Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Little fact about global warming for you


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Little fact about global warming for you Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Little fact about global warming for you - 8/23/2013 11:39:53 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
I am a retail merchant, I buy merchandise or acquire it thru pawn default. It has a value, I do not pay taxes on the acquisition, but I report inventory value (because the government wants their money from that sooner or later, perhaps upon my death and an auction). I sell stuff, I pay taxes on the profits of those sales, and my inventory is reduced, I get no inventory depletion allowance to write off in offset of my profit, no handout from the government.
Therefore oil and timber depletion allowances are a fuckin subsidy. It costs taxpayers money to give away that tax revenue.


You pay taxes on the inventory you have. If you have less inventory next year, your inventory tax will be less.

Nice try, though.



Bullshit. That is exactly and wholly wrong, I pay no taxes on my inventory. It is meaningless to the tax man. Only what I sell, which is no longer inventory.

The oil company pays no taxes on the oil in the ground, same fucking deal.

But it gets subsidies for its inventory removed from the ground.

< Message edited by mnottertail -- 8/23/2013 11:40:49 AM >


_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 141
RE: Little fact about global warming for you - 8/23/2013 11:42:17 AM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn
quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Just for amusement. One of those "subsidies" that you are bleating about is called a "depletion" allowance.
Its based on the priniciple that .. as you pump oil out.. its no longer there! The value of the remaining minerals, and the value of the land is therefor decreased.

Right. But if we are talking honest capitalism here, why should the supply side of it have such blatant government favoritism, vs. the demand side? Did Royal Typewriter have any "market depletion allowance" to allow for word processors? How many companies got "market depletion allowance" for making tubes after transistors came along? The government should still be blowing economic kisses to cathode ray tube screens, by this estimation. Has there ever been any question, in history, that both supply and demand in any one venture were finite? Why the extraordinary government favoritism and taxpayer burden for sake of this one commodity and its industry?

It's not a "market" depletion allowance the oil industry gets. It's based on the value of the well being lower since there is less oil under it. Taxes are based on the value, and when that value decreases, so should the taxes, no? Ever heard of a depreciation deduction? How much you want to bet that business owners do?
Does the US Government give money to "Big Oil," or, would it be better described not taking as much through tax breaks? Which is it for renewables?

depreciation of the hardware is legit but a tax break for a reduction in the mineral value on leased land? No fucking way. That should go to the land owner which is never the oil companies.

All depends on how the lease is worded.

No. Tex credits for depleting the mineral value of the land should go to the owner period. If he's such a colossal buffoon as to assign the value of those tax credits to the rented that is his problem but the tax credit should only and always go to the owner.


In other words, it depends on how the lease is worded. Thanks for agreeing.


No. The tax credit did not get paid to the oil company. I highly doubt anyone would sign a lease of that sort.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 142
RE: Little fact about global warming for you - 8/23/2013 12:09:07 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn
So tell us, then, how much depletion allowance the drug companies and electronics companies et al. get in depletion allowance for their patents, which decrease in value over time,

A patent doesn't decrease in value over time. It grants near monopoly for a limited time, so as to let the company recoup R & D costs. Nice try, but completely different.

If the company doesn't continually come up with new patents and salable results therefrom, but only sits idly by on current patents, then the stock price goes down as expiration approaches. The value of such companies resides in their patents.


Do they pay taxes on the value of their patent? How is that even determined? If I get a patent for Drug X and a patent for Drug Y, how do they assign the value of those patents? How would you determine the amount of taxes owed on those patents?

quote:

quote:

Yeah, it's flying over my head. The oil in the ground isn't "equipment."
The oil left in the ground doesn't fall under the same category as the equipment.

You don't say? Boy, you catch on quickly.
quote:

When the amount of oil coming out of a well drops, the profits from that well will drop.

You don't say? Boy, you catch on quickly.
quote:

Profits don't drop based on the amount left in. The oil that's in the ground doesn't profit the company until it's sucked out, or it's sold to someone else.

Actually, that is precisely what the oil depletion allowance does. It increases after-tax profit by allowing deduction for what the oil company could have made if there was the same amount of oil in the ground from that well forever. To no one's surprise for at least the last 60 years, oil wells don't last forever.


In other words, it only taxes the value of the oil left in the well instead of what used to be in the well. Thanks for clearing that up. Did you get it this time?

quote:

The only legitimate deduction concerns the amount, if any, that the driller pays to whomever to extract the commodity. In OPEC countries, this is not insubstantial. If It's in California, they pay nothing. So any other contrived deduction beyond that is not legitimate, and constitutes double dipping on expensing for tax purposes, and no other business could get away with that.


Horseshit. Why should they be taxed on the value of a full well when that well is no longer full?

quote:

quote:

What profits are there in oil that is still in the ground?

The oil depletion allowance. OK, so you're not catching on as quickly as I thought.
quote:

I better not find oil on my land. I'll have to pay back taxes for profits I never even knew I had, right?

Do you know of any property owner who has oil under his property but no well, or plans for one, who is paying taxes of any sort on that oil? You are again relying on fatuous assertions in service some bewildered sense of reasonable argument. Considering what you read for "information" (see below), this is becoming more understandable.


That's exactly what I'm talking about. If I have oil under my land, am I supposed to be paying taxes on it? It's value under my land, right? Don't I have to pay back taxes on the value of that oil (which would be before I knew it was there, thanks for reading)?

quote:

quote:

Does the US Government give money to "Big Oil," or, would it be better described not taking as much through tax breaks? Which is it for renewables?

As one example, the refineries (Koch Bros. et al.) get 45 cents per gallon (from the Treasury) for adding 1.6 ounces of corn ethanol to 14.4 ounces of petroleum gasoline. Ten percent ethanol gas. In any case, economic benefit is economic benefit. But the bill has to be paid eventually, by someone. If you and three other tenants get free rent, the other tenants' rent will be higher than otherwise. But you consider it as being no harm to the other tenants, because it didn't involve making you pay the same as everyone else. How convenient. For you.
quote:

Isn't your example of some sort of economic benefit for the ethanol industry, then? It's supporting the ethanol sector, not Big Oil. lmao

The ethanol industry in the US IS the oil industry, by way of the refineries.


Seriously?!?!? When did Big Oil start growing corn for ethanol?!? LMMFAO!!!

quote:

OK, now I really have to take back that "catch on quickly" comment. Sorry.
quote:

So, if I pay $1000 in Federal withholding taxes on my annual income and get back $800 through credits, exemptions, etc., is that a subsidy? If I were to get back $1200, would that be any different?

No, it wouldn't. You have obtained a $200 economic advantage from the government, however it came about.
Boy, you catch on quickly!
quote:

Those who are getting money from the government are still benefiting from the credits and deductions in the tax code, too.

Exactly.
quote:

Those are the "double dippers." But, you are perfectly okay with that, eh?

It's you who are arguing for the legitimacy of double dipping by the oil companies, not me. Do try to keep up.


Wrong-o! (Again) Big Oil gets tax relief. Renewables get their own tax breaks (as do all businesses), but are also getting money from the Feds. THAT is double dipping. See? Tax relief would be one dip, or "single" dipping. Renewables and Big Oil both single dip. Getting money from the government is the second dip, or, "double" dip.

quote:

quote:

"Big Oil" still pays an incredible amount of money in taxes each and every year.

Exxon paid zero taxes to the federal government in 2009.
That was from that well known lefty vanguard, Forbes magazine. But what? Exxon says different? How could that be?
quote:

Really?:
    quote:

    In 2009 specifically, ExxonMobil’s total taxes and duties to the U.S. government and its subdivisions exceeded $7.7 billion, an amount that includes ExxonMobil’s U.S. income tax expense related to 2009 activities of approximately $500 million. Our U.S. income tax expenses over the last five years alone reach almost $20 billion.

Do you know what the nebulous terms "and duties" or "the government and its subdivisions" mean? I don't either, as Exxon felt it to be in their interest to not explain.
But knowing that they are speaking to an audience like you, they present a figure for US only profit, then another circle with a figure that encompasses total taxes and all expenses of any sort worldwide.


LMAO!! It's right there in BIG white letters: US Income and Other Tax Expenses. Thus, the "Big Green" circle represents the income and other taxes paid in the US. The smaller blue circle represents the gross earnings from US operations.

quote:

Of which enough was able to be applied to their US tax return to pay no US federal income tax, according to Forbes. Exxon says it was $500 million. I can take either version, being that the 500 mil (by Exxon's own account) is pocket change accidentally spilled in comparison to the $40 Billion in net profit. They paid more in duties and taxes elsewhere because most of the countries they deal with are not nearly as stupid as the US.
Further:
    quote:

    In reality, the numbers in the 10-K reflected more than ExxonMobil’s tax expense for 2009 activities. They included the effect of adjustments to our taxes for earlier years, which exceeded the amounts related to 2009. In fact, ExxonMobil’s income tax expense related to 2009 activities was approximately $500 million.

There they are again, crying about the 500 mill on the 40 billion profit.


Profit, or earnings? Looks like someone is having difficulty coming to terms, literally.

quote:


BIG! circles, something we can all understand.


<snort> You've proven you don't understand.

quote:

quote:

A typewriter company doesn't have consumable drilling equipment, so they don't get that deduction, either. Is that really all that tough to figure out?

Every manufacturer and almost every service provider has on their balance sheet consumable equipment, hence depreciation and amortization allowance. You obviously have not even taken accounting 101, yet you insist on bluster and incoherent blather as functional substitute.
quote:

How does depreciation work? Isn't that over a period of time (5 years?)? Yet, a drill is likely to be worthless well before that 5 year depreciation schedule, no?

I'm not an expert on A&D,


Say it ain't so!

Have you played on on TV? Did you stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night?

quote:

but there is not a one-size-fit's-all formula, it varies by industry. But in any case it is based on actual cost, as opposed to the oil depletion allowance, which deducts 15% off the top, regardless of actual cost, and that on top of A&D to the same company for whatever equipment used, drills and the rest. That's called double dipping. Even Michael Dell can't do that.
quote:

Big Oil may have had record profits, in gross dollar amounts, but what was

Though by this discourse, such as it is, I doubt you could make meaning of it, here is one account of profit the margin in question.
quote:

Looks like that supports my argument that their margins aren't all that high. Huge profits only stem from huge revenues.

I dunno, the 30-34% margins from exploration and drilling in 2007-09 would look good to most people. In any case, the huge revenues actually prove MY point on the matter.


One part of a business makes high profits?!?!? OMG!!!! Noooooo!!!!!

Thank God no other business runs that way. I mean, shit, if Sony only relied on the cost of their games to make profits on the sales of they systems, that would be totally fucked up.

Wait a minute...

quote:

Boy, you are just up and down today on your ability to get it.


From a moving point of view, a stationary person will seem to be moving, but that isn't the case. It's not the case here, either.

Edited to fix a formatting error.

< Message edited by DesideriScuri -- 8/23/2013 12:10:54 PM >


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to Edwynn)
Profile   Post #: 143
RE: Little fact about global warming for you - 8/23/2013 12:23:10 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
I am a retail merchant, I buy merchandise or acquire it thru pawn default. It has a value, I do not pay taxes on the acquisition, but I report inventory value (because the government wants their money from that sooner or later, perhaps upon my death and an auction). I sell stuff, I pay taxes on the profits of those sales, and my inventory is reduced, I get no inventory depletion allowance to write off in offset of my profit, no handout from the government.
Therefore oil and timber depletion allowances are a fuckin subsidy. It costs taxpayers money to give away that tax revenue.

You pay taxes on the inventory you have. If you have less inventory next year, your inventory tax will be less.
Nice try, though.

Bullshit. That is exactly and wholly wrong, I pay no taxes on my inventory. It is meaningless to the tax man. Only what I sell, which is no longer inventory.
The oil company pays no taxes on the oil in the ground, same fucking deal.
But it gets subsidies for its inventory removed from the ground.


I was wrong. But, I don't think you were wholly correct, either.

http://www.mineralweb.com/owners-guide/leased-and-producing/royalty-taxes/depletion-allowance/

_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 144
RE: Little fact about global warming for you - 8/23/2013 12:30:40 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
quote:

depreciation of the hardware is legit but a tax break for a reduction in the mineral value on leased land? No fucking way. That should go to the land owner which is never the oil companies.

quote:

All depends on how the lease is worded.

So if I lease your house and then sell it and demand you reimburse me for the cost of the house you are good with that????because that was in the lease?????
Oh but waite I did not lease the house from you but from some cunt you live with ...said cunt being the u.s. govt who sells your oil and then charges you to replace it.


If that's the agreement I signed (being the property owner and all), then, yeah. I might not be happy about it, but I'll do my due diligence better next time, 'round.



Oh but waite I did not lease the house from you but from some cunt you live with ...said cunt being the u.s. govt who sells your oil and then charges you to replace it.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 145
RE: Little fact about global warming for you - 8/23/2013 12:34:34 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
Depletion allowance, then, is the allowance available through the IRS code allowing an owner to account for the reduction (production) of reserves as a product is produced and sold. (your link and it goes on more embarrassingly...)

I am wholly correct. lets say they buy this estimated million gallon well, for a buck a gallon thats capital cost (not taxable, but not write offable, not bad for the balance sheet or loans. Sunk cost $1 million. Cost of war, nobody including the governemnt gives a fuck about it while it sits. It is not actionable.

They pump and sell 0.5 million gallons at $2 a gallon (cost them one and pennies for the work and whatnot, but we are keeping it simple) that is a writeoff against profit. they now have a naked 0.5 million profit. They then use the oil depletion allowance, by the reduction of their inventory lets call that a quarter mill or so...whatever it is, we could get the details-------- because they have less oil to sell. That is a subsidy.

I buy 3 Xboxes and pay $50 apiece, thats $150 to the capital cost, dont mean shit.

I sell one, and my capital expense is now $100 and I sold it for $100 I have bare naked $50 profit, but where do I write off the $25 depletion allowance, because I have less XBOX reserves? I dont get that subsidy. I am not a multibillion dollar special interest corporation that the nutsuckers are felching.

THAT is why it is a subsidy.


_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 146
RE: Little fact about global warming for you - 8/23/2013 12:35:11 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

Actually, that is precisely what the oil depletion allowance does. It increases after-tax profit by allowing deduction for what the oil company could have made if there was the same amount of oil in the ground from that well forever. To no one's surprise for at least the last 60 years, oil wells don't last forever.

In other words, it only taxes the value of the oil left in the well instead of what used to be in the well. Thanks for clearing that up. Did you get it this time?


He did not say that the gov.only taxes the value of the oil left in the well.
You said that and it is not only factually wrong but not what he said at all.
Why do you think the oil co should get this subsidy?

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 147
RE: Little fact about global warming for you - 8/23/2013 12:43:43 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

have I ever feigned or dismissed that oil companies get tax breaks/credits/exemptions. They don't get subsidies. They get tax relief. There is a difference. Might be beyond your grasp, but that isn't so for everyone.


quote:




ORIGINAL: thompsonx
Obviously oil is not cost effective witness the giant subsidies to keep it propped up.


quote:

What are the subsidy levels? What is Big Oil getting vs. Renewables (in $'s and %'s, please)?


What is this?

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 148
RE: Little fact about global warming for you - 8/23/2013 12:44:55 PM   
Edwynn


Posts: 4105
Joined: 10/26/2008
Status: offline

I didn't say that patent holders pay taxes on their patents either, but that didn't stop him from saying I did, as he further soils himself in complete lack of comprehension of anything.


(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 149
RE: Little fact about global warming for you - 8/23/2013 12:47:52 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

I was wrong. But, I don't think you were wholly correct, either.

It is quite clear to the most casual observer that you are wrong but pray do tell us where we have erred?

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 150
RE: Little fact about global warming for you - 8/23/2013 12:49:06 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
quote:


They don't get subsidies. They get tax relief. There is a difference.


A company (which is now a person) that makes billions gets a tax break no other person does. They make money and pay no taxes on it.

A person gets welfare. They make no money and receive taxes on it.

I need some help with that welfare/subsidy/whatever thingie.

I need some goddamn relief. We need some even handed bitching here.

< Message edited by mnottertail -- 8/23/2013 12:50:41 PM >


_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Edwynn)
Profile   Post #: 151
RE: Little fact about global warming for you - 8/23/2013 12:51:35 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

From a moving point of view, a stationary person will seem to be moving,


You sure about that?

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 152
RE: Little fact about global warming for you - 8/23/2013 12:54:20 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

I need some goddamn relief.


Me too

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 153
RE: Little fact about global warming for you - 8/23/2013 12:54:41 PM   
Edwynn


Posts: 4105
Joined: 10/26/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn
So tell us, then, how much depletion allowance the drug companies and electronics companies et al. get in depletion allowance for their patents, which decrease in value over time,

A patent doesn't decrease in value over time. It grants near monopoly for a limited time, so as to let the company recoup R & D costs. Nice try, but completely different.

If the company doesn't continually come up with new patents and salable results therefrom, but only sits idly by on current patents, then the stock price goes down as expiration approaches. The value of such companies resides in their patents.


Do they pay taxes on the value of their patent? How is that even determined? If I get a patent for Drug X and a patent for Drug Y, how do they assign the value of those patents? How would you determine the amount of taxes owed on those patents?


OK. If you want to play that way, I'm game.

Why do you insist that every consideration to a company is a subsidy?

Touche.

I said that that's what you said, so that's what you said.

That is fun. Now I can see why you do it all the time.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 154
RE: Little fact about global warming for you - 8/23/2013 12:55:44 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

I need some goddamn relief.


Me too


LOL, A veritable desert of knowledge out here sometimes, huntie, it is parching.


_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 155
RE: Little fact about global warming for you - 8/23/2013 1:05:53 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

Not so. The oil co leases land from the taxpayers and pumps the oil out and sells it and then gets reimbursed for the oil he has pumped out.

LMAO!! Horseshit.


The oil depleation allowance is horseshit and I am glad to see that you agree with me.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 156
RE: Little fact about global warming for you - 8/23/2013 1:10:06 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail


quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

I need some goddamn relief.


Me too


LOL, A veritable desert of knowledge out here sometimes, huntie, it is parching.


I remain unconvinced that it is lack of knowledge but rather feigned ignorance.

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 157
RE: Little fact about global warming for you - 8/23/2013 2:00:02 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
quote:

depreciation of the hardware is legit but a tax break for a reduction in the mineral value on leased land? No fucking way. That should go to the land owner which is never the oil companies.

quote:

All depends on how the lease is worded.

So if I lease your house and then sell it and demand you reimburse me for the cost of the house you are good with that????because that was in the lease?????
Oh but waite I did not lease the house from you but from some cunt you live with ...said cunt being the u.s. govt who sells your oil and then charges you to replace it.

If that's the agreement I signed (being the property owner and all), then, yeah. I might not be happy about it, but I'll do my due diligence better next time, 'round.

Oh but waite I did not lease the house from you but from some cunt you live with ...said cunt being the u.s. govt who sells your oil and then charges you to replace it.


Now, you't purposely being obtuse. The government isn't giving them money. Not taking as much in taxes isn't the same as giving them money.






_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 158
RE: Little fact about global warming for you - 8/23/2013 2:01:32 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
Depletion allowance, then, is the allowance available through the IRS code allowing an owner to account for the reduction (production) of reserves as a product is produced and sold. (your link and it goes on more embarrassingly...)
I am wholly correct. lets say they buy this estimated million gallon well, for a buck a gallon thats capital cost (not taxable, but not write offable, not bad for the balance sheet or loans. Sunk cost $1 million. Cost of war, nobody including the governemnt gives a fuck about it while it sits. It is not actionable.
They pump and sell 0.5 million gallons at $2 a gallon (cost them one and pennies for the work and whatnot, but we are keeping it simple) that is a writeoff against profit. they now have a naked 0.5 million profit. They then use the oil depletion allowance, by the reduction of their inventory lets call that a quarter mill or so...whatever it is, we could get the details-------- because they have less oil to sell. That is a subsidy.
I buy 3 Xboxes and pay $50 apiece, thats $150 to the capital cost, dont mean shit.
I sell one, and my capital expense is now $100 and I sold it for $100 I have bare naked $50 profit, but where do I write off the $25 depletion allowance, because I have less XBOX reserves? I dont get that subsidy. I am not a multibillion dollar special interest corporation that the nutsuckers are felching.
THAT is why it is a subsidy.


The difference is that you can go out and get more inventory quite easily. Not so much with oil deposits.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 159
RE: Little fact about global warming for you - 8/23/2013 2:02:37 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
quote:


Now, you't purposely being obtuse. The government isn't giving them money. Not taking as much in taxes isn't the same as giving them money.


Tell that to the fellows like me that don't get that sort of freebie, c'mon, make me really feel that shit, bruddah.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 160
Page:   <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Little fact about global warming for you Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.125