Moderator: Community Team
I hope you have rich parents Sultan.SultanOfSurreal wrote:this bill is great news
thanks for the info man
Every time I read about the same thing the numbers seem to increase.Nobunaga wrote:... Yeah, and if memory serves you debunked all 34,000.Neoteny wrote:We've had a discussion on those scientists before.![]()
... Dude, I have climatologists, geologists and physicists saying your theory is a crock.Snorri1234 wrote:Every time I read about the same thing the numbers seem to increase.Nobunaga wrote:... Yeah, and if memory serves you debunked all 34,000.Neoteny wrote:We've had a discussion on those scientists before.![]()
But anyway, let's just take the opinions of structural engineers over that of climate scientists because we fucking love to drive gasguzzling cars.

muy_thaiguy wrote:All I have to say at this point is, "What the f*ck are a lot of people thinking!?"
Let us see here.
1. Raising a massive tax while unemployment is still growing.
2. Across the board taxes, including those that are having enough trouble as it is financially.
3. Our charismatic leader, who was supposed to be for "Change we can believe in" is backing this tax hike, and thus going back on another campaign promise (really, how many more until people that voted for him actually admit he is just another lying politician?)
4.
Nobunaga wrote:... Dude, I have climatologists, geologists and physicists saying your theory is a crock.Snorri1234 wrote:Every time I read about the same thing the numbers seem to increase.Nobunaga wrote:... Yeah, and if memory serves you debunked all 34,000.Neoteny wrote:We've had a discussion on those scientists before.![]()
But anyway, let's just take the opinions of structural engineers over that of climate scientists because we fucking love to drive gasguzzling cars.
... But this is a discussion on the greatest tax hike in US history, and your a damned foreigner, so get out!![]()
...
FYI most bills are passed without being fully read. And if you happened to view any legislation recently, you would know why. Its one reason why congressmen, etc have huge staffs. The junior member are assigned the tasks of actually reading the bills and alerting their bosses if there is anything significant.Nobunaga wrote:... This bill was voted on and passed without being read.
... Lovely.
...
... FYI, nobody read it. What's good for the "stimulus" is good for the carbon tax, I suppose.PLAYER57832 wrote:FYI most bills are passed without being fully read. And if you happened to view any legislation recently, you would know why. Its one reason why congressmen, etc have huge staffs. The junior member are assigned the tasks of actually reading the bills and alerting their bosses if there is anything significant.Nobunaga wrote:... This bill was voted on and passed without being read.
... Lovely.
...
So what? Congress has been doing this for decades.Nobunaga wrote:... This bill was voted on and passed without being read.
... Lovely.
...
So that justifies them to keep doing it when they want to spend record amounts of money and completely change the capitalistic environment of our country?GENERAL STONEHAM wrote:So what? Congress has been doing this for decades.Nobunaga wrote:... This bill was voted on and passed without being read.
... Lovely.
...
Night Strike wrote:So that justifies them to keep doing it when they want to spend record amounts of money and completely change the capitalistic environment of our country?GENERAL STONEHAM wrote:So what? Congress has been doing this for decades.Nobunaga wrote:... This bill was voted on and passed without being read.
... Lovely.
...
Exactly!GENERAL STONEHAM wrote:Night Strike wrote:So that justifies them to keep doing it when they want to spend record amounts of money and completely change the capitalistic environment of our country?GENERAL STONEHAM wrote:So what? Congress has been doing this for decades.Nobunaga wrote:... This bill was voted on and passed without being read.
... Lovely.
...
If the Bush/Cheney and the Republican Congress didn't change the tax code that President Clinton and Congress passed in the 90s. We wouldn't be in the dire situation we are in now.
For 6 full years Bush/Cheney and the Republican controlled Congress decided to cut taxes to the RICH FAT CATS and raise spending to uncontrollable levels! Now we're in a sea of red ink.
Yes Night Strike, less regulations and less red tape that was a favorite slogan by the Republicans threw us in a DEPRESSION. Our Banks, Financial Institutions and Insurance Giants need MORE OVERSIGHT. GREED got us in this mess.
We need National Healthcare too, otherwise only the RICH will afford good healthcare.
Just don't blame uncontrolled spending on Democrats alone, as the Republicans were spending our children and grandchildrens future for Socialist policies of supporting the RICH FAT CATS. You see Night Strike the Republicans have been susidising those poor RICH FAT CATS for years. God forbid, if those poor RICH FAT CATS get yanked off the tits of the U.S. Treasury.
Everyone got a tax cut under Bush, not just the rich. Plus, many small business owners are considered "rich" under the tax codes, so why should they be paying even more in taxes when they're the ones who supply the most jobs in the country?GENERAL STONEHAM wrote:If the Bush/Cheney and the Republican Congress didn't change the tax code that President Clinton and Congress passed in the 90s. We wouldn't be in the dire situation we are in now.
For 6 full years Bush/Cheney and the Republican controlled Congress decided to cut taxes to the RICH FAT CATS and raise spending to uncontrollable levels! Now we're in a sea of red ink.
Yes Night Strike, less regulations and less red tape that was a favorite slogan by the Republicans threw us in a DEPRESSION. Our Banks, Financial Institutions and Insurance Giants need MORE OVERSIGHT. GREED got us in this mess.
We need National Healthcare too, otherwise only the RICH will afford good healthcare.
Just don't blame uncontrolled spending on Democrats alone, as the Republicans were spending our children and grandchildrens future for Socialist policies of supporting the RICH FAT CATS. You see Night Strike the Republicans have been susidising those poor RICH FAT CATS for years. God forbid, if those poor RICH FAT CATS get yanked off the tits of the U.S. Treasury.
Oh puhleeze save me the partisan garbage. The Bush administration did ZERO enforcement on Fannie Mae and other government agencies. Talk is cheap.Night Strike wrote:Everyone got a tax cut under Bush, not just the rich. Plus, many small business owners are considered "rich" under the tax codes, so why should they be paying even more in taxes when they're the ones who supply the most jobs in the country?GENERAL STONEHAM wrote:If the Bush/Cheney and the Republican Congress didn't change the tax code that President Clinton and Congress passed in the 90s. We wouldn't be in the dire situation we are in now.
For 6 full years Bush/Cheney and the Republican controlled Congress decided to cut taxes to the RICH FAT CATS and raise spending to uncontrollable levels! Now we're in a sea of red ink.
Yes Night Strike, less regulations and less red tape that was a favorite slogan by the Republicans threw us in a DEPRESSION. Our Banks, Financial Institutions and Insurance Giants need MORE OVERSIGHT. GREED got us in this mess.
We need National Healthcare too, otherwise only the RICH will afford good healthcare.
Just don't blame uncontrolled spending on Democrats alone, as the Republicans were spending our children and grandchildrens future for Socialist policies of supporting the RICH FAT CATS. You see Night Strike the Republicans have been susidising those poor RICH FAT CATS for years. God forbid, if those poor RICH FAT CATS get yanked off the tits of the U.S. Treasury.
Actually, it was the Bush administration who was pushing for more regulation in regards to Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac, but it was congressional democrats like Bernie Frank who were blocking the efforts and saying there were no problems.

My state "suddenly" decided that wind power would be a good investment. Seems Texas has, too. I don't like any tax increase, but I want to live in a country that has decent roads, schools and parks anyone can visit... etc.jbrettlip wrote:I think that 100% of people here use electricity. And this tax will be absorbed and passed through by every power company in the country. What do you think that the electric company is going to ignore the higher costs of producing energy?
Is Nancy Pelosi going to buy carbon credits for her private jet? Does the Congress still have their own power plant? I bet that becomes exempt from the bill, if they do.
It is exactly what a free market is. If you don't like it, you buy from a different utility. Unfortunately, it's usually not an option because utilities are highly regulated entities, not just from an operations perspective, but from a financial perspective. I would expect (but am admittedly unsure) that the US government could put regulations in place to attempt to force the utilties not to pass through the cost onto the customers. However, I think the point of the bill is to have the tax pass along to the customers. The government wants people to be taxed so they stop using utilities that create "large carbon footprints."PLAYER57832 wrote:My state "suddenly" decided that wind power would be a good investment. Seems Texas has, too. I don't like any tax increase, but I want to live in a country that has decent roads, schools and parks anyone can visit... etc.jbrettlip wrote:I think that 100% of people here use electricity. And this tax will be absorbed and passed through by every power company in the country. What do you think that the electric company is going to ignore the higher costs of producing energy?
Is Nancy Pelosi going to buy carbon credits for her private jet? Does the Congress still have their own power plant? I bet that becomes exempt from the bill, if they do.
Profit is great, but too much of what companies and stockholders have received recently is not true profit, it is shifting costs of their doing business onto the tax payers. That is not what a free market should be.
Free market in utilities never will be a true option, because they depend upon set infrastructure and are not truly portable -- one necessity for real competition.thegreekdog wrote:It is exactly what a free market is. If you don't like it, you buy from a different utility. Unfortunately, it's usually not an option because utilities are highly regulated entities, not just from an operations perspective, but from a financial perspective. I would expect (but am admittedly unsure) that the US government could put regulations in place to attempt to force the utilties not to pass through the cost onto the customers. However, I think the point of the bill is to have the tax pass along to the customers. The government wants people to be taxed so they stop using utilities that create "large carbon footprints."PLAYER57832 wrote:My state "suddenly" decided that wind power would be a good investment. Seems Texas has, too. I don't like any tax increase, but I want to live in a country that has decent roads, schools and parks anyone can visit... etc.jbrettlip wrote:I think that 100% of people here use electricity. And this tax will be absorbed and passed through by every power company in the country. What do you think that the electric company is going to ignore the higher costs of producing energy?
Is Nancy Pelosi going to buy carbon credits for her private jet? Does the Congress still have their own power plant? I bet that becomes exempt from the bill, if they do.
Profit is great, but too much of what companies and stockholders have received recently is not true profit, it is shifting costs of their doing business onto the tax payers. That is not what a free market should be.
Again (ad infinitum), I have no idea where you're getting this from. Large businesses employ many people, they provide goods and services for others to purchase. Are there tax breaks for big companies? It depends. In many cases, tax breaks for big companies involve something that the government truly wants. For example, if a government of a state wants more jobs in a depressed area, they provide tax credits (in Pennsylvania these are called Keystone Opportunity Zones). The give tax credits to companies that create jobs in those depressed areas. I think that's okay, and it creates jobs. The governor of Pennsylvania seems to like it.PLAYER57832 wrote:But again, the real problem is that most large businesses (as opposed to small businesses) have not been truly paying for their costs of doing business. They get tax breaks in the name of "creating jobs", and then the rest of us help subsidize the companies real expenses.
Pennsylvania, America starts here state. When I left PA. they were pretty sure the steel mills were gonna open back up. Of course they had been saying that every night at the bar since 1979. I am curious what you think about PA drilling for oil again?thegreekdog wrote:Again (ad infinitum), I have no idea where you're getting this from. Large businesses employ many people, they provide goods and services for others to purchase. Are there tax breaks for big companies? It depends. In many cases, tax breaks for big companies involve something that the government truly wants. For example, if a government of a state wants more jobs in a depressed area, they provide tax credits (in Pennsylvania these are called Keystone Opportunity Zones). The give tax credits to companies that create jobs in those depressed areas. I think that's okay, and it creates jobs. The governor of Pennsylvania seems to like it.PLAYER57832 wrote:But again, the real problem is that most large businesses (as opposed to small businesses) have not been truly paying for their costs of doing business. They get tax breaks in the name of "creating jobs", and then the rest of us help subsidize the companies real expenses.
I think that a company passing on its expenses to its customers is just something that happens. If you don't want it to happen, don't buy things from that company. Like I said, I don't shop at Walmart (for non-tax reasons).
Then maybe you should shut up and provide proof before raving. At least PLAYER is talking in a civilized manner and not childish "I'm right and your wrong!" Try it sometime maybe someone will take you seriously.GENERAL STONEHAM wrote:Talk is cheap.


Do you mean oil or natural gas?thelastpatriot wrote:Pennsylvania, America starts here state. When I left PA. they were pretty sure the steel mills were gonna open back up. Of course they had been saying that every night at the bar since 1979. I am curious what you think about PA drilling for oil again?thegreekdog wrote:Again (ad infinitum), I have no idea where you're getting this from. Large businesses employ many people, they provide goods and services for others to purchase. Are there tax breaks for big companies? It depends. In many cases, tax breaks for big companies involve something that the government truly wants. For example, if a government of a state wants more jobs in a depressed area, they provide tax credits (in Pennsylvania these are called Keystone Opportunity Zones). The give tax credits to companies that create jobs in those depressed areas. I think that's okay, and it creates jobs. The governor of Pennsylvania seems to like it.PLAYER57832 wrote:But again, the real problem is that most large businesses (as opposed to small businesses) have not been truly paying for their costs of doing business. They get tax breaks in the name of "creating jobs", and then the rest of us help subsidize the companies real expenses.
I think that a company passing on its expenses to its customers is just something that happens. If you don't want it to happen, don't buy things from that company. Like I said, I don't shop at Walmart (for non-tax reasons).
Do you think it's a good idea or bad?