Queery #2
Comments
-
If this is an attempt to denote a non existence of subsidizing policies that allow oil companies to operate. I would rather you get to your point than waste time posing questions you could easily find the answers to yourself.Blu82 said:
OK, name the subsidies.Gwad said:
The oil that soaks up billions of dollars in subsidies (corporate socialism)?sarktastic said:
How happy will Kalifornians be when they learn they have to pay Donald Trumps government for the offshore oil?CirrhosisDawg said:
California makes you angry!Blu82 said:
I would be all in favor of leaving just the California portion of the border unprotected and wall off the entire state. That would save us all a bunch of money, increase the safety of the rest of the country and put a big dent into drugs coming into our country.CirrhosisDawg said:I support legislation that shuts down the federal government permanently. It’s a massive fucking waste. States are sovereign and should be responsible for managing their own social and political affairs. No more transfers of California wealth and prosperity to ignorant freeloaders who are so destitute and uncompetitive that they demand tariffs, labor restrictions and generalized economic protectionism. Shut it down. End the gravy train and handouts to trumptards.
Let California be the safe harbor foe all illegals. Since they already want to be a sanctuary state let them put their resources where their socialist mouths are. FREE SHIT FOR EVERYBODY THAT WANTS IN! What a utopia.
Somewhere in your lunacy, however, is a thread of agreement. You won’t understand it, at all, but it is still worth mentioning and you can nod your head obliviously in agreement.
The point of agreement is: “The wall” in 2019 is a far less destructive totem as slavery in 1860, but essentially serves the same purpose. It illustrates the intractable division — economic, social, and political— that defines today’s US. So, in other words, the US social contract is once again broken.
States should be free to go their own way. Think how happy that would make Mississippi! California would be way better off.
Please be specific.
I'll wait. -
Is this meant to be some sort of gotcha moment?
Did you just learn that the United States encourages energy development to run this country? -
The profits are privatized. It also ties into a larger theme I see on here about the nature of socialism.
-
Do you enjoy mobility? Lights? TV?
-
good talk
-
Exactly as I suspected.
Thanks for the confirmation -
Since you're a liberal I already know that you love policies that don't work. Got to love how well that welfare state has worked out.Gwad said:We need to build 'The Wall'. I want to see what other ineffective schemes can be dialed up when that one doesn't work.
-
Liberals love the myth about oil company "subsides." Most of these "subsides" are the same form of corporate deductions that can be taken advantage of by every business.Gwad said:
The oil that soaks up billions of dollars in subsidies (corporate socialism)?sarktastic said:
How happy will Kalifornians be when they learn they have to pay Donald Trumps government for the offshore oil?CirrhosisDawg said:
California makes you angry!Blu82 said:
I would be all in favor of leaving just the California portion of the border unprotected and wall off the entire state. That would save us all a bunch of money, increase the safety of the rest of the country and put a big dent into drugs coming into our country.CirrhosisDawg said:I support legislation that shuts down the federal government permanently. It’s a massive fucking waste. States are sovereign and should be responsible for managing their own social and political affairs. No more transfers of California wealth and prosperity to ignorant freeloaders who are so destitute and uncompetitive that they demand tariffs, labor restrictions and generalized economic protectionism. Shut it down. End the gravy train and handouts to trumptards.
Let California be the safe harbor foe all illegals. Since they already want to be a sanctuary state let them put their resources where their socialist mouths are. FREE SHIT FOR EVERYBODY THAT WANTS IN! What a utopia.
Somewhere in your lunacy, however, is a thread of agreement. You won’t understand it, at all, but it is still worth mentioning and you can nod your head obliviously in agreement.
The point of agreement is: “The wall” in 2019 is a far less destructive totem as slavery in 1860, but essentially serves the same purpose. It illustrates the intractable division — economic, social, and political— that defines today’s US. So, in other words, the US social contract is once again broken.
States should be free to go their own way. Think how happy that would make Mississippi! California would be way better off.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/drillinginfo/2016/02/22/debunking-myths-about-federal-oil-gas-subsidies/#6c7443126e1c -
Why can't you name them for us Mr. Cut and Paste? Btw, for a guy who loves to attack the source of others you sure post a lot Vox and Think Progress Kunt.2001400ex said:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vox.com/platform/amp/energy-and-environment/2017/10/6/16428458/us-energy-coal-oil-subsidiesBlu82 said:
OK, name the subsidies.Gwad said:
The oil that soaks up billions of dollars in subsidies (corporate socialism)?sarktastic said:
How happy will Kalifornians be when they learn they have to pay Donald Trumps government for the offshore oil?CirrhosisDawg said:
California makes you angry!Blu82 said:
I would be all in favor of leaving just the California portion of the border unprotected and wall off the entire state. That would save us all a bunch of money, increase the safety of the rest of the country and put a big dent into drugs coming into our country.CirrhosisDawg said:I support legislation that shuts down the federal government permanently. It’s a massive fucking waste. States are sovereign and should be responsible for managing their own social and political affairs. No more transfers of California wealth and prosperity to ignorant freeloaders who are so destitute and uncompetitive that they demand tariffs, labor restrictions and generalized economic protectionism. Shut it down. End the gravy train and handouts to trumptards.
Let California be the safe harbor foe all illegals. Since they already want to be a sanctuary state let them put their resources where their socialist mouths are. FREE SHIT FOR EVERYBODY THAT WANTS IN! What a utopia.
Somewhere in your lunacy, however, is a thread of agreement. You won’t understand it, at all, but it is still worth mentioning and you can nod your head obliviously in agreement.
The point of agreement is: “The wall” in 2019 is a far less destructive totem as slavery in 1860, but essentially serves the same purpose. It illustrates the intractable division — economic, social, and political— that defines today’s US. So, in other words, the US social contract is once again broken.
States should be free to go their own way. Think how happy that would make Mississippi! California would be way better off.
Please be specific.
I'll wait. -
Hey Hondo, when talking about how much the top 1% pays in income taxes you claimed it was dishonest to not list the amounts paid by everyone in Social Security and Medicare taxes. How come you don't list the amount of taxes paid by the oil industry and compare it to these so called "subsidies?"
Using your Kunt standard, shouldn't you also be citing the amount of taxes that are paid by the oil industry? -
Whatever helps you sleep under the reign of corporate socialism. I'm here to serve.sarktastic said:Exactly as I suspected.
Thanks for the confirmation
-
You’re a sniveling little punk who didn’t learn basic history in high school. You suck up basic resources that would be better served helping guatamalans kidnap children at out border for personal gain.
-
Do you think allowing the oil industry to take deductions that are available to all industries is a "subsidy?"Gwad said:
Whatever helps you sleep under the reign of corporate socialism. I'm here to serve.sarktastic said:Exactly as I suspected.
Thanks for the confirmation
What percentage or their revenue do you believe that corporations should pay taxes on? -
Psychological projection. Psychological projection is a defence mechanism in which the human ego defends itself against unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others.
-
Kids gonna kid
-
It's so entertaining to watch libs stumble over their own bullshit.
Can't/won't answer questions, throw up diversions and smoke screens, lol.
-
No one takes you seriously Cletus.Blu82 said:It's so entertaining to watch libs stumble over their own bullshit.
Can't/won't answer questions, throw up diversions and smoke screens, lol. -
"Most" El oh el. So most..... Still leaves billions every year in subsidies. I'm not surprised you don't get that.SFGbob said:
Liberals love the myth about oil company "subsides." Most of these "subsides" are the same form of corporate deductions that can be taken advantage of by every business.Gwad said:
The oil that soaks up billions of dollars in subsidies (corporate socialism)?sarktastic said:
How happy will Kalifornians be when they learn they have to pay Donald Trumps government for the offshore oil?CirrhosisDawg said:
California makes you angry!Blu82 said:
I would be all in favor of leaving just the California portion of the border unprotected and wall off the entire state. That would save us all a bunch of money, increase the safety of the rest of the country and put a big dent into drugs coming into our country.CirrhosisDawg said:I support legislation that shuts down the federal government permanently. It’s a massive fucking waste. States are sovereign and should be responsible for managing their own social and political affairs. No more transfers of California wealth and prosperity to ignorant freeloaders who are so destitute and uncompetitive that they demand tariffs, labor restrictions and generalized economic protectionism. Shut it down. End the gravy train and handouts to trumptards.
Let California be the safe harbor foe all illegals. Since they already want to be a sanctuary state let them put their resources where their socialist mouths are. FREE SHIT FOR EVERYBODY THAT WANTS IN! What a utopia.
Somewhere in your lunacy, however, is a thread of agreement. You won’t understand it, at all, but it is still worth mentioning and you can nod your head obliviously in agreement.
The point of agreement is: “The wall” in 2019 is a far less destructive totem as slavery in 1860, but essentially serves the same purpose. It illustrates the intractable division — economic, social, and political— that defines today’s US. So, in other words, the US social contract is once again broken.
States should be free to go their own way. Think how happy that would make Mississippi! California would be way better off.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/drillinginfo/2016/02/22/debunking-myths-about-federal-oil-gas-subsidies/#6c7443126e1c -
Answer the actual questionGwad said:good talk
-
What not surprising is that you're such a lightweight Kunt you can't even detail for us what these "subsidies" are. The oil industries pays billions in federal and state taxes and employs millions of people who in turn pay billions in taxes. Whatever "subsidies" the oil industry receives they payback in taxes far, far more.2001400ex said:
"Most" El oh el. So most..... Still leaves billions every year in subsidies. I'm not surprised you don't get that.SFGbob said:
Liberals love the myth about oil company "subsides." Most of these "subsides" are the same form of corporate deductions that can be taken advantage of by every business.Gwad said:
The oil that soaks up billions of dollars in subsidies (corporate socialism)?sarktastic said:
How happy will Kalifornians be when they learn they have to pay Donald Trumps government for the offshore oil?CirrhosisDawg said:
California makes you angry!Blu82 said:
I would be all in favor of leaving just the California portion of the border unprotected and wall off the entire state. That would save us all a bunch of money, increase the safety of the rest of the country and put a big dent into drugs coming into our country.CirrhosisDawg said:I support legislation that shuts down the federal government permanently. It’s a massive fucking waste. States are sovereign and should be responsible for managing their own social and political affairs. No more transfers of California wealth and prosperity to ignorant freeloaders who are so destitute and uncompetitive that they demand tariffs, labor restrictions and generalized economic protectionism. Shut it down. End the gravy train and handouts to trumptards.
Let California be the safe harbor foe all illegals. Since they already want to be a sanctuary state let them put their resources where their socialist mouths are. FREE SHIT FOR EVERYBODY THAT WANTS IN! What a utopia.
Somewhere in your lunacy, however, is a thread of agreement. You won’t understand it, at all, but it is still worth mentioning and you can nod your head obliviously in agreement.
The point of agreement is: “The wall” in 2019 is a far less destructive totem as slavery in 1860, but essentially serves the same purpose. It illustrates the intractable division — economic, social, and political— that defines today’s US. So, in other words, the US social contract is once again broken.
States should be free to go their own way. Think how happy that would make Mississippi! California would be way better off.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/drillinginfo/2016/02/22/debunking-myths-about-federal-oil-gas-subsidies/#6c7443126e1c
-
I did provide a link that lists them out. And that link had the source data. And you still don't get it.SFGbob said:
What not surprising is that you're such a lightweight Kunt you can't even detail for us what these "subsidies" are. The oil industries pays billions in federal and state taxes and employs millions of people who in turn pay billions in taxes. Whatever "subsidies" the oil industry receives they payback in taxes far, far more.2001400ex said:
"Most" El oh el. So most..... Still leaves billions every year in subsidies. I'm not surprised you don't get that.SFGbob said:
Liberals love the myth about oil company "subsides." Most of these "subsides" are the same form of corporate deductions that can be taken advantage of by every business.Gwad said:
The oil that soaks up billions of dollars in subsidies (corporate socialism)?sarktastic said:
How happy will Kalifornians be when they learn they have to pay Donald Trumps government for the offshore oil?CirrhosisDawg said:
California makes you angry!Blu82 said:
I would be all in favor of leaving just the California portion of the border unprotected and wall off the entire state. That would save us all a bunch of money, increase the safety of the rest of the country and put a big dent into drugs coming into our country.CirrhosisDawg said:I support legislation that shuts down the federal government permanently. It’s a massive fucking waste. States are sovereign and should be responsible for managing their own social and political affairs. No more transfers of California wealth and prosperity to ignorant freeloaders who are so destitute and uncompetitive that they demand tariffs, labor restrictions and generalized economic protectionism. Shut it down. End the gravy train and handouts to trumptards.
Let California be the safe harbor foe all illegals. Since they already want to be a sanctuary state let them put their resources where their socialist mouths are. FREE SHIT FOR EVERYBODY THAT WANTS IN! What a utopia.
Somewhere in your lunacy, however, is a thread of agreement. You won’t understand it, at all, but it is still worth mentioning and you can nod your head obliviously in agreement.
The point of agreement is: “The wall” in 2019 is a far less destructive totem as slavery in 1860, but essentially serves the same purpose. It illustrates the intractable division — economic, social, and political— that defines today’s US. So, in other words, the US social contract is once again broken.
States should be free to go their own way. Think how happy that would make Mississippi! California would be way better off.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/drillinginfo/2016/02/22/debunking-myths-about-federal-oil-gas-subsidies/#6c7443126e1c -
You provided a link that pontificated that our military keeping shipping lanes open could also qualify as a "subsidy" to the oil industry.
You didn't provide shit. You cut and pasted an article that you didn't even read and if I were to attack it you wouldn't even defend. -
The article clearly explained the military deal.SFGbob said:You provided a link that pontificated that our military keeping shipping lanes open could also qualify as a "subsidy" to the oil industry.
You didn't provide shit. You cut and pasted an article that you didn't even read and if I were to attack it you wouldn't even defend.
That being said, you said "most subsidies can be claimed by every other company". What you ignore is the subsidies they do get to claim. This is the second time I had to explain that to you. -
Here's one of the "subsidies" listed by your source Hondo.
Intangible drilling oil & gas deduction ($2.3 billion)
Now here's what "Intangible drilling costs" really are.
Intangible Drilling Costs are essentially the cost of drilling a new well that have no salvageable value. Currently, most exploration companies are allowed to deduct 100% of the costs in the year they are incurred with the majors able to deduct 70% of the costs immediately with the remaining 30% amortized over 5 years. In what world would money spent that may or may not be recovered be capitalized as an asset?
So because we allow oil companies to deduct the cost of drilling a non-producing well in the world of Hondo the Kunt that's a "subsidy."
Hondo when you deduct your home mortgage or business expenses are you being "subsidized" by the Federal government?
-
actual question?CuntWaffle said:
Answer the actual questionGwad said:good talk
-
Yes I know what my article said and what your article said. Thanks for repeating it.SFGbob said:Here's one of the "subsidies" listed by your source Hondo.
Intangible drilling oil & gas deduction ($2.3 billion)
Now here's what "Intangible drilling costs" really are.
Intangible Drilling Costs are essentially the cost of drilling a new well that have no salvageable value. Currently, most exploration companies are allowed to deduct 100% of the costs in the year they are incurred with the majors able to deduct 70% of the costs immediately with the remaining 30% amortized over 5 years. In what world would money spent that may or may not be recovered be capitalized as an asset?
So because we allow oil companies to deduct the cost of drilling a non-producing well in the world of Hondo the Kunt that's a "subsidy."
Hondo when you deduct your home mortgage or business expenses are you being "subsidized" by the Federal government?
And yes reducing my income for home mortgage INTEREST is a subsidy. People who rent can't deduct any part of their rent.
Businesses expenses are just that, a business expense. However, capital projects are capitalized and the oil industry gets to deduct drilling costs in the year incurred, which contrary to your article, should be capitalized.
You are awful at this. -
I didn't ignore anything you lying Kunt that's just another one of your standard dodges. First of all, allowing business to deduct business expenses is hardly a subsidy by an clear definition of the word. Second of all2001400ex said:
The article clearly explained the military deal.SFGbob said:You provided a link that pontificated that our military keeping shipping lanes open could also qualify as a "subsidy" to the oil industry.
You didn't provide shit. You cut and pasted an article that you didn't even read and if I were to attack it you wouldn't even defend.
That being said, you said "most subsidies can be claimed by every other company". What you ignore is the subsidies they do get to claim. This is the second time I had to explain that to you.
In 2012 the top two corporations paying federal taxes in the US were ExxonMobil and Chevron CVX +2.07% paying a combined total of $45.2 billion. On average, the industry pays a 45% tax rate when all state, federal, and foreign taxes are totaled up. By comparison the Healthcare Industry pays a total rate of 35% and the Pharmaceuticals pay an estimated rate of 21%. Based upon these numbers it’s hard to believe which business sector is criticized the most for “subsidies”.
-
Why do you like to bring in state and foreign taxes in this discussion but don't want to include payroll taxes paid to the government and reported on income tax forms for individuals?SFGbob said:
I didn't ignore anything you lying Kunt that's just another one of your standard dodges. First of all, allowing business to deduct business expenses is hardly a subsidy by an clear definition of the word. Second of all2001400ex said:
The article clearly explained the military deal.SFGbob said:You provided a link that pontificated that our military keeping shipping lanes open could also qualify as a "subsidy" to the oil industry.
You didn't provide shit. You cut and pasted an article that you didn't even read and if I were to attack it you wouldn't even defend.
That being said, you said "most subsidies can be claimed by every other company". What you ignore is the subsidies they do get to claim. This is the second time I had to explain that to you.
In 2012 the top two corporations paying federal taxes in the US were ExxonMobil and Chevron CVX +2.07% paying a combined total of $45.2 billion. On average, the industry pays a 45% tax rate when all state, federal, and foreign taxes are totaled up. By comparison the Healthcare Industry pays a total rate of 35% and the Pharmaceuticals pay an estimated rate of 21%. Based upon these numbers it’s hard to believe which business sector is criticized the most for “subsidies”.
Hypo fucking crit.
I do appreciate your attempt to lie with statistics tho. It's cute. -
You mean "lies" like when you call business tax deductions "subsidies?"2001400ex said:
Why do you like to bring in state and foreign taxes in this discussion but don't want to include payroll taxes paid to the government and reported on income tax forms for individuals?SFGbob said:
I didn't ignore anything you lying Kunt that's just another one of your standard dodges. First of all, allowing business to deduct business expenses is hardly a subsidy by an clear definition of the word. Second of all2001400ex said:
The article clearly explained the military deal.SFGbob said:You provided a link that pontificated that our military keeping shipping lanes open could also qualify as a "subsidy" to the oil industry.
You didn't provide shit. You cut and pasted an article that you didn't even read and if I were to attack it you wouldn't even defend.
That being said, you said "most subsidies can be claimed by every other company". What you ignore is the subsidies they do get to claim. This is the second time I had to explain that to you.
In 2012 the top two corporations paying federal taxes in the US were ExxonMobil and Chevron CVX +2.07% paying a combined total of $45.2 billion. On average, the industry pays a 45% tax rate when all state, federal, and foreign taxes are totaled up. By comparison the Healthcare Industry pays a total rate of 35% and the Pharmaceuticals pay an estimated rate of 21%. Based upon these numbers it’s hard to believe which business sector is criticized the most for “subsidies”.
Hypo fucking crit.
I do appreciate your attempt to lie with statistics tho. It's cute.
And I bring in all the taxes paid by the oil industry because I wasn't limiting it to just Federal taxes. I don't include payroll taxes when I'm talking about income taxes because they're not income taxes despite your fucking lies to the contrary.
If you wan't to talk about all taxes paid by individuals knock yourself out but I was specifically and only talking about income taxes. -
HypocriteSFGbob said:
You mean "lies" like when you call business tax deductions "subsidies?"2001400ex said:
Why do you like to bring in state and foreign taxes in this discussion but don't want to include payroll taxes paid to the government and reported on income tax forms for individuals?SFGbob said:
I didn't ignore anything you lying Kunt that's just another one of your standard dodges. First of all, allowing business to deduct business expenses is hardly a subsidy by an clear definition of the word. Second of all2001400ex said:
The article clearly explained the military deal.SFGbob said:You provided a link that pontificated that our military keeping shipping lanes open could also qualify as a "subsidy" to the oil industry.
You didn't provide shit. You cut and pasted an article that you didn't even read and if I were to attack it you wouldn't even defend.
That being said, you said "most subsidies can be claimed by every other company". What you ignore is the subsidies they do get to claim. This is the second time I had to explain that to you.
In 2012 the top two corporations paying federal taxes in the US were ExxonMobil and Chevron CVX +2.07% paying a combined total of $45.2 billion. On average, the industry pays a 45% tax rate when all state, federal, and foreign taxes are totaled up. By comparison the Healthcare Industry pays a total rate of 35% and the Pharmaceuticals pay an estimated rate of 21%. Based upon these numbers it’s hard to believe which business sector is criticized the most for “subsidies”.
Hypo fucking crit.
I do appreciate your attempt to lie with statistics tho. It's cute.
And I bring in all the taxes paid by the oil industry because I wasn't limiting it to just Federal taxes. I don't include payroll taxes when I'm talking about income taxes because they're not income taxes despite your fucking lies to the contrary.
If you wan't to talk about all taxes paid by individuals knock yourself out but I was specifically and only talking about income taxes.
