Bill to Cut Oil Companies' Subsidies Filibustered

Originally posted by FMF
You seemed to suggest that they made a loss.

In the second quarter of 2010, BP made a loss of $17 billion.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
In the second quarter of 2010, BP made a loss of $17 billion.

Ah thanks. That's what I was asking about. How did it do for the whole year?

Originally posted by wittywonka
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/may/17/republicans-block-oil-tax-break-repeal/

I don't think for a minute that ending said tax breaks will make gasoline any cheaper (not that increased offshore drilling will any time soon, either), but I still think it's ridiculous that in a time of record profits for oil companies, coinciding with a time of r ...[text shortened]... els compelled to fund these tax breaks. Heaven forbid Congress should appear "un-American."

I'm not sure I believe what I'm about to say, but I think I agree with ya.

The heads of oil companies defended the tax breaks at a Senate hearing last week saying they just wanted the same tax advantages enjoyed by other industries. Last quarter these oil giants made $36 billion, so is $2 billion too much to ask for?

Sure, it will "hurt" these industries to varying degrees and may cost jobs etc, but I think its time for America to begin paying for the nanny state government they have elected over the years. Now pucker up and lets give them a good french kiss.

As for the likes of Harry Ried who said that the US needs to cut government spending and the place to start is with these subsidies I say, "Where were ya before the 2010 elections? Also, why not continue with other corporations?

Make no mistake, this is just more drama to appease those on the left. The Dems were in full control of government and had ample oppurtunity to take care of this. However, because they too are in the pockets of corporate America, they have no real desire in stopping these tax breaks, rather, its just smoke and mirrors. It is akin to the GOP making waves about nickles and dimes in cutting spending. Its just drama to gain support from various groups whom they have no interest in representing.

As for the defense of the oil companies provided for themselves, they do have a point. Why single them out? Why is the federal government continuing to give subsidies to corporate America in general?

Of course, we all know the answer. If the subisdies/tax breaks stop so does much of the election money these leaches need to run their venemous campaigns.

According to this propaganda from the American Petroleum Institute, the oil industry is generating about $100 million per day to the US govt. If we're going to stop "subsidizing" this activity, can we please also stop subsidizing ethanol, solar, wind etc?

http://www.api.org/policy/tax/apikeytaxissues/upload/API_2011_Hill_Tax_Presentation.pdf

Originally posted by FMF
Ah thanks. That's what I was asking about. How did it do for the whole year?

Loss of $3.3 billion, so that's close to break even considering total revenue is around $300 billion.

Originally posted by Sleepyguy
According to this propaganda from the American Petroleum Institute, the oil industry is generating about $100 million per day to the US govt. If we're going to stop "subsidizing" this activity, can we please also stop subsidizing ethanol, solar, wind etc?

http://www.api.org/policy/tax/apikeytaxissues/upload/API_2011_Hill_Tax_Presentation.pdf

Strange argument, by the same logic employees should always get tax cuts. No one is saying oil production is useless.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Strange argument, by the same logic employees should always get tax cuts. No one is saying oil production is useless.

What? Are you really equating oil companies with "employees" of the US govt?

Originally posted by Sleepyguy
What? Are you really equating the oil companys as "employees" of the US govt?

No, I'm comparing them because employees also bring in money for the US government.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
No, I'm comparing them because employees also bring in money for the US government.

Yes fine, but if the US taxpayer is going to be forced to subsidize an industry, I'd prefer to subsidize the one that pays us back in spades.

I thought the Right was all about cutting government spending. Why is it that Big Tobacco, Big Finance and Big Oil are being protected by the Right via government spending? Lets cut them loose. Free market ftw. I mean, it's shameful that they're forced to suckle off the nanny state's teat. John Galt would not stand for it!

Oh, lets not forget Big Auto.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
I thought the Right was all about cutting government spending. Why is it that Big Tobacco, Big Finance and Big Oil are being protected by the Right via government spending? Lets cut them loose. Free market ftw. I mean, it's shameful that they're forced to suckle off the nanny state's teat. John Galt would not stand for it!

I agree, cut them all loose. But the pols won't do it. I'm not going to cry for the oil companies, but I'll bet the money would benefit the economy more in their hands than in the hands of the govt.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
I thought the Right was all about cutting government spending. Why is it that Big Tobacco, Big Finance and Big Oil are being protected by the Right via government spending? Lets cut them loose. Free market ftw. I mean, it's shameful that they're forced to suckle off the nanny state's teat. John Galt would not stand for it!

Oh, lets not forget Big Auto.

If the Democrats proposed to eliminate a broad range of tax breaks for businesses in combination with an overall lowered corporate tax rate, that would be good thing because it would render the system fairer, more efficient, and more predictable which would spur growth.

That's not what they are trying to do here. They are trying to make 'their opponents' in the Republican party look bad.

Their opponents in the Republican Party don't need help looking bad. They're a bunch of hypocrite munchkins playing the system so they don't have to get real jobs.

They are willing to sacrifice the legendary perfect credit rating of the USA for personal profit, principles be damned.

Originally posted by Sleepyguy
If we're going to stop "subsidizing" this activity, can we please also stop subsidizing ethanol, solar, wind etc?

What was the profit margin for those sectors last quarter?

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
Their opponents in the Republican Party don't need help looking bad. They're a bunch of hypocrite munchkins playing the system so they don't have to get real jobs.

They are willing to sacrifice the legendary perfect credit rating of the USA for personal profit, principles be damned.

I don't disagree with you, but I'm curious-- how would any politician score "personal profit," other than perhaps winning some skewed political clout by appearing to conform with the GOP mainstream platform, by being willing to default?