Talk About Network

Google


Register and Login
Nick
Password
Register create new account Sign up is FREE and you can post replies, new topics, bookmark posts and more!
Recover lost password


Government > US Elections > Re: Dem's as Fo...
Latest [ Topics | Posts ] Archive Post A New Topic Post a Reply
<< Topic < Post Post 3 of 16 Topic 21696 of 25089
Post > Topic >>

Re: Dem's as Forest Gumps

by "Dionysus" <no surrender@[EMAIL PROTECTED] > May 12, 2008 at 03:42 PM

"MACK DADDY" <pepsivanilla@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:1185aa84-fee2-48b8-9c7d-b7f280e37727@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On May 12, 9:33 am, "Dionysus" <no surren...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> FROM IBD
>>
>> HEAD: DEMOCRATS' WINDFALL TAX -- ON YOU
>>
>> In their ongoing war against U.S. oil producers, Senate Democrats say
>> they'll slap Big Oil with a windfall profits tax and take away $17 
>> billion
>> in tax breaks, among other punishments. The planned 25 percent tax on
>> windfall profits would be imposed on oil company earnings above what
the
>> Senate's wise members decided was "reasonable." Never mind that what's
>> "reasonable" to one person might be punitive to another, says
Investor's
>> Business Daily (IBD).
>>
>> The last time the United States had a windfall profits tax on oil 
>> companies,
>> the results were [disastrous]:
>> --Over the entire 1980-1986 period, the (windfall profits tax) reduced
>> domestic oil production from between 320 million barrels . . . and
1,268
>> million barrels according to the Congressional Research Service.
>> --Oil companies were hit hard by the tax, and in line with basic
economic
>> theory, they produced less oil, not more.
>> --The effect of reducing domestic oil production was to increase the 
>> level
>> of im****ted oil, says IBD:
>>
>> At the time, the United States im****ted about 30 percent of its oil; 
>> today,
>> we im****t about 60 percent.
>>
>> In part, that jump in oil dependency was due to the huge tax advantage
we
>> gave foreign oil companies in the 1980s -- and to the continuing 
>> advantage
>> we give them today by refusing to let our oil companies produce more 
>> crude
>> from our own reserves.
>> Revenues from the windfall tax were far less than expected, because
>> producers pumped less and non-taxed im****ts flooded our market.
Compared
>> with a forecast of $393 billion in windfall tax revenues from 1980 to 
>> 1988,
>> Congress got a mere $80 billion.
>> *********
>> Dose dim Dems..."stupid is as stupid does" indeed.
>>
>> Dionysus
>
> The period you cited was when Raygun was president.  That's why it
> didn't work!
*********
All right, who left the livestock pen gate open?

Dionysus
 




 16 Posts in Topic:
Dem's as Forest Gumps
"Dionysus" <  2008-05-12 12:33:53 
Re: Dem's as Forest Gumps
MACK DADDY <pepsivanil  2008-05-12 11:26:46 
Re: Dem's as Forest Gumps
"Dionysus" <  2008-05-12 15:42:13 
Re: Dem's as Forest Gumps
Day Brown <daybrown@[E  2008-05-12 13:45:45 
Re: Dem's as Forest Gumps
"Dionysus" <  2008-05-12 15:41:05 
Re: Dem's as Forest Gumps
ray <xxxrayted@[EMAIL   2008-05-12 16:43:10 
Re: Dem's as Forest Gumps
Day Brown <daybrown@[E  2008-05-12 21:57:44 
Re: Dem's as Forest Gumps
ray <xxxrayted@[EMAIL   2008-05-13 17:16:59 
Re: Dem's as Forest Gumps
MACK DADDY <pepsivanil  2008-05-12 19:13:16 
Re: Dem's as Forest Gumps
"Dionysus" <  2008-05-13 11:35:26 
Re: Dem's as Forest Gumps
MACK DADDY <pepsivanil  2008-05-13 19:39:25 
Re: Dem's as Forest Gumps
MACK DADDY <pepsivanil  2008-05-13 19:42:30 
Re: Dem's as Forest Gumps
ray <xxxrayted@[EMAIL   2008-05-13 23:38:45 
Re: Dem's as Forest Gumps
Day Brown <daybrown@[E  2008-05-14 22:06:37 
Re: Dem's as Forest Gumps
ray <xxxrayted@[EMAIL   2008-05-14 23:31:56 
Re: Dem's as Forest Gumps
MACK DADDY <pepsivanil  2008-05-14 20:51:30 

Post A Reply:
  Go here to Signup

AddThis Feed Button


About - Advertising - Contact - Frequently Asked Questions - Privacy Policy - Terms of Use - Signup

Contact
tan12V112 Sun Oct 12 16:46:46 CDT 2008.