15.5% total

12.4% is made up from 6.2% from the employee and 6.2% from the employer. however the employee rate was lowered to 4.2% temporarily. thus the employer/employee total was actually 10.4% for the last year. thus if youre an employee you would pay 6.2% (currently 4.2%) and 1.45% for medicare for a grand total of 7.65% for the employee (currently 5.45%)

if youre self employed you have to pay for both the employee and employer. this is not a new concept, as the business pays a portion and the employee pays a portion. do you understand any of this?

this is not different for anyone else or any other business. corporations pay the same rates as do LLC's. you need to be able to separate your business expenses from your personal expenses as they are different no matter how much you want to lump them into the same category.

hows that online MBA treating you? because apparently you dont really know much of anything.

The employer never has to pay anything. All I do is withhold that from my employees just like I withhold the cost of medical insurance.
They are paying it all. Instead of me paying them their 60K a year salary that I have budgeted FOR THEIR JOB for the year, I pay them 60K MINUS the cost of THEIR social security and health insurance costs which leaves them 48K a year.
They pay it, all I do is transfer it.
None of my corporations, or any corporation, has ever paid one cent in taxes, ever.
PEOPLE pay taxes. I all do is collect FROM PEOPLE with increases in the cost of my services.
If you do not know that corporations NEVER pay taxes then you know nothing about business.
Every corporation has their tax obligation as a % of their costs fixed IN THEIR PRICE TO THE CONSUMER. Why? So THE CONSUMER pays the tax and we just collect it.
Same as sales tax where you buy everything. The proprietor of that business NEVER pays the tax, he just collects it and passes it on.
Econ 101 for dummies.

if youre trying to come up with some wingnut logic to justify your reasoning, so be it. it still doesnt change the facts that the employee pays a share and the employer pays a share. if you want to consider that part of the compensation package so you feel better about your situation at night so be it. the tax code isnt written to pay the employee pays a percentage on behalf of the employer, it states that the employer pays that share.

apparently you didnt pass econ 101 for dummies. you got ripped off on the online MBA.

 

[Uncensored2008]

{ "We cannot drill our way to lower gas prices." This one is just an outright lie, and anyone with any intelligence will tell you that. The liberals will tell you that oil prices are based on the world market and are controlled by OPEC. There are two ways to attack that kind of thinking. First of all; If prices are controlled by the world market and introducing more oil into the market doesn't matter, than why does OPEC increase and decrease production to raise and lower prices? Also, why did oil prices drop sharply after President Bush announced that he was removing the drilling moratorium off of the east and west coasts of America, opening them up to exploration. Don't let Liberals lie to you, supply and demand still control prices. If we increased our oil production by 10 to 20%, oil prices worldwide would plummet.}

Obama is lying about oil production



Did splatter from a pan of bacon burn me? Should I douse myself with kerosine and set myself ablaze? The issue we have is too much government interference, not too little.


if you do the market research you will realize that you can not in fact drill your way to lower gas prices. there is not enough oil in on american soil or in american waters such that we would be able to unilaterally affect gas prices. the only way to do so would be to nationalize all the oil and sell it only stateside, thus insulating ourselves from the rest of the world. this in effect is truly socialism.
U.S. Oil Drilling May Not Improve Gas Prices, Study Says
More Drilling Won
What can U.S. do to halt rising gas prices? Not much
FACT: U.S. Drilling Doesn't Lower Gas Prices | Luke Tonachel's Blog | Switchboard, from NRDC
20 Experts Who Say Drilling Won't Lower Gas Prices | Blog | Media Matters for America

the private sector is sitting on thousands of drilling leases that they are not using. if they are truly wanting to drill then they have plenty of land available to do so.
Fact: More than half the federal land leased for energy drilling is unexplored. Energy firms say it wouldn

rising energy costs again are a product of the free market. when demand increases price increases. worldwide there is a high demand for oil, thus oil providers are able to charge what the market will bear. if you want to eliminate the free market just say so, but again at the time you will be endorsing socialism at its finest.

do you have any proof that left is waging said war? clinton raised taxes and grew the middle class more than any president. GWB lowered taxes and contracted the middle class more than any president.

what are you referring to as the "obama tax"?

The leftist hate sites have all sorts of nuts, who make all sorts of claims.

{The United States has some 20 billion barrels of oil in reserves. By "reserves" we're talking "proven" reserves, meaning those that are certain to be recoverable in future years from known reservoirs under existing economic and operating conditions. That is, we have 20 billion barrels of oil that is recoverable at current prices and under lands currently available for development.

That definition excludes many oil reserves that Obama has declared off-limits. According to the Institute for Energy Research, we have more than 1.4 trillion barrels of oil that is technically recoverable in the United States with existing technology. The largest deposits are located offshore, in portions of Alaska and in shale deposits in the Rocky Mountain states.}

Obama's Big Lies on Big Oil

The biggest tragedy the left has contended with in recent years is the glut of oil. For decades the left has preached that the world was coming to an end with fossil fuels running out. Sadly for them, more oil has been found in the last 10 years than in all history prior to that. We have huge amounts of oil. Canada, our own midwest with Fracking, and the gulf deposits that are a thousand times what Saudi Arabia has (which Obama is giving to China.)

The amount of oil that has been found in the last decade creates fear in the status-qua
of destabilization of world markets as the old and favored players face competition from new sources.

Politics, low oil prices destabilize European operations - Offshore

The greatest fear is that China finds a source of oil that cuts out the Arabs - such as the Florida oil that Obama is ceding to them - and oil in North East Africa. Not just Libya, but Somalia, Ethiopia, et al.

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

{ "We cannot drill our way to lower gas prices." This one is just an outright lie, and anyone with any intelligence will tell you that. The liberals will tell you that oil prices are based on the world market and are controlled by OPEC. There are two ways to attack that kind of thinking. First of all; If prices are controlled by the world market and introducing more oil into the market doesn't matter, than why does OPEC increase and decrease production to raise and lower prices? Also, why did oil prices drop sharply after President Bush announced that he was removing the drilling moratorium off of the east and west coasts of America, opening them up to exploration. Don't let Liberals lie to you, supply and demand still control prices. If we increased our oil production by 10 to 20%, oil prices worldwide would plummet.}

Obama is lying about oil production



Did splatter from a pan of bacon burn me? Should I douse myself with kerosine and set myself ablaze? The issue we have is too much government interference, not too little.


if you do the market research you will realize that you can not in fact drill your way to lower gas prices. there is not enough oil in on american soil or in american waters such that we would be able to unilaterally affect gas prices. the only way to do so would be to nationalize all the oil and sell it only stateside, thus insulating ourselves from the rest of the world. this in effect is truly socialism.
U.S. Oil Drilling May Not Improve Gas Prices, Study Says
More Drilling Won
What can U.S. do to halt rising gas prices? Not much
FACT: U.S. Drilling Doesn't Lower Gas Prices | Luke Tonachel's Blog | Switchboard, from NRDC
20 Experts Who Say Drilling Won't Lower Gas Prices | Blog | Media Matters for America

the private sector is sitting on thousands of drilling leases that they are not using. if they are truly wanting to drill then they have plenty of land available to do so.
Fact: More than half the federal land leased for energy drilling is unexplored. Energy firms say it wouldn

rising energy costs again are a product of the free market. when demand increases price increases. worldwide there is a high demand for oil, thus oil providers are able to charge what the market will bear. if you want to eliminate the free market just say so, but again at the time you will be endorsing socialism at its finest.

do you have any proof that left is waging said war? clinton raised taxes and grew the middle class more than any president. GWB lowered taxes and contracted the middle class more than any president.

what are you referring to as the "obama tax"?

The leftist hate sites have all sorts of nuts, who make all sorts of claims.

{The United States has some 20 billion barrels of oil in reserves. By "reserves" we're talking "proven" reserves, meaning those that are certain to be recoverable in future years from known reservoirs under existing economic and operating conditions. That is, we have 20 billion barrels of oil that is recoverable at current prices and under lands currently available for development.

That definition excludes many oil reserves that Obama has declared off-limits. According to the Institute for Energy Research, we have more than 1.4 trillion barrels of oil that is technically recoverable in the United States with existing technology. The largest deposits are located offshore, in portions of Alaska and in shale deposits in the Rocky Mountain states.}

Obama's Big Lies on Big Oil

The biggest tragedy the left has contended with in recent years is the glut of oil. For decades the left has preached that the world was coming to an end with fossil fuels running out. Sadly for them, more oil has been found in the last 10 years than in all history prior to that. We have huge amounts of oil. Canada, our own midwest with Fracking, and the gulf deposits that are a thousand times what Saudi Arabia has (which Obama is giving to China.)

The amount of oil that has been found in the last decade creates fear in the status-qua
of destabilization of world markets as the old and favored players face competition from new sources.

Politics, low oil prices destabilize European operations - Offshore

The greatest fear is that China finds a source of oil that cuts out the Arabs - such as the Florida oil that Obama is ceding to them - and oil in North East Africa. Not just Libya, but Somalia, Ethiopia, et al.

you have any proof about this 1.4T barrels of oil that is recoverable on american soil? how much of that is easily accessible? how much of that would decimate the arctic wildlife refuge?

you spout off a lot of right wing talking points, but you are unwilling to address the fact that big oil has thousands of leases on federal land that they are unwilling to use. if they start using them, then maybe new leases will open up. the way you speak about it, it as though there is so much that can easily be extracted and brought to market that gas prices should be $1. but worldwide demand is only increasing, along with pollution and climate change (which the right isnt even willing to admit exists).

apparently you didnt read any of the articles i posted which come from reputable sources and experts. and youre rebuttal is a website called "newsmax". well played.

there would be no fear if china found a new oil source, it would mean that supply has increased and thus prices should fall. you should be hoping that they find new oil. its called supply and demand.

 

[Uncensored2008]

you have any proof about this 1.4T barrels of oil that is recoverable on american soil?

Of course, I already cited it, here is a link.

Institute for Energy Research | IEA: U.S. to Become the World

how much of that is easily accessible? how much of that would decimate the arctic wildlife refuge?

And here we go. No one actually questions the 1.4 trillion barrels. You know it's there, Obama knows it's there. Instead, the left works up fiction to block access to these reserves. After all, plentiful oil is the worst thing that ever happened to a left that seeks micro-managment of the populace. Independent mobility makes the populace very difficult to rule.

Do you honestly think a Moose will commit suicide because they see an oil derrick? The impact on wildlife is negligible and transient. 10 years after the development, no impact at all will be felt.

you spout off a lot of right wing talking points, but you are unwilling to address the fact that big oil has thousands of leases on federal land that they are unwilling to use.

Leases for exploration are not leases for use. This was another lie Obama told during the election. Further, exploration leases do not allow drilling if oil is found. By blocking 47% of lease requests, the Obama administration stops development of know oil sources - which are distinctly different than exploration.

if they start using them, then maybe new leases will open up. the way you speak about it, it as though there is so much that can easily be extracted and brought to market that gas prices should be $1. but worldwide demand is only increasing, along with pollution and climate change (which the right isnt even willing to admit exists).

Maybe, maybe not. But the known sources, such as Alaska, should be leased immediately.

apparently you didnt read any of the articles i posted which come from reputable sources and experts. and youre rebuttal is a website called "newsmax". well played.

Huffingglue isn't a "reliable source" anymore than Worldnet Daily is - both are biased to a particular position. Huffington is a propaganda wing of the party.

there would be no fear if china found a new oil source, it would mean that supply has increased and thus prices should fall. you should be hoping that they find new oil. its called supply and demand.

In fact that is one of the worst things that could happen to the left. Ending the use of fossil fuels is vital to getting Americans out of cars and onto public transportation that is controlled by the state. A population that comes and goes as they please is impossible to rule.

The central planners are desperate to get America onto buses and trains where movement can be tracked and controlled.

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

per your article, america currently produces 83% of its oil domestically and only imports 17%.

the same article also makes no mention of 1.4T barrels being "readily available" nor does it actually make any mention of 1.4T barrels at all.

by your logic we should be able to reduce oil prices simply based our ability to self supply.

leases for oil are still leases for oil. the only way to find oil is by exploration, there is no guarantee that oil exists anytime you drill as well. you have "proof" of these "known" oil sources?

there any many other sources than the huffington post listed. keep reading.

so we should decimate the arctic wildlife refuge in the name of oil?


want to try again?

 

[Uncensored2008]

per your article, america currently produces 83% of its oil domestically and only imports 17%.

Then Chinese consumption is clearly a red herring with no impact as you had claimed.

the same article also makes no mention of 1.4T barrels being "readily available"

Why should it? No one made any claim of such. "Technically recoverable."

nor does it actually make any mention of 1.4T barrels at all.

Sure it does. It's all over the page.

{The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) has recently claimed that we at IER were telling a “white lie” by explaining that the United States has 1.4 trillion barrels of technically recoverable oil—enough to fuel our current oil needs for the next 200 years. The United States indeed has 1.4 trillion barrels of technically recoverable oil and this estimate is likely to be an understatement of our oil resources.

On Thursday, January 12, 2012, Tom Donohue, President and CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, explained that the economy could create many, many more jobs if the federal government allowed access to more taxpayer-owned energy resources. In the speech, Donohue correctly stated that the United States has “1.4 trillion barrels of oil, enough to last at least 200 years.”}

Institute for Energy Research | The NRDC’s Oil Ignorance

by your logic we should be able to reduce oil prices simply based our ability to self supply.

Strawman huh? A sure sign of desperation.

Reliance on domestic production shifts the market locally, which removes China and India from the equation, for the most part.

leases for oil are still leases for oil. the only way to find oil is by exploration, there is no guarantee that oil exists anytime you drill as well. you have "proof" of these "known" oil sources?

Wrong. An exploratory lease grants no right to drill. If it did, ANWAR would be booming.

there any many other sources than the huffington post listed. keep reading.

Sure, ThinkProgress and Democratic Underground are expected to weigh in as well.

so we should decimate the arctic wildlife refuge in the name of oil?

Yawn, demagoguery is boring.

want to try again?

Try what?

The left lies about oil reserves, then when nailed on that lie shifts to lies about environmental disaster to block access. The left has depended on energy shortage as the main weapon to fight individual liberty and civil rights - the glut of oil, not just in the USA, but across the globe, throws a monkey wrench in the whole program. If none of these lies work, then Global Warming/cooling/climate change is trotted out.

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

per your article, america currently produces 83% of its oil domestically and only imports 17%.

Then Chinese consumption is clearly a red herring with no impact as you had claimed.

the same article also makes no mention of 1.4T barrels being "readily available"

Why should it? No one made any claim of such. "Technically recoverable."



Sure it does. It's all over the page.

{The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) has recently claimed that we at IER were telling a “white lie” by explaining that the United States has 1.4 trillion barrels of technically recoverable oil—enough to fuel our current oil needs for the next 200 years. The United States indeed has 1.4 trillion barrels of technically recoverable oil and this estimate is likely to be an understatement of our oil resources.

On Thursday, January 12, 2012, Tom Donohue, President and CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, explained that the economy could create many, many more jobs if the federal government allowed access to more taxpayer-owned energy resources. In the speech, Donohue correctly stated that the United States has “1.4 trillion barrels of oil, enough to last at least 200 years.”}

Institute for Energy Research | The NRDC’s Oil Ignorance



Strawman huh? A sure sign of desperation.

Reliance on domestic production shifts the market locally, which removes China and India from the equation, for the most part.



Wrong. An exploratory lease grants no right to drill. If it did, ANWAR would be booming.



Sure, ThinkProgress and Democratic Underground are expected to weigh in as well.

so we should decimate the arctic wildlife refuge in the name of oil?

Yawn, demagoguery is boring.

want to try again?

Try what?

The left lies about oil reserves, then when nailed on that lie shifts to lies about environmental disaster to block access. The left has depended on energy shortage as the main weapon to fight individual liberty and civil rights - the glut of oil, not just in the USA, but across the globe, throws a monkey wrench in the whole program. If none of these lies work, then Global Warming/cooling/climate change is trotted out.

so now you post a complete different article? well played...... let make claims about something post the wrong article and then when i challenge you on it, post the one i was actually referring to. but what i find hilarious is that by your own article it states that the 1.4T barrel is actually a lie.

Fib No. 1

“Recent discoveries have confirmed that this nation is truly blessed with energy resources. We have 1.4 trillion barrels of oil, enough to last at least 200 years.”

This figure is pulled from a December report by the Institute for Energy Research called North American Energy Inventory. But the authors of that report misstated their own source, a U.S. Department of Energy analysis called “Undeveloped Domestic Oil Resources.” Of the over 1 trillion estimated barrels of oil that are still in the ground, only 400 billion are “technically recoverable.” And of that, only a tiny fraction is economically feasible to recover. So good luck filling up your car, Donohue’s kids, when the pumps run dry well short of two centuries from now.

Verdict: White lie

the NRDC state the following on their webiste:
NRDC is the nation's most effective environmental action group, combining the grassroots power of 1.3 million members and online activists with the courtroom clout and expertise of more than 350 lawyers, scientists and other professionals.

The New York Times calls us "One of the nation's most powerful environmental groups." The National Journal says we're "A credible and forceful advocate for stringent environmental protection."

IEC states the following:
The Institute for Energy Research (IER) is a not-for-profit organization that conducts intensive research and analysis on the functions, operations, and government regulation of global energy markets. IER maintains that freely-functioning energy markets provide the most efficient and effective solutions to today’s global energy and environmental challenges and, as such, are critical to the well-being of individuals and society.

Founded in 1989 from a predecessor organization, IER is a public foundation under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code and is funded entirely by tax deductible contributions from individuals, foundations and corporations. No financial support is sought for or accepted from government sources.

so who is right? the IEC or the NRDC? both can't be right and both can't be wrong. both are reputable.

again you fail to grasp the concept of the free market and no matter how much more oil the US produces domestically, unless you take oil out of the free market the US simply producing more wont lower the price of gas. as a business man why would i want to produce more of a product at lower prices and lower margain, than less of a product at higher margin? i make more money when prices are high.

you still also can't grasp the concept that a lease to drill is a lease to drill. its not that hard.

travel to the moon is "technically achievable" does that mean its economically feasible? if it was then we would be traveling there all the time. what if there was oil on the moon that was technically recoverable, should we drill the moon?

theres no strawman argument going on here, by your logic if the US drills for more oil then prices will drop. i have already provided multiple sources disputing this fact, and all come from reputable sources.

 

[Uncensored2008]

so now you post a complete different article? well played......

ROFL

Seriously bro, those blue, underlined words are links. I gave you the home page...

let make claims about something post the wrong article and then when i challenge you on it, post the one i was actually referring to. but what i find hilarious is that by your own article it states that the 1.4T barrel is actually a lie.

See above,

the NRDC state the following on their webiste:
NRDC is the nation's most effective environmental action group, combining the grassroots power of 1.3 million members and online activists with the courtroom clout and expertise of more than 350 lawyers, scientists and other professionals.

The New York Times calls us "One of the nation's most powerful environmental groups." The National Journal says we're "A credible and forceful advocate for stringent environmental protection."

Yer point?

IEC states the following:
The Institute for Energy Research (IER) is a not-for-profit organization that conducts intensive research and analysis on the functions, operations, and government regulation of global energy markets. IER maintains that freely-functioning energy markets provide the most efficient and effective solutions to today’s global energy and environmental challenges and, as such, are critical to the well-being of individuals and society.

Founded in 1989 from a predecessor organization, IER is a public foundation under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code and is funded entirely by tax deductible contributions from individuals, foundations and corporations. No financial support is sought for or accepted from government sources.

so who is right? the IEC or the NRDC? both can't be right and both can't be wrong. both are reputable.

The IEC makes their point well.

{If NRDC actually looked at the report – or any of the myriad government reports on U.S. resources, they would know that we are indeed correct that the U.S. has 1.4 trillion barrels of technically recoverable oil, with total oil resources in the ground estimated at about 3.75 trillion barrels. Also, if NRDC would have looked at the report, they would have seen the multitude of sources documenting the abundance of energy the U.S. and North America contain. For some reason, NRDC and many other like-minded groups and politicians who advocate for more expensive, less reliable forms of energy become agitated whenever the public begins to learn that we have huge energy resources. Maybe that’s what George Will was talking about when he wrote his first column of the year, entitled “The Specter of Abundance.”}

again you fail to grasp the concept of the free market and no matter how much more oil the US produces domestically, unless you take oil out of the free market the US simply producing more wont lower the price of gas. as a business man why would i want to produce more of a product at lower prices and lower margain, than less of a product at higher margin? i make more money when prices are high.

I see, so greater supply of a commodity has no influence on the retail price....

Do you want to reconsider your answer?

you still also can't grasp the concept that a lease to drill is a lease to drill. its not that hard.

The leases that Obama lied about are not leases to drill, but leases to explore.

And you're right, it isn't that hard to grasp.

travel to the moon is "technically achievable" does that mean its economically feasible? if it was then we would be traveling there all the time. what if there was oil on the moon that was technically recoverable, should we drill the moon?

20 years ago, oil from shale was not economically viable, now it is. The USA has vast reserves of oil. It's an inconvenient truth, but the truth nonetheless.

theres no strawman argument going on here, by your logic if the US drills for more oil then prices will drop. i have already provided multiple sources disputing this fact, and all come from reputable sources.

Supply and demand can only be subverted by the government. Otherwise, an increase in supply will cause prices to drop.

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

you argue like a child. go back and look at the two different links you provided. they are not the same story. its not my fault your ability to do research is sorely lacking.

its also hilarious that you put all your faith into one organization while simply dismissing the other. especially when both are considered reputable organization.

there is no difference between the two leases you speak about. they are both leases to drill. whether you want to call it exploratory or not, thats up to you. leases on federal land are just that, leases. if they have them they should use them.

again look at the all the research performed on drilling for more oil and how it would affect the price of gas. i posted several different sources, all which agree that simply drilling for more oil will not reduce the price of gas. as the price of gas is determined by oil and since oil is a commodity and the price is set on the open market, adding the small amount your talking about on a daily basis vs. what the world demands wont affect a thing. the only way to truly affect gas prices is to lower the demand by use of alternative fuel sources. but you can't even grasp this concept because you all you see is drill baby drill.

Obama never lied about leases. 7,200 drilling permit are sitting idle as of march of last year.
Oil and Gas Industry Sitting on 7,200 Drilling Permits - NYTimes.com

oil and gas from shale is still a highly dangerous operation, and can cause major damage to the environment. but i guess that doest matter since oil is more important.
What Are the Dangers of Drilling for Natural Gas?: Scientific American

 

[Gadawg73]

you argue like a child. go back and look at the two different links you provided. they are not the same story. its not my fault your ability to do research is sorely lacking.

its also hilarious that you put all your faith into one organization while simply dismissing the other. especially when both are considered reputable organization.

there is no difference between the two leases you speak about. they are both leases to drill. whether you want to call it exploratory or not, thats up to you. leases on federal land are just that, leases. if they have them they should use them.

again look at the all the research performed on drilling for more oil and how it would affect the price of gas. i posted several different sources, all which agree that simply drilling for more oil will not reduce the price of gas. as the price of gas is determined by oil and since oil is a commodity and the price is set on the open market, adding the small amount your talking about on a daily basis vs. what the world demands wont affect a thing. the only way to truly affect gas prices is to lower the demand by use of alternative fuel sources. but you can't even grasp this concept because you all you see is drill baby drill.

Obama never lied about leases. 7,200 drilling permit are sitting idle as of march of last year.
Oil and Gas Industry Sitting on 7,200 Drilling Permits - NYTimes.com

oil and gas from shale is still a highly dangerous operation, and can cause major damage to the environment. but i guess that doest matter since oil is more important.
What Are the Dangers of Drilling for Natural Gas?: Scientific American

No, you argue like a child.
Every tax dollar ever paid by every corporation in American history was collected from PEOPLE and passed on by the corporation to the government.
No taxes are ever paid by corporations. They collect the taxes and pass it on.
And you fight and argue that fact like a 5 year old monkey on fire.

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

you argue like a child. go back and look at the two different links you provided. they are not the same story. its not my fault your ability to do research is sorely lacking.

its also hilarious that you put all your faith into one organization while simply dismissing the other. especially when both are considered reputable organization.

there is no difference between the two leases you speak about. they are both leases to drill. whether you want to call it exploratory or not, thats up to you. leases on federal land are just that, leases. if they have them they should use them.

again look at the all the research performed on drilling for more oil and how it would affect the price of gas. i posted several different sources, all which agree that simply drilling for more oil will not reduce the price of gas. as the price of gas is determined by oil and since oil is a commodity and the price is set on the open market, adding the small amount your talking about on a daily basis vs. what the world demands wont affect a thing. the only way to truly affect gas prices is to lower the demand by use of alternative fuel sources. but you can't even grasp this concept because you all you see is drill baby drill.

Obama never lied about leases. 7,200 drilling permit are sitting idle as of march of last year.
Oil and Gas Industry Sitting on 7,200 Drilling Permits - NYTimes.com

oil and gas from shale is still a highly dangerous operation, and can cause major damage to the environment. but i guess that doest matter since oil is more important.
What Are the Dangers of Drilling for Natural Gas?: Scientific American

No, you argue like a child.
Every tax dollar ever paid by every corporation in American history was collected from PEOPLE and passed on by the corporation to the government.
No taxes are ever paid by corporations. They collect the taxes and pass it on.
And you fight and argue that fact like a 5 year old monkey on fire.

just keep telling yourself that. that online MBA is working wonders for you.

apparently you cant comprehend the dictionary, so here is the definition in simple plain English:

Taxation: A means by which governments finance their expenditure by imposing charges on citizens and corporate entities.

businesses collect funds and pay taxes accordingly, taxes are not passed through individuals on behalf of the company they work for, your an idiot if you truly believe that. but then again based on what you have posted recently, its really that not hard to believe.

that hole you keep digging is looking mighty deep there. you cant even address the fact you posted two different links trying to claim they are the same story.

 

[Uncensored2008]

you argue like a child. go back and look at the two different links you provided. they are not the same story. its not my fault your ability to do research is sorely lacking.

We pout a bit when we lose, don't we?

its also hilarious that you put all your faith into one organization while simply dismissing the other. especially when both are considered reputable organization.

I put my faith in facts. Both acknowledge that they are the facts, but the environmental group attempts to explain away the facts in desperate hope to mitigate them.

there is no difference between the two leases you speak about. they are both leases to drill. whether you want to call it exploratory or not, thats up to you. leases on federal land are just that, leases. if they have them they should use them.

No, an APD is not the same as a permit to produce oil. An "Application for Permit to Drill" is an exploratory permit that allows soil samples and ground water trace to be obtained. The EPA WILL have it's full pound of flesh before one drop of oil is extracted.

again look at the all the research performed on drilling for more oil and how it would affect the price of gas. i posted several different sources, all which agree that simply drilling for more oil will not reduce the price of gas.

Again, plentiful oil is a disaster for the left, nearly the level of all the poor suddenly having wealth. Plentiful oil undermines the entire leftist platform.

Let's look at the basic argument of the left; "Oil prices are high because of global demand from China and India." Then from the other side of their mouth "increased oil production has no impact on price."

At first blush this appears an absurd contradiction. But that assumes a rational statement, when in fact these are mantras, recited as fealty to party, not as a matter of reasoned discourse.

Increased supply necessarily will reduce prices, economic fact. But oil does not exist in a vacuum. Obama's war against domestic coal has an impact. While domestic oil production is up, domestic ENERGY production is down.

Annual Energy Review - Energy Information Administration (Click the ******* links - fer christsakes)

Obama attacked the energy market by sabotaging coal supplies leaving fuel oil to take up the slack. Plentiful and economical coal is replaced by more expensive oil. Hey, but the looters at Solendra walked away with billions from the public treasury - we must have priorities.

as the price of gas is determined by oil and since oil is a commodity and the price is set on the open market, adding the small amount your talking about on a daily basis vs. what the world demands wont affect a thing. the only way to truly affect gas prices is to lower the demand by use of alternative fuel sources. but you can't even grasp this concept because you all you see is drill baby drill.

Demonstrably false.

{Now a new drilling boom in South Texas is delivering local crude oil several dollars a barrel cheaper than international prices. Another domestic drilling surge, in natural gas, has produced a 60 percent drop in domestic prices over the last four years. Together those changes have provided the Valero refinery $665,000 a day in savings, raising profit by 400 percent since 2008. }

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/25/b...he-refining-business.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Plentiful oil is a disaster for a left bent on "green" initiatives and authoritarian control of energy, but it is a fact. Obama's war on America's energy producers may eventually achieve the goal of an America without energy, but thus far, the private sector has stepped up and more than offset the administration efforts to cut America's life line.

Obama never lied about leases. 7,200 drilling permit are sitting idle as of march of last year.
Oil and Gas Industry Sitting on 7,200 Drilling Permits - NYTimes.com

Once again, these are APD's, not permits to produce.

Had you read your own link you would have found;

{But the number of unused permits only tells part of a regulatory picture that includes the need to also obtain air and water permits, seasonal restrictions, and economic factors, said an energy attorney and former official with Devon Energy, one of the country's largest onshore oil and gas producers. }

{quote]oil and gas from shale is still a highly dangerous operation, and can cause major damage to the environment. but i guess that doest matter since oil is more important.
What Are the Dangers of Drilling for Natural Gas?: Scientific American[/QUOTE]

Utter bullshit. I subscribe to Scientific American and enjoy the magazine, but they are HIGHLY biased and are not a reliable source on anything that touches politics.

{Fracking works like this: You set up your giant robot and you drill a five-inch-diameter hole down several thousand feet until you hit the gas shale, and then you turn 90 degrees and you drill horizontally through some more shale, until you’ve got all your pipes and rig in place. And then you hit that shale with a high-pressure blast of water and sand, creating millimeter-wide fractures through which the natural gas can escape and make you very, very rich in spite of the fact that you’re spending about a million dollars a week on space-age “matrix” drill bits and squadrons of engineers and a small army of laborers, technicians, truck drivers, machinists, }

The Truth about Fracking - Kevin D. Williamson - National Review Online

The "dangerous chemicals," water and sand. Who do they pose a danger to? The left that is dependent on energy shortages to pursue the goals of a more contained and constrained populace.

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

if your unable to comprehend supply, demand, economics and policy no one can help you. like many on the right you simply disagree even when faced with the facts.

we arent talking about natural gas here, we are talking about oil so try to stay on topic if you can.


more reasons why the price of oil is so high:

Crude oil accounted for nearly three-quarters, or 72%, of the retail cost of a gallon of gasoline in February, according to the most recent data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration, the analytical arm of the Department of Energy. Refining costs/profits accounted for 12%, federal/state taxes for 11% and distribution/marketing for 5%.
Crude oil prices reflect the cost of production, which has become more challenging as easy-to-access reserves dwindle.
"Oil companies are turning to increasingly costly-to-produce oil," says Michael T. Klare, author of The Race For What's Left: The Global Scramble for the World's Last Resources. He points to tar sands in Canada, deepwater reserves off Brazil or so-called tight oil that's extracted from shale formations by hydraulic fracturing in the U.S.
Klare says oil prices also reflect both the world's current supply and demand as well as expectations about the future. "People are bidding against each other and driving up the price," he says, noting buyers pay now for delivery later, so they often hedge their bets to account for a potential loss in supply.

Oil consumption in the U.S. has fallen 10% since 2005, back to 1998 levels, as Americans drive less and use more fuel-efficient cars and equipment.
That's not the case worldwide. From 2008 to 2011, oil demand grew by 3.2 million barrels per day from just four countries — Brazil, India, China and Saudi Arabia — and isn't expected to slow much this year, according to U.S. Senate testimony by Paul Horsnell, head of commodities research for Barclays.
Japan's demand for oil has also increased since a massive earthquake and tsunami in March 2011 caused partial meltdowns at its Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant. Of its 54 nuclear reactors, only one is now operational.
"Demand is rising worldwide, even if it's not in the United States, and supply is not keeping pace," Klare says.

U.S. oil production is up, so why are gas prices so high?

so even as demand in the US declines, the price continues to rise due to global concerns. by your economic theory less demand in the US should lead to declining prices, that would be true if the US was a closed loop system, however since oil is a commodity and its prices is determined by the free market, simply having the US drill for more without addressing the worldwide demand will do nothing.

 

[Gadawg73]

you argue like a child. go back and look at the two different links you provided. they are not the same story. its not my fault your ability to do research is sorely lacking.

its also hilarious that you put all your faith into one organization while simply dismissing the other. especially when both are considered reputable organization.

there is no difference between the two leases you speak about. they are both leases to drill. whether you want to call it exploratory or not, thats up to you. leases on federal land are just that, leases. if they have them they should use them.

again look at the all the research performed on drilling for more oil and how it would affect the price of gas. i posted several different sources, all which agree that simply drilling for more oil will not reduce the price of gas. as the price of gas is determined by oil and since oil is a commodity and the price is set on the open market, adding the small amount your talking about on a daily basis vs. what the world demands wont affect a thing. the only way to truly affect gas prices is to lower the demand by use of alternative fuel sources. but you can't even grasp this concept because you all you see is drill baby drill.

Obama never lied about leases. 7,200 drilling permit are sitting idle as of march of last year.
Oil and Gas Industry Sitting on 7,200 Drilling Permits - NYTimes.com

oil and gas from shale is still a highly dangerous operation, and can cause major damage to the environment. but i guess that doest matter since oil is more important.
What Are the Dangers of Drilling for Natural Gas?: Scientific American

No, you argue like a child.
Every tax dollar ever paid by every corporation in American history was collected from PEOPLE and passed on by the corporation to the government.
No taxes are ever paid by corporations. They collect the taxes and pass it on.
And you fight and argue that fact like a 5 year old monkey on fire.

just keep telling yourself that. that online MBA is working wonders for you.

apparently you cant comprehend the dictionary, so here is the definition in simple plain English:

Taxation: A means by which governments finance their expenditure by imposing charges on citizens and corporate entities.

businesses collect funds and pay taxes accordingly, taxes are not passed through individuals on behalf of the company they work for, your an idiot if you truly believe that. but then again based on what you have posted recently, its really that not hard to believe.

that hole you keep digging is looking mighty deep there. you cant even address the fact you posted two different links trying to claim they are the same story.

The Robinson School of Business at Georgia State University is not an online university.
Corporations ARE PEOPLE, just an entity in NAME ONLY. People pay taxes. All my corporations do, and every corporation does, is collect taxes from PEOPLE and pass it on to government.
Where does the $$ come from that corporations pay their taxes with? The money tree? The tooth fairy? THEIR CUSTOMERS. And instead of paying a higher dividend to the stockholders PEOPLE or giving bonuses to their employees PEOPLE or offering lower prices to their consumers PEOPLE, they pay that $$$ collected from PEOPLE from the sales of their goods and services to their customers PEOPLE and pass it on to government as an expense-TAXES.
Do you talk back at the screen when you go to the movies?
You need to save all of your hot air for your inflatable date later tonight.

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

No, you argue like a child.
Every tax dollar ever paid by every corporation in American history was collected from PEOPLE and passed on by the corporation to the government.
No taxes are ever paid by corporations. They collect the taxes and pass it on.
And you fight and argue that fact like a 5 year old monkey on fire.

just keep telling yourself that. that online MBA is working wonders for you.

apparently you cant comprehend the dictionary, so here is the definition in simple plain English:

Taxation: A means by which governments finance their expenditure by imposing charges on citizens and corporate entities.

businesses collect funds and pay taxes accordingly, taxes are not passed through individuals on behalf of the company they work for, your an idiot if you truly believe that. but then again based on what you have posted recently, its really that not hard to believe.

that hole you keep digging is looking mighty deep there. you cant even address the fact you posted two different links trying to claim they are the same story.

The Robinson School of Business at Georgia State University is not an online university.
Corporations ARE PEOPLE, just an entity in NAME ONLY. People pay taxes. All my corporations do, and every corporation does, is collect taxes from PEOPLE and pass it on to government.
Where does the $$ come from that corporations pay their taxes with? The money tree? The tooth fairy? THEIR CUSTOMERS. And instead of paying a higher dividend to the stockholders PEOPLE or giving bonuses to their employees PEOPLE or offering lower prices to their consumers PEOPLE, they pay that $$$ collected from PEOPLE from the sales of their goods and services to their customers PEOPLE and pass it on to government as an expense-TAXES.
Do you talk back at the screen when you go to the movies?
You need to save all of your hot air for your inflatable date later tonight.

oh so youre gonna play the corporations are people card now. thanks for moving the goal posts. typical conservative....

for those of you who are still paying attention, the way SSI and FICA is calculated is a portion is paid by the employer, and a portion is paid by the employee. the employee tax liability would be much higher if you gave the employee the money, only to take it away in the form of increasing their taxes to the government. this would also be highly illegal as the corporation would avoid paying any actual taxes itself and the employee would then be paying all the taxes. did you not learn anything in business school?

when you hire an employee do you sit down with them and say well, your compensation package is $100k, but thats not what youre actually gonna make. see what im gonna do is without both the company portion as well the employee portion of the federal taxes owed so your effective tax rate will be near 43%, (roughly 28% for the wage rage, plus another 15% to cover both the employee and the employer contributions to SSI and FICA) but thats ok, because the company wont be paying any real taxes, ill just be screwing my employees out of their hard earned money. why would anyone want to work for you? youve just screwed an employee out of 7.65% of their own income.

yup great theory, i hope you have an audit coming soon.

 

[Gadawg73]

just keep telling yourself that. that online MBA is working wonders for you.

apparently you cant comprehend the dictionary, so here is the definition in simple plain English:

Taxation: A means by which governments finance their expenditure by imposing charges on citizens and corporate entities.

businesses collect funds and pay taxes accordingly, taxes are not passed through individuals on behalf of the company they work for, your an idiot if you truly believe that. but then again based on what you have posted recently, its really that not hard to believe.

that hole you keep digging is looking mighty deep there. you cant even address the fact you posted two different links trying to claim they are the same story.

The Robinson School of Business at Georgia State University is not an online university.
Corporations ARE PEOPLE, just an entity in NAME ONLY. People pay taxes. All my corporations do, and every corporation does, is collect taxes from PEOPLE and pass it on to government.
Where does the $$ come from that corporations pay their taxes with? The money tree? The tooth fairy? THEIR CUSTOMERS. And instead of paying a higher dividend to the stockholders PEOPLE or giving bonuses to their employees PEOPLE or offering lower prices to their consumers PEOPLE, they pay that $$$ collected from PEOPLE from the sales of their goods and services to their customers PEOPLE and pass it on to government as an expense-TAXES.
Do you talk back at the screen when you go to the movies?
You need to save all of your hot air for your inflatable date later tonight.

oh so youre gonna play the corporations are people card now. thanks for moving the goal posts. typical conservative....

for those of you who are still paying attention, the way SSI and FICA is calculated is a portion is paid by the employer, and a portion is paid by the employee. the employee tax liability would be much higher if you gave the employee the money, only to take it away in the form of increasing their taxes to the government. this would also be highly illegal as the corporation would avoid paying any actual taxes itself and the employee would then be paying all the taxes. did you not learn anything in business school?

when you hire an employee do you sit down with them and say well, your compensation package is $100k, but thats not what youre actually gonna make. see what im gonna do is without both the company portion as well the employee portion of the federal taxes owed so your effective tax rate will be near 43%, (roughly 28% for the wage rage, plus another 15% to cover both the employee and the employer contributions to SSI and FICA) but thats ok, because the company wont be paying any real taxes, ill just be screwing my employees out of their hard earned money. why would anyone want to work for you? youve just screwed an employee out of 7.65% of their own income.

yup great theory, i hope you have an audit coming soon.

How else could I, OR ANY CORPORATION, make a profit if the cost of taxes was not figured into my cost of doing business ahead of time? Taxes are an expense that I add into the cost of my services in each business.
My customers pay the tax. It is built into my fees.
The taxes on the producers is passed onto you who use or buy a corporations services.
Taxes go up MY ONLY OPTION is to raise the price of my services. Same with every corporation. And YOU, a person pays it each and every time when you buy something.
Econ 101 is taught at your local community college near you. Enroll and learn something.
The Democratic talking points are bringing you down to the low information voter level.
Stupid, which I do not believe you are, is the inability to learn.
Ignorant, which you obviously are, is from not taking the initiative to learn.