Toodles: Let's look at your statement on depreciation rules of drilling rigs. What are the details? Are those accelerated depreciation schedules for all wells or only for wells that produce? Because there is a huge difference. There are many instances where research(i.e. drilling wells that don't produce) must be prorated even though it is an outright loss for the company (the research resulted in negative results). Perhaps this dep. schedule is entirely fair because of the unique business of finding oil reserves. It may be that 70% is a very fair number. There are many industry specific depreciation rules. Ask your accountant. Why can't all companies follow thse rules? They all have failures that occur with research. Maybe Target stores don't always produce after they are built. Maybe Chrysler cars are no always purchased after they are produced.
Let's look at your statement on depreciation rules of drilling rigs. What are the details? Are those accelerated depreciation schedules for all wells or only for wells that produce? Because there is a huge difference. There are many instances where research(i.e. drilling wells that don't produce) must be prorated even though it is an outright loss for the company (the research resulted in negative results). Perhaps this dep. schedule is entirely fair because of the unique business of finding oil reserves. It may be that 70% is a very fair number. There are many industry specific depreciation rules. Ask your accountant.
Why can't all companies follow thse rules? They all have failures that occur with research. Maybe Target stores don't always produce after they are built. Maybe Chrysler cars are no always purchased after they are produced.
Please re-read this paragraph. I would bet there are industry specific rules for both Target and Chrysler. Like I said in the paragraph. Try reading slower so you can comprehend it more good!
I do have an opinion, I'm just not sharing it with you. I'm simply asking you to explain your position; which you are having great difficulty.
Toodles: I based this on many readings, the fact that many Democrats and REPUBLICANS share a simlar view point.
I based this on many readings, the fact that many Democrats and REPUBLICANS share a simlar view point.
Perhaps you should stop getting your information from politicians. How does the saying go about politicians lips moving? And there's another one about statistics.
Don't listen to politicians and look deeper into statistics to see how ther are DERIVED before you run off crying foul.
I NEVER once said tax breaks and subsidies for oil companies don't exist. NOBODY on this thread EVER said that. You have only been asked to explain your SPECIFIC problems with SPECIFIC tax breaks and subsidies. WHICH YOU STILL HAVE NOT DONE.
Number Johnny 5
GOOTS: Toodles: Let's look at your statement on depreciation rules of drilling rigs. What are the details? Are those accelerated depreciation schedules for all wells or only for wells that produce? Because there is a huge difference. There are many instances where research(i.e. drilling wells that don't produce) must be prorated even though it is an outright loss for the company (the research resulted in negative results). Perhaps this dep. schedule is entirely fair because of the unique business of finding oil reserves. It may be that 70% is a very fair number. There are many industry specific depreciation rules. Ask your accountant. Why can't all companies follow thse rules? They all have failures that occur with research. Maybe Target stores don't always produce after they are built. Maybe Chrysler cars are no always purchased after they are produced. Please re-read this paragraph. I would bet there are industry specific rules for both Target and Chrysler. Like I said in the paragraph. Try reading slower so you can comprehend it more good! So you are basing your opinion on guessing, or I should say you are using guesses to argue that my opinion is incorrect. I can't argue with that, I really can't. You are my new favorite person to disagree with you know that. I do have an opinion, I'm just not sharing it with you. I'm simply asking you to explain your position; which you are having great difficulty. I think I'm doing just fine thank you. Am I doing a good job convincing you that you should share my opinion. Yes, luckily I never set out to do that in the first place. It is possible to share your opinion with out having the need to convince all those around you that they need to agree with you. You wouldn't know anything about that though. Toodles: I based this on many readings, the fact that many Democrats and REPUBLICANS share a simlar view point. Perhaps you should stop getting your information from politicians. Politicians represent me, last time I checked. and if they are doign their jobs they are a refelcting of the view points of American citizens. Readings, did you get that first part.How does the saying go about politicians lips moving? And there's another one about statistics. Don't listen to politicians and look deeper into statistics to see how ther are DERIVED before you run off crying foul. Way ahead of you there. So, go through here and cherry pick yourself some thread bites thus leaving behind what you don't understand or can't argue while at the same time accomplishing nothing for yourself....So now you do have an opinion. Is this something new or were you lying earlier.
So you are basing your opinion on guessing, or I should say you are using guesses to argue that my opinion is incorrect.
I can't argue with that, I really can't.
You are my new favorite person to disagree with you know that.
I think I'm doing just fine thank you. Am I doing a good job convincing you that you should share my opinion. Yes, luckily I never set out to do that in the first place. It is possible to share your opinion with out having the need to convince all those around you that they need to agree with you. You wouldn't know anything about that though.
Perhaps you should stop getting your information from politicians. Politicians represent me, last time I checked. and if they are doign their jobs they are a refelcting of the view points of American citizens. Readings, did you get that first part.How does the saying go about politicians lips moving? And there's another one about statistics.
Way ahead of you there.
So, go through here and cherry pick yourself some thread bites thus leaving behind what you don't understand or can't argue while at the same time accomplishing nothing for yourself....So now you do have an opinion. Is this something new or were you lying earlier.
Toodles: So you are basing your opinion on guessing, or I should say you are using guesses to argue that my opinion is incorrect.
No. I am asking you to flesh out your position. I KNOW there are thousands of industry specific tax rules. I KNOW there are automotive industry specific tax rules. I'm still NOT SAYING YOU ARE INCORRECT. Jesus kid, fucking read what people are saying to you. I just want you to explain WHY that is your position. Do you get it yet?
Nevermind, I give up. You are well justified in your position. The fact that you can't illustrate how ONE oil industry tax break works and why it should be removed is very compelling.
bravo.
I have made it very very clear what tax breaks I disagree with, you agree with them, good for you, I respect your opinion but I also repectfully disagree. If I didn't do an adequate job describing them to you then that's your fault for expecting a tax code lesson on my free time. You are more capable to come up with your own details, though you didn't because it is a lot less work for you to just criticize mine. Plus you eliminate yourself from having to supply any actualy counters. Cowardly but effective, KUDOS
Here is why I think that those tax breaks are harmful now that we agree that they do exist: (GG SAID THAT THEY DIDN'T BY CALLING ME OUT FOR REFERRING TO THEM AS FACTS, AS IF THEY WERE NOT:
If you are a capitalist you believe that a free market should function with little government intervention and control. In this case the American people are being asked to pick up part of the bill for the oil industry. Whether it is cleaning up their spills , protecting their tankers, protecting their interests in the Middle East or funding their R and D.
One touched on area is reating roads and maintaining infrastructure that is gasoline vehicle friendly and less friendly to mass transit like light rail. This type of spending plays into the hands of the oil companies, for it is infrastructure that is designed to work with it's product.
With all this help (LISTED ABOVE AND THROUGHOUT THIS QUAGMIRE BUT FEEL FREE TO PICK THE EASIEST ONE FOR YOU TO ARGUE AND GIVE IT HELL) that the American Tax Payers give to the Oil industry I happen to believe that added tax breaks that are INDUSTRY SPECIFIC should be taken back.
Not to punish anyone, not because they are evil but because they are unnecessary because we already do enough to benefit their industry that again is highly profitable.
Instead we should honor capitalistic ideals and help bring healthy competition to energy markets. The more aid we give oil the less easy it is for new alternatives to compete.
Toodles: I have made it very very clear what tax breaks I disagree with, you agree with them, good for you,
I have made it very very clear what tax breaks I disagree with, you agree with them, good for you,
I have always asked WHY.
GOOTS: And I have no opinion. My only supposition this whole thread is that you don't know the facts behind your position.
And I have no opinion. My only supposition this whole thread is that you don't know the facts behind your position.
Are you pretending to be this daft? Is there some course you can take in your finance school dealing with reading comprehension?
I'm not arguing against you, I'm only asking for your reasoning.
Last post. This is like conversing with a toddler. No one's attacking you, they just want you to make a point instead of repeating dodgy claims you heard from some pundit.
GOOTS: Toodles: I have made it very very clear what tax breaks I disagree with, you agree with them, good for you, I have always asked WHY. GOOTS: And I have no opinion. My only supposition this whole thread is that you don't know the facts behind your position. Are you pretending to be this daft? Is there some course you can take in your finance school dealing with reading comprehension? I'm not arguing against you, I'm only asking for your reasoning. Last post. This is like conversing with a toddler. No one's attacking you, they just want you to make a point instead of repeating dodgy claims you heard from some pundit.
...BRAVO Goots BRAVO
I wish I had seen this before this thread.
http://musicscene.org/forums/t/10953.aspx?PageIndex=1
...explains much
All that link explains is that 2 years ago we had a open argument that at times I took seriously and at times I didn't. It proves that at that point in time I said those things.
For all I know I was listening to Creed 2 years ago. How about living in the NOW.
You really have nothing of real value to the discussion?? I'm fine with that. You can blindly hold your opinion and I can blindly hold mine. I'll admit that I do have limited knowledge to support my opinion, that is fair, can you admit the same? From what you have OR should I say haven't said I don't know that you can.
Granted it's easier to use the , "I know you are but what am I" defense. and I have to admit more entertaining but it does little to support your opinion. Not saying your wrong for having that opinion only saying that your cowardly approach may keep you out of everyone elses microscope and maintain it's focus on me BUT it still doesn't say much for the structure that your opinion rests on.
I don't mind saying things on the cuff or risk coming off sounding ignorant, yes that bites me in the ass but it is also how you grow and learn.
Try it if you have the balls
What was my opinion again?
way to pay attention.
GOOTS: What was my opinion again? way to pay attention.
EXACTLY
Let's get drunk and come back to this 4 hours from now. I think this could get really funny
GG This article is for you, the part that is bolded reinforces my belief that oil prices are NOT the main concern when it comes to rising food prices:
Federal government subsidies to ethanol producers are having a sizable impact on food prices, but the impact is limited to corn-based food goods and will likely subside over time, the chief economist at the Department of Agriculture told Congress.
Joseph Glauber told a hearing of the Joint Economic Committee that ethanol subsidies were having an “important impact” on corn prices, directly pushing up the cost of corn-based food. He told the panel that retail food prices increased by 4% in 2007, the fastest since 1990. Prices are forecast to grow between a further 4%-4.5% in 2008, he said. But he said the ethanol subsidies had little to do with sharp increases in wheat and rice prices.
That has had more to do with the rapid increase in demand from countries like China and India for high quality foods, and adverse weather conditions in major wheat producers like Australia and Canada, which has severely reduced yields. Glauber said he anticipated the ethanol impact on the price of corn to moderate over time.
Sen. Charles Schumer (D., N.Y.) the chairman of the economic panel, said that due to federal government subsidies to ethanol producers, corn accounted for a quarter of total crop output across the U.S. in 2007, from less than 15% in 2005. “This has obviously raised the price of corn and grains because farmers have shifted more land into corn production, squeezing domestic supplies of wheat, soy, and many other crops,” Schumer said.
Others were far more skeptical of any contribution to food prices from the move towards biofuels. “Don’t be blaming the farmer and ethanol for the high price of food,” said Sen. Charles Grassley (R., Iowa), who gnawed on a piece of corn at a press conference to show reporters that some types of corn aren’t suited for eating.
Grassley cited other factors, such as drought in Australia, import duties on food, growing demand from China and India, speculation in commodities markets, and rising oil prices that drive up the cost of transporting agricultural products. –Corey Boles and Ian Talley
Born of black wind, fire, and steel
Sawbones
Kwang
Me
G.G.:
That is seriously hilarious!