Wayne,
Please stop with the boiler-plate crap about hurricanes and 9/11 and 2 wars. He handled Katrina about as badly as Nagin and that governess chick.
He *chose* Iraq. So please stop with that one when you refer to 'two wars.'
Global Warming is a bunch of bullshit. I've said it dozens of times, but I wanted to know specifically how this carbon credit thing was going to double our electric bills.
As far as the 'debt' that 'O' has forced on us, it's just about exactly the same amount that W forced on right before he left us.
I think it's all bullshit and ridiculous. All of it.
However, it seems that people from both sides think only half of it is bullshit.
Lets get the facts straight
he and congress chose both wars.
vote on Iraq war
house--296-133
senate--77-23
Now that we got that out of way--
I looked for source on carbon taxing from non-conservative source--here is what Cato Institute came out with today--
March 05, 2009
How Obama's Soak-The-Rich Plan Will End Up Hurting Middle Class
By Jim Powell
President Obama has claimed that his budget goes after the rich who supposedly will pay the cost of his spending extravaganza. But it is already apparent that the rest of us will pay plenty.
Obama is continuing the crusade against offshore tax havens he began as an Illinois senator. He's targeting places like the Bahamas, Cayman Islands, Isle of Man, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, Netherlands Antilles and Switzerland, which have low taxes. There are about 50 such tax havens globally.
<SCRIPT language=JavaScript><!--OAS_AD('Block');//--></SCRIPT><!-- BEGIN TAG - 300x250 -
www.realclearpolitics.com - DO NOT MODIFY --><SCRIPT src="http://optimizedby.rmxads.com/st?ad_type=ad&ad_size=300x250§ion=180925" type=text/javascript></SCRIPT><!-- END TAG -->
<SCRIPT src="http://optimizedby.rmxads.com/imp?Z=300x250&s=180925&_salt=2892128976&B=10&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.realclearpolitics.com%2Farticles%2F2009%2F03%2Fhow_obamas_soaktherich_plan_wi.html&r=1" type=text/javascript></SCRIPT>
It's wrong to think that a U.S. crackdown on offshore tax havens would primarily hit disgraced Wall Street high rollers who made fortunes peddling subprime securities. These tax havens are used by many of the biggest U.S.-based corporations to help minimize the massive tax liabilities imposed on multinational operations.
To the extent these corporations are able to minimize their tax liabilities -- along with other costs of doing business -- their profits and stock valuations are higher.
Shares of these corporations are in millions of individual retirement plans as well as the portfolios of colleges, universities, insurance companies, hospitals and charitable institutions.
Some of the corporations would be more adversely affected than others by Obama's effort to bar the use of offshore tax havens, thereby raising corporate taxes, undermining stock valuations -- and making it harder to hire people.
Why would Obama choose to attack stock valuations now, after the stock market has already lost about half its value during the past year? Why, when the country is in a serious recession, investment portfolios have been hammered, the banking sector is in turmoil, and unemployment rates are rising, would Obama make it harder for U.S.-based corporations to do business?
Obama's concern seems to be that corporations aren't paying their fair share. But corporations don't really pay taxes anyway. Corporate taxes are passed through to consumers like other costs of doing business -- factored into the price of goods and services.
Trying to suppress offshore tax havens means generating upward pressure on the prices Americans pay for food, gasoline, clothing, computers, pharmaceuticals and thousands of other products that affect our daily lives. Why would Obama do anything to make life harder for American consumers in already tough times?
Moreover, corporate taxes amount to double taxation. Profits are taxed at the corporate level, and they're taxed again when investors receive interest on corporate bonds, dividends on corporate stock, or when investors sell stock, bought with personal income previously taxed, that yields a capital gain.
The crusade against offshore tax havens is just one among many Obama initiatives that will have the effect of increasing business costs and reducing returns for investors.
His proposed budget includes $353.5 billion of tax increases for U.S. businesses. Many investors face a tripling of taxes. Other proposed policies would further increase the cost of doing business, such as "green" mandates.
A proposed "card-check" law is intended to revive compulsory unionism in the private sector and make it more expensive for employers to hire people. When something becomes more expensive, demand is likely to fall.
By reducing after-tax returns from investment, Obama will discourage investors from making their funds available. For all practical purposes, investors could go on strike as they did during the 1930s when a succession of soak-the-rich taxes made it hard for investors to estimate their risks and returns, and they remained on the sidelines. Without more capital, it's almost impossible to create more private sector jobs.
Obama's populist rhetoric suggests that he's only going after the super-rich. Yet reportedly half of individuals earning over $250,000 a year are small business owners. During the past 15 years, small businesses have been creating over 90% of net new jobs -- altogether, more than 20 million jobs. How smart is it for the heavy hand of government to come down on these employers?
Not very -- if the goal of these policies is economic recovery and prosperity.
========================
I might add what Geither had to say--to show how far they will attempt to throw this global warming hoax--If I was oil companies I'd be looking into doing the Halibuton move and domicle in another country--then tell em to stick their taxes where sun don't shine--lets see Exxon alone paid 32 billion in taxes in 07
I give you our secreatary of treasury Geither who believe it or not yesterday was ranting about off shore tax cheats also-is that not the pot calling the kettle black-or not
By Tom Doggett
WASHINGTON, March 4 (Reuters) -
U.S. oil and natural gas producing companies should not receive federal subsidies in the form of tax breaks because their businesses contribute to global warming, U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner told Congress on Wednesday.
It was one of the sharpest attacks yet on the oil and gas industry by a top Obama administration official, reinforcing the White House stance that new U.S. energy policy will focus on promoting renewable energy sources like wind and solar power and rely less on traditional fossil fuels like oil as America tackles climate change.
"We don't believe it makes sense to significantly subsidize the production and use of sources of energy (like oil and gas) that are dramatically going to add to our climate change (problem). We don't think that's good economic policy and we think changing those incentives is good for the country," Geithner told the Senate Finance Committee at a hearing on the White House's proposed budget for the 2010 spending year.
The Obama administration's budget would levy an excise tax on oil and natural gas produced in the Gulf of Mexico, raising $5.3 billion in revenue from 2011 to 2019.
