cawacko
Well-known member
technically you are correct but speaking generally if windfall taxes causes gas prices to rise, which it will, then the little guy is paying more. These tax breaks which may or may not come probably wouldn't cover it.
Barrack Jimma Carter Obama
- Thread starter Topspin
- Start date
technically you are correct but speaking generally if windfall taxes causes gas prices to rise, which it will, then the little guy is paying more. These tax breaks which may or may not come probably wouldn't cover it.
To be fair, credit cards aren't necessities whereas gas and petroleum products are (except to Onceler).
Having said that, not only are politicians not doing anything about the credit card company ridiculous interest rates, they passed that awful Bankruptcy Bill a little while back that was basically the industry wish list.
Last edited:
Your stupidity is epic. YES, energy is very strategic to the country; that is what I have said about a half dozen times on this thread. Which is WHY it should not be left entirely to the free market and a group of lobbyists with nearly bottomless pockets to decide, and why gouging needs to be monitored and punished.
I'm amazed, tops; for all of your 'did you ever take a business class'/GED BS, you are truly clueless on this topic.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
What a load of crap. What exactly does the windfall tax do to benefit the consumer? Taking more money from the consumer and then telling them they are better off because you used the money to build a road is not going to ease the pressure they are feeling.
Your last comment is telling.... wealth redistribution.... typical bullshit from the left. Another government program to make the poor reliant upon big brother.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Credit cards are not necessities, but the items people are using them for are. People using their cards to make mortgage/rent payments or to pay utilities or buy gas etc.... then they get reamed.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
The only way they could cover the additional cost is to turn around and give it ALL right back to the consumer. Which is funny considering they could save all the bullshit by simply not creating the windfall tax.
But Dung pointed to the mantra.... wealth redistribution. It is indeed another way the government can attempt to do this.
The gas tax is regressive. This would make it a bit more progressive. It's got nothing to do with making the poor reliant on big brother, rather it has to do with ensuring that taxes impact consumers equally rather than hitting the poor the hardest.
evince
Truthmatters
Solar is on the cusp of becoming cost effective for home owners.
Wind is not far behind. The more of the sector these ideas can fill the closer we will be to ending the grasp of big oil has on the throats of our economy.
When their competitors are stronger they will be more willing to negociations about price gougeing.
cawacko
Well-known member
Who are oil companies going to negotiate with about price gouging?
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
I do agree that the gas tax is regressive in that the poor pay a larger portion of their income towards gas and are thus more effected by the higher prices. But this windfall tax does not change that. The net to the consumer is at BEST neutral. Unless of course, they do as you suggest and simply give the revenue from the tax to the low income. Which is a really convoluted way to go about helping the poor.
You want progressive, fair and an immediate aid to the poor/low income?
Let’s begin with our tax code. It should be simple enough that the average person can understand it. It should not be filled with thousands of loopholes and deductions. Let us push for the flat tax with a standard deduction and nothing more.
Start with a standard deduction of $30k (adjusted for inflation annually) for each adult and then tax every dollar over that $30k at 20%. This is simple, easy to understand, fair and progressive. It protects the low-income individuals and couples from paying federal income taxes. It provides the middle-income families a lower effective tax rate than the wealthy. This plan would encompass ALL income, including earned income, capital gains and dividend income.
A person making $30k pays an effective rate of 0%.
A person making $50k pays an effective rate of 8%.
A person making $100k pays an effective rate of 14%.
A person making $200k pays en effective rate of 17%.
A person making $1mm pays an effective rate of 19.4%
Everyone has the same deduction and takes it. Which causes the effective tax rate to increase the more you make.
To reduce the national debt I would propose we add an additional temporary bracket to the flat tax. Every dollar over $1 million (again adjusted for inflation annually) would be taxed at 30% rather than 20%. The additional 10% would be mandated to pay down the debt.
evince
Truthmatters
http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/03/news/economy/energy_manipulation_hearing/index.htm
Solution: Close the Enron loophole
Some suggested closing the "Enron loophole" as a possible solution to the speculation problem. The loophole, which was codified in the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000, allows oil futures to be traded electronically in unregulated markets outside of the jurisdiction of the Commodities Futures Trading Commission.
"Americans may be surprised to learn that the oil futures markets were substantially deregulated by the CFTC staff decisions that were made behind closed doors," said Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash. "Now this London and Dubai loophole is keeping important U.S. energy trading in the dark and without proper light ... it can give manipulators free rein in energy markets."
As part of the recently-passed Farm Bill, Congress attempted to close that loophole, but Greenburger said language did not go far enough. He said the Farm Bill placed the burden on the public to prove a trade needs regulation rather than placing the onus on the trader to prove it does not need regulation. Greenburger said Congress should return the language of the original bill "this afternoon," saying that overnight it would bring the price of crude oil by 25%.
Greenburger also suggested that Congress impose increased margins for oil traders and regulate hedge fund owners' public speculation on oil prices.
"I find it highly ironic that when you control the price of oil, you can speculate it will go up to $150," he said.
Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley hedge funds own large amounts of oil futures, and have both recently said the price oil could go up to $150 or even $200 this year.
CFTC investigation
Last Thursday, the CFTC announced it had launched a wide-ranging probe into oil price manipulation six months ago, saying it would gather more information about the effect investors are having on the market.
The commission's public acknowledgment of a normally secret probe has sparked talk that it has evidence oil companies are withholding oil from the market in an attempt to manipulate prices.
Regarding speculators, CFTC has previously said that it had not found any evidence that traders were artificially inflating prices.
On the day the CFTC announced its investigation, crude oil futures dropped $4.41 - the third-biggest one-day slide since 1991 - and prices have hovered around that $127-a-barrel level since.
But some lawmakers were critical of CFTC's investigation.
"If we want our exchanges to be world leaders, they need to have transparency, and speed and integrity," said Sen. John Sununu, R-N.H.
Cantwell said the CFTC investigation will not go far enough and doesn't have any enforcement mechanism. As a result, she called it a "ruse to deflect criticisms" and an "abdication of oversight responsibility."
"It is clear to me that the CFTC is not doing everything that it can to protect consumers from oil price manipulation," said Cantwell. "CFTC's response is a toothless tiger."
Solution: Close the Enron loophole
Some suggested closing the "Enron loophole" as a possible solution to the speculation problem. The loophole, which was codified in the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000, allows oil futures to be traded electronically in unregulated markets outside of the jurisdiction of the Commodities Futures Trading Commission.
"Americans may be surprised to learn that the oil futures markets were substantially deregulated by the CFTC staff decisions that were made behind closed doors," said Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash. "Now this London and Dubai loophole is keeping important U.S. energy trading in the dark and without proper light ... it can give manipulators free rein in energy markets."
As part of the recently-passed Farm Bill, Congress attempted to close that loophole, but Greenburger said language did not go far enough. He said the Farm Bill placed the burden on the public to prove a trade needs regulation rather than placing the onus on the trader to prove it does not need regulation. Greenburger said Congress should return the language of the original bill "this afternoon," saying that overnight it would bring the price of crude oil by 25%.
Greenburger also suggested that Congress impose increased margins for oil traders and regulate hedge fund owners' public speculation on oil prices.
"I find it highly ironic that when you control the price of oil, you can speculate it will go up to $150," he said.
Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley hedge funds own large amounts of oil futures, and have both recently said the price oil could go up to $150 or even $200 this year.
CFTC investigation
Last Thursday, the CFTC announced it had launched a wide-ranging probe into oil price manipulation six months ago, saying it would gather more information about the effect investors are having on the market.
The commission's public acknowledgment of a normally secret probe has sparked talk that it has evidence oil companies are withholding oil from the market in an attempt to manipulate prices.
Regarding speculators, CFTC has previously said that it had not found any evidence that traders were artificially inflating prices.
On the day the CFTC announced its investigation, crude oil futures dropped $4.41 - the third-biggest one-day slide since 1991 - and prices have hovered around that $127-a-barrel level since.
But some lawmakers were critical of CFTC's investigation.
"If we want our exchanges to be world leaders, they need to have transparency, and speed and integrity," said Sen. John Sununu, R-N.H.
Cantwell said the CFTC investigation will not go far enough and doesn't have any enforcement mechanism. As a result, she called it a "ruse to deflect criticisms" and an "abdication of oversight responsibility."
"It is clear to me that the CFTC is not doing everything that it can to protect consumers from oil price manipulation," said Cantwell. "CFTC's response is a toothless tiger."
Last edited:
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
The breakeven timeframe for residential is still 15 years. For commercial properties it is one year. Again, I agree we need to continue to expand the alt energy areas.
Again, when their profit margins are lower than many industries it is hard to say they are gouging anyone. The reason the dollar figures are so high is because worldwide DEMAND is at record highs and will continue to increase. When demand increases faster than supply... prices escalate.
You want to bring oil prices down while alt energy is being built up.... drill the estimated 120 billion barrels of oil that are currently untapped in the US. More supply coming on line means lower prices.
Annie
Not So Junior Member
Where, I mean in writing? I just checked his website under issues, no mention of tax plan.
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/
Other than this 'generalized statement':
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
So why even involve the oil companies? You are not affecting their bottom line. This is just a smoke screen being tossed up because "everyone hates oil companies".
evince
Truthmatters
SOLAR IS ABOUT TO BREAK THROUGH TO A COUPLE OF YEARS RECOOP.
keep up with the news fella.
1) Because doing it this way is "revenue neutral."
2) Because doing it this way doesn't involve coming out and saying, "I am going to tax the rich to give the poor relief on their gas bills" even though that is in effect what it does.
3) Because everyone hates the oil companies.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Desh, I was just at a solar cell developer less than two weeks ago... no data on anything to suggest residential could get to two years was available at that time. If you have news to the contrary, post it. Unless the government increases residential tax rebates for solar installation, the breakeven point remains at 15 years.
Again, if you have data that shows otherwise, I would be very interested in reading it.