Re: Breaking down the numbers Wait a friggin' minute. "Those bastards" have posted unprecedented profits in recent years, $46 Billion in 2007. So tell me why they deserve over a Billion dollars in tax credits on top of all that? Republicans are against welfare for the needy but greedily encourage corporate welfare.
didnt you see the interview with oreilly? http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,419703,00.html "O'REILLY: Listen, if you raise the cap gains tax, that's going to inhibit investment. I won't buy as many stocks. And many, many, more people won't, OK, that's… OBAMA: If we went up… O'REILLY: It's going to come back to bite you, senator. OBAMA: If we went up to a prohibitive rate, you're right. But look… O'REILLY: Thirty percent on — that's Vegas, man. I'm not going with those odds. Fifteen I'll pay. Not 30. OBAMA: I didn't do to — I didn't say we would go to that. O'REILLY: You said between 25 and 28. OBAMA: No, what we said is let's say we go up to 20. I've talked to… O'REILLY: Twenty is OK, not 25. OBAMA: Well, you and I agree. O'REILLY: All right."
Re: Breaking down the numbers Those bastards are already paying 42% of net income in income taxes. How much more should they be expected to pay?
Sounds like there business is doing well. I assume you ride a bike to work instead of supporting such an evil company. I just think we shouldn't target oil companies to exclude them from tax breaks or give them extra taxes because they are making so much money. We are an oil hungry nation and if they gouge us, we'll come up with other alternatives. If we don't, that's our problem. Do we not still have some of the cheapest gasoline amongst oil importing countries in the world? There it is, he says "let's say we go up to 20" as in a hypothectical and then it never gets discussed. The point is, he has been vague as to where he's going and if you take that and think it's 20, you're kidding yourself. It might be, but we certainly don't know.
Re: Breaking down the numbers are they paying 42% or are they paying 42% minus subsidies/tax credits?
its in writing on his website, too. but youre right, you never know. but you never know about mccain too---especially with all his flip-flopping to get elected. what are you going to do? not listen to him and think taxes will be higher just because he's liberal or because youre anti-abortion?
I assume you said "youre (sic) anti-abortion" not as a reflection on my personal views because I have not expressed them in this or any other forum. Secondly, the point I'm making is that Bill O'Reilly is a high pressure interviewer and can get people to appear to say things. If I once heard a speech/debate/interview where Obama had said this without O'Reilly trying to put words in his mouth, i may believe it. By the way, I also don't believe mccain on his tax position as he has flip flopped in the past year on whether or not he supports the Bush tax cuts. As far as I'm concerned, we're playing roulette on tax policy with whoever gets elected.
After reading Obama's website, it's good to see that he has committed to a 20% cap. Like I said, this is a departure from his initial comments and, to me, can't be totally trusted just like McCain's policy can't be totally trusted. But it is promising step. I think if you get to 25 or above, you're in dangerous territory.
Re: Breaking down the numbers Exxon paid a little over 30 billion on a little over 70 billion in net income which is about 42%. To answer your question yes that is the percentage they paid after all credits, subsidies, and deductions. What I would really like to see is how much they pay in payroll taxes, but I have not found a detailed schedule on the web.
correct. more of a collective "you" to bring up the determinant of people's political leanings. heck, im anti-choice.
