So much for Republican support for an unfettered free market

[Saint Peter]

Do you support taxpayer subsidies for oil companies?

This particular question seems to stump the band each time it is asked.

 

[bronzeage]

This particular question seems to stump the band each time it is asked.

It's one of those, "I don't know economics, but I know what I like," questions.

The next question is: Do gun manufacturers get taxpayer subsidies, and if they don't, why the hell not?

 

[kbate]

Do you support taxpayer subsidies for oil companies?

The long answer is no - because I do not support taxpayer subsidies for any company.

The real questions are: Do you consider corporate tax breaks to be "subsidies"?

What is the Correct Corporate Tax Rate? Should government set prices of goods to the consumer to prevent them from passing down the taxes?

Do you believe that if the $2 billion a year in corporate tax breaks they are currently arguing about is "reclaimed" by the government - that the price of Gasoline at the pump will come down?

And - should the Government decide who wins and who loses in the market?

What is the "Correct" tax level for individuals and corporations: The 1946 rates (25% for the poorest and 94% for the wealthiest) or perhaps the 1970s or 1990s or 2005 rates?

So, ask the real questions and stop playing with the one that is simple politics.

 

[Saint Peter]

It turns out the band knows that tune!

 

[kbate]

Why should every person who takes a mortgage have their interest subsidised by the taxpayer? You agreed to usury when you signed the papers, why does the taxpayer have to pay 15 to 80% of your interest?

How many billions are lost to this subsidy for banks and the housing industry?

Why does the Federal Government subsidise your state and local income taxes?

 

[bronzeage]

The long answer is no - because I do not support taxpayer subsidies for any company.

The real questions are: Do you consider corporate tax breaks to be "subsidies"?

What is the Correct Corporate Tax Rate? Should government set prices of goods to the consumer to prevent them from passing down the taxes?

Do you believe that if the $2 billion a year in corporate tax breaks they are currently arguing about is "reclaimed" by the government - that the price of Gasoline at the pump will come down?

And - should the Government decide who wins and who loses in the market?

What is the "Correct" tax level for individuals and corporations: The 1946 rates (25% for the poorest and 94% for the wealthiest) or perhaps the 1970s or 1990s or 2005 rates?

So, ask the real questions and stop playing with the one that is simple politics.

This particular question was posed for Jenn. I just wanted to see her/him respond with "Why do you love Obama's Kenyan born union members?"

I don't support subsidies for any company, either.

The original question was, why do we have subsidies for oil companies. It's a tough question, so everybody decided to answer a different one.

Tax breaks, subsidies and tax deductions, what's the difference? I understand tax deductions. I have a few of them. All of my tax deductions are the cost of doing business. They whittle away at my gross receipts for the year, so I end up paying taxes on the true income, not all the money which went through the cash register.

A tax break or subsidy would be some special case, where an expense which is not normally allowed suddenly becomes a deduction. This is how government steers the private sector. A business will do whatever makes the most money, so the government puts a little more money someplace and business follows.

It is kind of strange when you think about it. The same government which is incompetent when it comes to health care administration is more than qualified to manage the oil business. We should get the government employees who know all about oil company subsidies to work on the healthcare plan.

 

[trysail]

This is such a bullshit thread.




Somebody is eventually going to have to cite specifics about the frequently asserted “tax breaks to the to the fossil fuel industry.” It is a well-used canard that would not pass muster with snopes or factchecker.com


All industries are permitted to recover capital costs through depreciation of fixed investments. All natural resource companies ( e.g., timber, mining ) are allowed to recover the replacement cost of their raw materials through the depletion allowance. Are you referring to the deduction of intangible drilling costs? That is, of course, nothing more than a timing issue and, in any event, is only permissible for relatively small operators ( i.e., Murphy, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Shell, BP, ExxonMobil are already excluded ).


The popular assertion of the existence of “tax breaks” unique to fossil fuel companies does not bear up under scrutiny. It's complete, absolute, utter, total fabrication ( that's the polite term for a LIE ).


Anybody who promotes it or who repeats it is either someone who knows nothing about accounting or the Internal Revenue Service Code or a deliberate liar.

 

[kbate]

It is kind of strange when you think about it. The same government which is incompetent when it comes to health care administration is more than qualified to manage the oil business. We should get the government employees who know all about oil company subsidies to work on the healthcare plan.

Which, in the end is the entire reason for the rising of tea parties (something predicted back in 1984 in various political literature. The search for the correct size of government.


**

And if you wish to talk to Jen, simply post in its language: "Obama Good" is a sure and certain way to begin a debate on its level.

 

[trysail]

Name the "subsidy" they get that's not given to any other corporation.

☝​

★★★★★

 

[bronzeage]

...
The popular assertion of the existence of “tax breaks” unique to fossil fuel companies does not bear up under scrutiny. It's complete, absolute, utter, total fabrication ( that's the polite term for a LIE ).


Anybody who promotes it or who repeats it is either someone who knows nothing about accounting or the Internal Revenue Service Code or a deliberate liar.


[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT][/B]

If the tax subsidies (deductions, breaks, etc.) were ended, would the price of gasoline rise, or would market forces of supply and demand keep it at the current price?

It would be strange if every oil company effected were in identical financial situations and reacted to the change in exactly the same way.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

Read the thread title retard.

A priest is caught in bed with a hooker. Who is more disgraced?

 

[trysail]

If the tax subsidies (deductions, breaks, etc.) were ended, would the price of gasoline rise, or would market forces of supply and demand keep it at the current price?

It would be strange if every oil company effected were in identical financial situations and reacted to the change in exactly the same way.

In the short run, competitive strategic objectives tend to determine behavior. In the long run, every corporation's cost of capital is adjusted to reflect its tax burden, otherwise the corporation will die.

 

[Liar]

The popular assertion of the existence of “tax breaks” unique to fossil fuel companies does not bear up under scrutiny. It's complete, absolute, utter, total fabrication ( that's the polite term for a LIE ).

How about this then:

"Tax breaks" for extremely profitable companies (of which the big players in the oil industry is a clear example). For or against?

 

[bronzeage]

In the short run, competitive strategic objectives tend to determine behavior. In the long run, every corporation's cost of capital is adjusted to reflect its tax burden, otherwise the corporation will die.

I love talk like this. So, what sets the prices for products in a competitive market? Is it tax breaks, the lack of tax breaks, or market forces of supply and demand?

 

[trysail]

I love talk like this. So, what sets the prices for products in a competitive market? Is it tax breaks, the lack of tax breaks, or market forces of supply and demand?

A corporation's weighted cost of capital is calculated using the after-tax cost of debt. The after-tax cost of debt reflects the fact that interest is a deductible expense for income tax purposes.


Capital spending decisions are implicitly evaluated using an estimate of a corporation's weighted cost of capital.

 

[The_Trouvere]

The Republicans favor any policy that benefits rich people. Anything else they talk about is an effort to win the support of lower income whites who are hurt by their economic policies.

 

[unregistered]

 

[IrezumiKiss]

The Republicans favor any policy that benefits rich people. Anything else they talk about is an effort to win the support of lower income whites who are hurt by their economic policies.

Absolutely right on.

 

[Sonny Limatina]

The Republicans favor any policy that benefits rich people. Anything else they talk about is an effort to win the support of lower income whites who are hurt by their economic policies.

This is oversimplistic. The Republicans favor pulling government back to its smallest possible size. To do that, they need dollars to be injected into and to remain in the market. The people with the most dollars are the government's partner in this endeavor. It's not that they favor the rich, it's that this model requires the existence of rich people, in order to work.

 

[bronzeage]

A corporation's weighted cost of capital is calculated using the after-tax cost of debt. The after-tax cost of debt reflects the fact that interest is a deductible expense for income tax purposes.


Capital spending decisions are implicitly evaluated using an estimate of a corporation's weighted cost of capital.

Can a corporation raise the price of their products over current market value because their costs have increased?

 

[trysail]

Can a corporation raise the price of their products over current market value because their costs have increased?

Aggregate corporate capital spending decisions ultimately determine supply and, thus, price.

 

[bronzeage]

Aggregate corporate capital spending decisions ultimately determine supply and, thus, price.

Can an individual corporation demand higher prices in a competitive market because of higher costs?

 

[kbate]

Can an individual corporation demand higher prices in a competitive market because of higher costs?

If they can convince you that their product is in some way better than the others. Repeat after me - Made In America By Union Workers.

Not Made by A Trust!

 

[bronzeage]

If they can convince you that their product is in some way better than the others. Repeat after me - Made In America By Union Workers.

Not Made by A Trust!

That would require a larger advertising budget, which is a tax deductible cost.

In a competitive market, raising prices sends business to the competitors. In a less competitive market, raising prices reduces sales volume and sends buyers to alternatives.

This assumes the US gasoline business is a competitive market. Maybe it's not. Maybe all the oil companies meet every morning and agree to that day's gas prices. Is this what "Aggregate corporate capital spending decisions ultimately determine supply and, thus, price." means?

Do oil companies aggregate and fix prices?

If this is the case, we have a serious breach of the law.

 

[JenAltArmy]

Do you support taxpayer subsidies for oil companies?

Do I think, that an oil company should be given a “free” check for drilling or processing for oil?

No.

Now, do I feel that if a company drills and the well is dead should that company be allowed to write off those expenses?

Yes.

My question is how do you define subsidies?