Those are nothing but list of list. You South African dumb ass. What particular tax breaks were used by CP Yo get to the number of tax savings he posted.
No I quoted the pilgrim so my question was to his particular post!
See:
nobody wrote:
billy.pilgrim wrote:ConocoPhillips has made 7 billion in profits through 3 quarters of this year, it is the ninth largest company in the world.
But ConocoPhillips receives on average $600 million in tax breaks ever single year - allowing the oil giant to spend more than $20 million lobbying Congress so far in 2012
talk about a real asshole buying steak with their food stamps
What are these tax breaks? No one ever says what they are.
ya know, in a convoluted sort of way, you are right; no one on faux news has ever said what these loopholes and tax breaks, that allow profitable companies that use the services provided by real taxpayers, are. they just keep filling your empty head with the ridiculous idea that these magnanimous all powerful benevolent dukes and earls and princes and kings of industry must be protected because the, as they have been for thousands of years, are the "job creators".
there is plenty of info that is thoroughly discussed in many other sources - stick with wnd, faux and breibart and you will stay stupid
Trump: “We had the safest border in the history of our country - or at least recorded history. I guess maybe a thousand years ago it was even better.”
nobody wrote:No I quoted the pilgrim so my question was to his particular post!...
Open forum, I gave you the answer. Don't like it? Use PM. There's no reason for billy.pilgrim to do your legwork on something so easily found with a simple search, lazy.
no point in doing leg work for a liar, he'll just re[peat the same bs next time
Trump: “We had the safest border in the history of our country - or at least recorded history. I guess maybe a thousand years ago it was even better.”
Vrede wrote:You're like a broken record. It was one year before the filibuster-proof majority dissipated and not really even then thanks to Byrd's age and Kennedy's illness.the corporations, too, just not as much so as the GOP.
And don't forget it took 8 months after the election to seat the D. Minn. Senater Franken.
and don't forget that many dems vote their conscience and don't vote as a block against all things supported by republicons.
the cons always put party above country
Trump: “We had the safest border in the history of our country - or at least recorded history. I guess maybe a thousand years ago it was even better.”
gongoozler wrote:I still haven't gotten an answer to this:
How does paying less of what you earn equal taking money you didn't make?
what does your idiotic strawman question have to do with this thread
You are equating welfare to tax breaks. How are they the same?
and you are playing with words, rather than discussing the commonly understood definition of corporate welfare
example
a company earns a zillion dollars and owes .3 zillion dollars for all the services of taxpayer funded government it used while making the zillion dollars, resulting in at net .7 zillion in real income
company spends .1 zillion dollars to buy legislation that allow it to receive .3 zillion in tax loopholes and increases their net earnings to .9 zillion dollars
consequence = taxpayers have to pick up the welfare tab for the .3 billion in services used by the company
simple enough for even a nobodygoozer to understand
Trump: “We had the safest border in the history of our country - or at least recorded history. I guess maybe a thousand years ago it was even better.”
gongoozler wrote:I still haven't gotten an answer to this:
How does paying less of what you earn equal taking money you didn't make?
what does your idiotic strawman question have to do with this thread
You are equating welfare to tax breaks. How are they the same?
and you are playing with words, rather than discussing the commonly understood definition of corporate welfare
example
a company earns a zillion dollars and owes .3 zillion dollars for all the services of taxpayer funded government it used while making the zillion dollars, resulting in at net .7 zillion in real income
company spends .1 zillion dollars to buy legislation that allow it to receive .3 zillion in tax loopholes and increases their net earnings to .9 zillion dollars
consequence = taxpayers have to pick up the welfare tab for the .3 billion in services used by the company
simple enough for even a nobodygoozer to understand
Do you ever pay more in taxes than you owe? Would you expect anyone else to?
goozer, please explain how the consequences of allowing huge money to buy law and regulation that serves to allow them to skip out on paying for the services they use can possibly be beneficial
that is what this thread is about, not your thick head or your strawman bs
Trump: “We had the safest border in the history of our country - or at least recorded history. I guess maybe a thousand years ago it was even better.”
Vrede wrote:..."those who take advantage of these loop holes" created them...
Not all. I had the best little accountant in the world. He knew every loop hole there ever was.
The class of people that can afford accountants and the classes above them created the loopholes.
You are delusional and your Jealousy of anyone with more then you is showing again. Maybe a few less packs of cigarettes and a few less drinks and you could afford and accountant too.
Was I supposed to say no I want to pay more so some slacker on a street corner begging for guvmit handouts can get free stuff while I worked 70 hrs. per week while gambling with my own money. NOT!
You're like a broken record. The corporate welfare and cheating that we are discussing far outpaces the true slackers that make up a small portion of Mitten's "47%" parasites like Big FUBAR Reality.
Cheating is cheating, the end. Or are you suggesting that it's Ok for those who don't have accountants to cheat?[/color]
Then, there's that $140K per kid "free stuff" education "handout" that you got. If you couldn't or wouldn't pay your own way you should have kept your pants zipped.
This is old and a dumb analogy but since you brought it up I have paid much more in taxes then my kids ever got in education. And the last I heard even here in NC it only cost about $6500.00 per yr. to educate a kid, you do the math.
I've asked you this many many times and you and your liberal friends never answer. How much more in taxes have you paid then you were supposed to? Does Hypocrite come to mind.
nobody wrote:No I quoted the pilgrim so my question was to his particular post!...
Open forum, I gave you the answer. Don't like it? Use PM. There's no reason for billy.pilgrim to do your legwork on something so easily found with a simple search, lazy.
I cannot read his mind. There are normal business expenses and there are tax credits for political agenda and there are subsidies that may not be right. It is his job to explain his post.
nobody wrote:No I quoted the pilgrim so my question was to his particular post!...
Open forum, I gave you the answer. Don't like it? Use PM. There's no reason for billy.pilgrim to do your legwork on something so easily found with a simple search, lazy.
I cannot read his mind. There are normal business expenses and there are tax credits for political agenda and there are subsidies that may not be right. It is his job to explain his post.
My mind is tax credit normal agenda and political subsidies all up in there to make the blind hear it good and see it better. And that's no shit.
ya know, in a convoluted sort of way, you are right; no one on faux news has ever said what these loopholes and tax breaks, that allow profitable companies that use the services provided by real taxpayers, are. they just keep filling your empty head with the ridiculous idea that these magnanimous all powerful benevolent dukes and earls and princes and kings of industry must be protected because the, as they have been for thousands of years, are the "job creators".
there is plenty of info that is thoroughly discussed in many other sources - stick with wnd, faux and breibart and you will stay stupid
What are the top five tax breaks, expressed in dollar amounts, that CP used to get their $600 million. That should be easy for you if you know what you are talking about.
I think it is the responsibility to make his own substantiation to back up his post. It is the challenger's job to refute those facts. Just who is being lazy when the South African Stinger expects others to do both?
ya know, in a convoluted sort of way, you are right; no one on faux news has ever said what these loopholes and tax breaks, that allow profitable companies that use the services provided by real taxpayers, are. they just keep filling your empty head with the ridiculous idea that these magnanimous all powerful benevolent dukes and earls and princes and kings of industry must be protected because the, as they have been for thousands of years, are the "job creators".
there is plenty of info that is thoroughly discussed in many other sources - stick with wnd, faux and breibart and you will stay stupid
What are the top five tax breaks, expressed in dollar amounts, that CP used to get their $600 million. That should be easy for you if you know what you are talking about.
I think it is the responsibility to make his own substantiation to back up his post. It is the challenger's job to refute those facts. Just who is being lazy when the South African Stinger expects others to do both?
backing up facts for someone interested in a discussion is different than backing up facts for someone who refuses to acknowledge common knowledge and common sense. tag, you're it, now continue with you bs
Trump: “We had the safest border in the history of our country - or at least recorded history. I guess maybe a thousand years ago it was even better.”
ya know, in a convoluted sort of way, you are right; no one on faux news has ever said what these loopholes and tax breaks, that allow profitable companies that use the services provided by real taxpayers, are. they just keep filling your empty head with the ridiculous idea that these magnanimous all powerful benevolent dukes and earls and princes and kings of industry must be protected because the, as they have been for thousands of years, are the "job creators".
there is plenty of info that is thoroughly discussed in many other sources - stick with wnd, faux and breibart and you will stay stupid
What are the top five tax breaks, expressed in dollar amounts, that CP used to get their $600 million. That should be easy for you if you know what you are talking about.
I think it is the responsibility to make his own substantiation to back up his post. It is the challenger's job to refute those facts. Just who is being lazy when the South African Stinger expects others to do both?
backing up facts for someone interested in a discussion is different than backing up facts for someone who refuses to acknowledge common knowledge and common sense. tag, you're it, now continue with you bs
In other words you expect people to read your mind then to prove a negative.
nobody wrote:In other words you expect people to read your mind then to prove a negative.
There is no proving a negative for you to do.
$600M in CP tax breaks, with supporting links, is a positive assertion. Logic much?
Prove it wrong, lazy.
i have looked there is nothing I could find on my search or your links that tell me what tax breaks cp used to get $600 million. There are a lot of links that say what the pilgrim said.
I can not prove the negative of the statement but there is no evidence that the statement is true.
Vrede wrote:For one thing, it's a competitive advantage given to oil companies that other energy sources don't enjoy.
My take:
Take away all the energy tax breaks.
Take away the HUGE direct subsidies given to fossil fuels and nukes.
Tax and/or regulate fossil fuels and nukes so they are not enjoying HUGE indirect subsidies - pollution, flattened Appalachians, loss of watersheds, wars, water grabs, support for dictators, trade imbalance, liability limits, etc.
Then, with a level playing field, I'm confident green energy will do just fine.
Vrede wrote:Now you're just being a troll. How we end up with the loopholes has been discussed at length and you're pretending it hasn't been.
An advantage offered to a sector of the economy is based on decisions made above and beyond the corporation itself. That's not the same as taking money you didn't earn.
Would you take away government loans to green energy companies like Solyndra, et al?
