Is this Drudge Retort now?

headkicker_girl wrote:

Is this Drudge Retort now?

'Tis the season.  You can't avoid it anywhere.

George Orr wrote:

headkicker_girl wrote:

Is this Drudge Retort now?

'Tis the season.  You can't avoid it anywhere.

Heck, poly-tit-shams will say anything to get elected.  I think I remember W campaigning on SMALLER government and MORE personal freedoms...pfft.

headkicker_girl wrote:

phreddy wrote:

headkicker_girl wrote:

Is this Drudge Retort now?

I was thinking this news was more in the vein of Cruel.com.

It still doesn't trump going to war under false pretenses, "mission accomplished," or "we'll be welcomed as liberators."

I'll agree with Headkicker's notion that George W. Bush (and Republicans in general) are fucktards, but I also agree with Phreddy's original post.....  Why the hell are trying to redistribute the wealth away from companies who generate high paying jobs and give it to a bunch of worthless, toothless Walmart shoppers who are too fucking stupid to hold down a job?  I have zero pity for poor people in the United States, if you can't make it here you're a fucking retard.  Perhaps I've got a negative image of the Democrats because where I'm from the only Democrats are Native Americans.  They make up over ten percent of the population here, but I can't remember the last time I saw one of them with a job.  They don't even have jobs on the Indian Reservations either, the only people I see employed on the reservations are scared white people.  It's all about getting a free handout then bitching and whining about how you're being held down and being treated unfairly.  Rather than helping themselves and society in general they sit around fucking and squirting out baby after baby after baby.  I guess they have to reproduce so much because they murder each other off at almost the same rate.  It's worthless examples of humans like this that represent Obama's constituency and it makes me fucking sick that people who do nothing but pull society down are allowed to vote.

Last edited by Dirckman (2008-06-09 20:38:19)

Thanks for that ad hominen against me there Dmt, at a quick glance I see my rant rife with at least four fallacies, however this board is not about accuracy or empiricism, but rather about throwing out random uneducated opinion....

phreddy wrote:

What about the windfall profits the government is making on gasoline, huh, what about that?  The oil companies make 4% profit on a gallon, whereas government taxes are over 15%.  The government's revenues from gasoline sales have risen to criminal levels and government does nothing to earn the money.  Gawd help us if this guy gets the presidency.

The federal gas tax is 18.4 cents per gallon.



Edit:  In case you hadn't noticed, that also means that the federal government gets nothing out of rising gas prices.

Auto-edited on 2020-08-02 to update URLs

Last edited by tojo2000 (2008-06-09 21:20:29)

I didn't give the Native Americans enough credit in my original post though, they are the largest factor in the housing market around here.  When one family of Native Americans moves into a White Neighborhood, twenty families of white people move out into a new neighborhood.

Dirckman wrote:

Thanks for that ad hominen against me there Dmt, at a quick glance I see my rant rife with at least four fallacies, however this board is not about accuracy or empiricism, but rather about throwing out random uneducated opinion....

Admit it, it was the sex comment.  You don't have to get all defensive about your lack of experience, 'kay?

headkicker_girl wrote:

I lived in the Twin Cities for 5 years.  It never amazed me how many people thought they "knew" Chicago from hearing about it, or from a two day visit.  They would say things like, "why would you want to move back to Chicago?  It's so big and crowded and full of crime, and everyone is so rude."  Then when I'd challege them one it, they'd just get defensive.  I found the people there to be passive agressive and judgmental, but my opinion is based on the experience of living in the culture...not random conversations with a few people while passing through.

I'd never claim to know the culture of any other city without living there.

Thank You.  Dirck is sweet, but slow on the uptake..  I have lived in the hinterlands, and thanks, but the idiocy level is beyond me. 

If a city doesn't at least have a liberal arts University, then count me out.  I have lived in most major US cities, and and several in Europe.  I am always amazed by what passes for knowledge in all the rural regions of the US.

Not to say I haven't met ignorance in Europeans, but you have to be at the end of all things to meet what passes for country in the US.  I will say that there are good, and sweet people out there.  Somewhere, I am sure....

Chill Pill.

When you wake up, you'll think differently.  Sleep well my Prince.

Yeah, I was twisting his wick.  I have lived in the country, (actually very remote places) and yes, it was pleasant, quiet, etc. yada yada. 

I like the coast towns.  Out the door, and stare at eternity.

I was going to raise my son in the country, but with the poisoned atmosphere of partisanship and stupidity about what is good for families drove us back to the city.  He is off to college this fall, and did well I think with the choice.  His horizons are pretty damn wide, and he doesn't have to run away from the small town to do what he wants.

Cities can be pretty intimate, especially if you have a good neighborhood.

Taint wrote:

Ahh, be nice to Dirck. I've always prided myself on my ability to live comfortably in cities and in rural areas. I've easily spent half my life living in large cities (New York, Montreal, San Francisco, and - if you care to think of it as a large city - Anchorage), as well as small towns (in Vermont, Ontario, Alaska, California, and Arkansas).

There's always been something I enjoyed about each place I lived: in the small towns, I enjoyed the intimacy and the quiet. I liked living on open land and far away from others. In the large cities, I love the variety and the diversity and - conversely - the throngs of people.

Of course, the great relief in all the above situations is knowing that I'll never be far from the high class standards of High Street.

Ahem.

Thank you for the support Taint.....  I do understand what Dmtdust was talking about when he said "I have lived in the hinterlands, and thanks, but the idiocy level is beyond me.".  You get around many of these rural areas and suddenly you find yourself surrounded by a population of people who don't believe in evolution, but are willing to give full credit to chiropractors, homeopathy and creation "science".  I blame ninety nine percent of this ignorance on the church because it's such a major road block in allowing these people to think critically about the world around them.  I guess I'm on this rant because I'm tired of hearing the pretentious city dwellers ramble on about how things are so desolate and forlorn for me and how my life experience is totally lacking merit or understanding.  I deal with people like this every day of the week at work and it really does get old fast.  I guess what I'm trying to say is that I actually have a lot of fun living where I do.  In the last two weeks I've gone bicycling in the mountains, dug up some of a Triceratops I found last fall, and took a 130 mph roadtrip out across the prairie.  This weekend I'm playing cowboy and chasing cows around with a four wheeler.  I used to take these people seriously and was embarrassed about where I lived, but I'm not anymore, I rack it all up to them being naive about how people live where I do.

What about the windfall profits the government is making on gasoline, huh, what about that?  The oil companies make 4% profit on a gallon, whereas government taxes are over 15%.  The government's revenues from gasoline sales have risen to criminal levels and government does nothing to earn the money.  Gawd help us if this guy gets the presidency.

Phred - You don't know what the hell you are talking about.  Gas taxes have fallen precipitously when measured as a percentage of the price paid at the pump.  It is assessed as a per gallon charge at a fixed amount, not as a percentage of the price per gallon.  The taxes collected are actually dedicated to transportation costs, principally road construction and repair.  Without it, the roads would be in even worse shape than they are.  As a result, for the first time in history, the highway trust fund will fall into the red within about 12 months.  So, Phred, why not actually know something before you comment on the subject?

I have no position on windfall profits taxes.  On the other hand, I do believe that we need a completely different approach to energy policy.  Perhaps the best idea I have read about would be to establish, on a federal level, a floor price per gallon of fuel, say $4 or $5 per gallon.  If the market price drops below the floor level, the price at the pump would stay at the floor, with the excess taken as federal revenue.  Most who back this strategy favor then rebating the entire amount recovered in the form of reduced parroll taxes (Social Security and Medicare), but I think this is a secondary, if important, issue.  The floor price would provide very strong incentives for conservation and for alternative energy development, in the face of the double whammy of (a) rapidly escalating demand resulting largely from economic growth in China, India, Southeast Asia and Latin America), and (b) the fact that petroleum is a finite and dwindling natural resource.  Leaving it to market forces is to assume there is no such thing as meaningful public policy, and I think an exercise in blind faith.

Exxon-Mobil

Operating Margin:  16.02%
EBITDA:  $66906mm
Dividend growth:  9.06%
EPS (trailing) $7.69

Source: Bloomberg as of 10 June 2008


That is not what we'd call sucking wind, and I don't see anything to indicate there is any validity to the 4% per gallon number.

________

I tend to think this is a politically motivated last gasp attempt to open up the Alaska reserves

Last edited by Emmeran (2008-06-10 08:54:12)

Dirckman wrote:

Taint wrote:

Ahh, be nice to Dirck. I've always prided myself on my ability to live comfortably in cities and in rural areas. I've easily spent half my life living in large cities (New York, Montreal, San Francisco, and - if you care to think of it as a large city - Anchorage), as well as small towns (in Vermont, Ontario, Alaska, California, and Arkansas).

There's always been something I enjoyed about each place I lived: in the small towns, I enjoyed the intimacy and the quiet. I liked living on open land and far away from others. In the large cities, I love the variety and the diversity and - conversely - the throngs of people.

Of course, the great relief in all the above situations is knowing that I'll never be far from the high class standards of High Street.

Ahem.

Thank you for the support Taint.....  I do understand what Dmtdust was talking about when he said "I have lived in the hinterlands, and thanks, but the idiocy level is beyond me.".  You get around many of these rural areas and suddenly you find yourself surrounded by a population of people who don't believe in evolution, but are willing to give full credit to chiropractors, homeopathy and creation "science".  I blame ninety nine percent of this ignorance on the church because it's such a major road block in allowing these people to think critically about the world around them.  I guess I'm on this rant because I'm tired of hearing the pretentious city dwellers ramble on about how things are so desolate and forlorn for me and how my life experience is totally lacking merit or understanding.  I deal with people like this every day of the week at work and it really does get old fast.  I guess what I'm trying to say is that I actually have a lot of fun living where I do.  In the last two weeks I've gone bicycling in the mountains, dug up some of a Triceratops I found last fall, and took a 130 mph roadtrip out across the prairie.  This weekend I'm playing cowboy and chasing cows around with a four wheeler.  I used to take these people seriously and was embarrassed about where I lived, but I'm not anymore, I rack it all up to them being naive about how people live where I do.

I can find nothing here to twist your wick about.  Wish I could join ya chasing the cattle around, sounds like fun.

phreddy wrote:

Dirckman,
Thanks for a rational view of our country's slide into Socialism.  Sorry I dropped this little bomb and then had to leave.  It appears I left you swinging in the wind by yourself.  A few notes:
1.  Dusty accuses you and I of living in a vacuum.  Few places on earth are more insulated from reality than the part of the Peoples Republic of Oregon where he lives.

Funny, the taxes from my area of The Peoples Republic Of Oregon supports the other 4/5ths of the state that is loathe to tax itself, fund its schools properly, and thinks that we are in a vacuum.  The dullards in the hinterlands reap all the benefits from my labours, and yet I can be okay with that. 

There kids get a better education because we actually give a shit about others, whereas your whole being is focused on what handouts the gov't will give you, and how you'll reap the benefits of not contributing.  typical Phwedd, it always gets back to the essentials, doesn't it?

phreddy wrote:

3.  Time after time history shows us that reducing taxes on the people who create wealth in this country results in more taxes to the U.S. Treasury.  The only reason Obama and other Socialists keep beating the bullshit drum about rich riding on the backs of the poor is to create class envy and therefore support for their regimes.

Which history is that?  The history where we had to start selling 30 year bonds again after Bush lowered the max income tax for the wealthy?  (aka -Cap Gains)

Let me clue you into something I've learned here in the "High Net Worth Investor" part of the world - Cap Gains is the Primary source of income for the individuals in question.

So let me break it down for you:  Bill Gates pays a max of 15% on his income, I pay a max of 35%.  This tax break also includes Carried Interest which is the primary source of income for Hedge Fund managers.

This isn't about socialism, it's about fair and equal taxation and a balanced budget.

Emmeran wrote:

Exxon-Mobil

Operating Margin:  16.02%
EBITDA:  $66906mm
Dividend growth:  9.06%
EPS (trailing) $7.69

Source: Bloomberg as of 10 June 2008


That is not what we'd call sucking wind, and I don't see anything to indicate there is any validity to the 4% per gallon number.

________

I tend to think this is a politically motivated last gasp attempt to open up the Alaska reserves

They sure are trying to step up those efforts. Unfortunately the opening of Alaskan, Florida or CA coastal reserves would have little to no impact on the price as they are but a drop in the bucket of our need and imports. The oil companies just want to make $130 dollar a barrel profit on easily extractible oil that costs just a few dollars a barrel to develop and extract just like the Saudis. Due to the nature of the global marketplace for oil opening those relatively small reserves won't result in cheaper prices at the pumps.  And the Oil companies won't be passing any of that profit on to the consumers or the US People who actually own that oil.

You have a valid point about the sepculative nature of the market. But the market will factor in that the opening up the Alaskan reserve, which will take most of a deacde or more  to develop to full pumping capacity, it will just not meet our need or reduce our imports more than a few percent. There just is not enough oil there to make an impact. As such this will not have enough effect to but significant downward pressure on the prices.

But if we did make long term investments in realigning our energy infrastructure to wean us off oil we could see future futures markets in oil not ruled by the current forces that have created this speculative bubble.

In the short term it is too bad the oil companies did not invest in bringing the output of the already developed, and much larger than the Alaskan reserves in question, oil sand fields in Canada to the US. Now that this costly to produce oil is more economicaly feasable to make a profit on with the rising worldwide costs per barrel.

That task was left to the Chinese who partnered with Canada to build the  cross mountain pipelines, the extraction facilities and a new deep water BC port at Bela Coola for shipments to China. Too bad some oil company didn't run that slurry pipeline along the front range south towards the border. But C'est_la_vie thats oil slurry under the bridge at this point.

Last edited by Johnny_Rotten (2008-06-10 13:55:45)

phreddy wrote:

2.  Tojo says "The federal gas tax is 18.4 cents per gallon."  Well, Tojo notice I did not restrict my remarks to the federal government.  In California the gas tax exceeds 15% and I'll bet it's near that much in your state too.

Oh, I'm sorry, for a second here I thought we were talking about Obama for some strange reason.

phreddy wrote:

2.  Tojo says "The federal gas tax is 18.4 cents per gallon."  Well, Tojo notice I did not restrict my remarks to the federal government.  In California the gas tax exceeds 15% and I'll bet it's near that much in your state too.

You are confusing state sales taxes ( a percentage) with excise taxes and use fees (fixed). Actually as the price has gone up we pay a less and less a total percentage in taxes per gallon. The CA excise taxes and use fees are I believe, $0.18 /g. which has been the same since 1994. Less then most other states and much less then the highest in Wisconnson at $0.281/g.

CA state and local counties just have higher sales taxes, but that is the same on all goods.

Last edited by Johnny_Rotten (2008-06-10 14:29:52)

All right, who are the "cybernauts" here already on the payroll?
Barack Obama sets up internet 'war room' to fight slurs.

factcheck.org wrote:

Federal taxes are a flat 18.4 cents per gallon of regular gasoline, no matter the price at the pump. State taxes range anywhere from 7.5 cents to 34 cents per gallon, according to the Federal Highway Administration. And on top of that, the oil industry points to additional taxes and fees, such as sales taxes and inspection and environmental fees, that drive up the state-local fees to as much as 45.5 cents per gallon (in California).

And even these figures don’t account for income taxes that the companies pay on their profits. Those taxes would drive the tax total higher yet, but we know of no authoritative source that has attempted to break down how much income tax should be allocated to each gallon of gasoline