Since election years generate an incredible amount of advertising revenue for media, why don't we levy a windfall profits tax, and use the proceeds to publicly fund future elections? Any takers?

Don't count me in.

Why are liberals so hot to tax anyone who makes a lot of money? Even if they do tax, they piss the money away in Washington.

Why do you want to punish businesses who make money? They provide jobs and benefits and without the profits, no one gets paid, right down to the janitor.

Please explain yourself. Thank you.

economics 101


i dont have time to explain it all to you and the right wing spin you have been fed will make it impossible for you to accept...you should start by reading some history, especially about the gilded age, i think thom hartman has some good books on it...

taxing the media isnt where i would start, obamas plan will work just fine...thom and i agree no taxes on corps who profit under $25,000,000 or thereabouts and also need to increase level of inheritance tax so the average guy doesnt get beat up so bad...

but, for amounts in the higher ranges, the taxes need to go up substantially, trickle down dont work

Silly lil troll, put this in your trickle down drool, and when
your done, Explain why a fuckin cantaloupe melon now costs 4.99.

As to the janitor, he is getting min wage and paid by a temp
agency with no benefits. Why do you want Big Business to
charge whatever they care to only because they can?

And before you droll on about free markets and all that
bullshit, perhaps your brain cells can try to comprehend
the obvious:
IF the price of oil is justified by supply and demand, then the
oil companies would have a static or decrease in profits, NOT
the WINDFALL they now receive. You are the one that need to
explain.

April 26, 2007
Will Exxon Mobil Hit $100 Billion in Revenues?

Exxon Mobil Corp. (XOM-NYSE) may be the most controversial earnings report on Thursday morning despite the trend of who beats and who misses estimates. The EPS target by Wall Street of $1.52 "earnings per share" seems harmless enough, but the revenue projection is just a hard one to swallow for any tax payer or anyone that drives a car. The estimates are revenues of $100 BILLION!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.247wallst.com/2007/04/will_exxon_mobi.html

WOW! You actually shut the trolls up with facts! Can I see it again?

reminder, troll is a word we dont use around here

read the rules please

I apologize I didn't know even tho I did read the rules. I would edit it but it won't let me.

TAX TAX TAX. How much profit is a windfall? Who decides how much profit is too much?Why punish a company for making money? I dont like the inheritance tax either, that money has already been taxed, any property is taxed yearly. I would like to know how much is a windfall profit. Also what is the right wing spin on windfall profits. Windfall profits, sounds like Jimmy Carter is back in town.

So what you are saying is we should only put a windfall profit tax on the evil oil companys.

Paul Krugman talks about the Gilded age at length in his book "The conscience of a Liberal".

I'm sure it will come as no surprise to you that I disagree with your position.

The airwaves (electromagnetic spectrum) are a public resource.

The telecommunications/broadcast companies are given the broadcast spectrum for their use by the public, and with that bequest comes responsibility.

I see no reason why part of that responsibility should not be to give political debates and other things for informing the public free airtime, as part of meeting that public service that comes with the privilege of using our airwaves.

Maybe you don't, but economists who teach economy in college, even Republicans, they agree that the rich don't part with their money.

You see that was what caused the great depression. That upper 1% held most of the wealth and they held onto it instead of putting it back into the economy so the market could use it to stay healthy.

Rich people don't part with their money, that's how they become rich. Seriously, and I'm not pointing to them saying they are bad people, but even if they spent as much as the middle class did in the market, there are only 1% of them! They could spend 10x as much but that would only be 10%. We need that other 90% in order for our economy to stay healthy and vibrant.

The middle and working classes need to have enough money to buy from the market for the market to work. For some reason, a lot of people don't get that. We need that 90% to be out there spending and now they can't. We tried, we even used our credit cards to keep trying, but now the money has dried up for us and our credit is holding us down so we cannot buy, we can't even pay our bills.

How does the "trickle down theory" work when that 1% that holds the majority (and I mean more than the entire 90% put together) of the money spends very small amounts of it in Indonesia, spends almost nothing here in the states and holds onto the rest, how exactly does that work? Really, if they have all the money but aren't spending it, and we have all the debt so we can't spend money, how does a "free" market work?

Hell, we can't even have a Roosevelt to step in and fix our problem now because Bush send all our tax money over to Iraq so Cheney could have a really nice retirement fund. One he isn't going to live to spend, his children couldn't spend and their children won't be able to spend. So the treasury is broke, the jobs are overseas and we can't buy.

Good job! Even this psych major can see that ain't gonna work!

What we need is some trickle up economics.

Hi Rottman

Just a few points here. We are talking about Corporations, not individuals, so it would seem that your post is a little bit off topic.

Remember that corporations are required to make as much money as possible. This is settled case law.

You guys make it seem like the corporations are devils with pitchforks. The stockholders ARE the corporations. If Exxon makes loads of the money, that will go to the individuals who have 401Ks, IRA's mutual funds, stockholders. Tax the corporation and these are the people who pay.

Nice. Now when companies making over $25,000,000 simply stop producing or become multi-national, of what use is your tax law? Confiscatory tax policy has never worked. It has never provided any additional economic benefit to Americans simply because it is self defeating.
Now I know, don't tell me - you're going to lock up all executives of companies who refuse to produce more than your $25,000,000. Not very well thought out I'm afraid.

"The 1990 budget deal also slapped a hefty luxury tax on boats. This was supposed to draw more money from wealthy yacht owners. What actually happened? People bought fewer boats. So who really paid the price? The many nonwealthy boat builders who were put out of work by the tax. As the Washington Post described: "In its first year and a half, the yacht tax raised a pathetic $12,655,000 for the Treasury That's enough to run the Agriculture Department for a little over two hours. Meanwhile, the tax has contributed to the general devastation of the boating industry." The Post article reported estimates that 25,000 to 30,000 jobs were lost."


http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m157..._v9/ai_14466811

Here is a link to the liberal view of what caused the great depression.

http://gusmorino.com/pag3/greatdepression/

Here is a link to a more objective view.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Depression

OOPS!

These so-called conservatives forget that key point. WE own the airwaves. Like I have said before in other threads the only real reason Fake news gets away with as mch as they do is because they don't broadcast "over the air".

If they did their license would have been yanked long ago.

Great point. absolutely doable.

Not sure what you are talking about, as I listen to the news broadcast over the air every day in my car.

Corporations are tools. Tools for people to cooperate with each other. (Perhaps "technique" would be a better description than "tool").

It appears that, like fire, they are a valuable tool but a dangerous master.

Why do Conservatives object to government installing safety guards on those hazardous tools?

(If, as the courts have held, they are "persons", how do we deal with the relationship between us mortal flesh and blood persons and coroporate persons?
An immortal (bankrupcy doesn't kill the corp, it re-organizes it) with a belly (bank account) that never feels full.
This is a dangerous type of "person".)

Examples???

I see our Corporation Worshiper is back among us!

Here's some information about the inheritance tax, and why the inheritance is taxed
http://www.nolo.com/article.cfm/objectId/A...C7/309/126/QNA/
Who pays for estate tax?

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/MoneyTaxAndBen...usts/DG_4016736
Inheritance Tax : Directgov - Money, tax and benefits

Tax, tax, tax...O.K. you win. No taxes for oil companies, likewise no business deductions, no subsidies, and they get to pay for the infrastructure they use, including airports and sea ports.

I am totally shocked! Heaven forbid the corps pay for something called America.

Break out the history books on how Roosevelt fixed the depression. The same rules our fore fathers put in, and the repugs removed among many regulations. From what I see the repugs don't like our fore fathers.

Im curious how would you go about generating revenue to support our infrastructure without taxation?

Most history books indicate that Roosevelt prolonged the depression and it was the war that pulled us out of the depression.

You said "repugs removed among many regulations."

Have any examples???

Fox News Channel is a "CABLE" operation, different rules apply.

how can war help to pull a country out of a depression?

Putting people to work building weapons, ships, airplanes, etc. The historical record is pretty clear on this.

How in the hell do you think the common good is paid for? Hmmm?

How much is too much? If your profit making throws the entire economy into recession, that may be a clue.

Leave Brother Carter alone. You are one of those bushites. You can't talk about ANYBODY beinig bad at anything. Your guy was TERRIBLE at EVERYTHING.

I don't have cable in my car. In terms of the news, I have the choice of an ABC, CBS, NBC or Fox affiliate on my car radio.

Profit from death and destruction. Perfect. WWJD?

Spin it any way you want, but the positive impact of WWII on the Great Depression is a matter of historical record.

Profit taking is not responsible for a recession. If you claim it is then the burden is on you to support your claim with a link.

No one is advocating no taxes.

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and not call you an idiot. Read my response again. different rules apply to that type of operation vs. a station or channel.

Ailes is not a complete fool. Those 3 minute news breaks don't disseminate the venom that's done on their main enterprise.

Just to let you know, this is not an argument you can win.

wow thats pretty simple but wait a minute wont the people be affected by higher prices due to the massive wasting of and diversion of resources away from them? I mean shortages cause higher prices right? so arent they manufacturing themselves into fewer available goods for themselves to buy? oh thats it I get it, it destroys everything and makes a need to refill or repair. but still the only way to bring the country out of that kind of depression is to stop the massive wasting of and diversion of resources from the people, so not the war but the ending of war that helps to bring the country out of a depression.

We were already on our way back to recovery before the war hit. The war was a hardship on America. It is this war is a money maker attitude that repugs just love.

Here is another one, http://www.villagevoice.com/2002-01-15/new...-s-enron-favor/ This stuff is easy to find and it is history. They deregulated all kinds of stuff. This did not help us at all. This has all been on Randi's show. Do you even listen to her show?

still Im curiuos as to the alternatives to support our infrastructure.

Being that all of our stuff is built in China I guess they would love it. The jet aircraft for our military is serviced in Japan. Our tanks built in Germany. Our ships are either worked on up North or in Japan. So what are we going to do?

The repugs don't give a rats ass about America. They have no idea about our factories and jobs. They don't exist. All of our steel is coming from China. There are just a handful of refineries left here in the United States. One is BP, the other one that came up on the hit list was American Steel in Ohio. How are we supposed to wage war when we only have two major steel plants, and one is under construction?

Not sure what your question is. I was simply providing historical perspective.

In your opinion

I don't see that there is an alternative.

I'm used to not winning arguments on RRMB. By my count, I haven't won any.

so in your opinion whats the best way to generate enough revenue to support America's infrastructure?

I'm simply stating what is a well documented fact. There is abundant information on this subject if you care to check it out yourself.

Prior to the outbreak of world war 2 we were still in the depths of depression. We didn't begin to make any significant progress until the late 1930 when other countries were buying from us. Very few historians would support your position.

I should have been more clear. In general regulations have been instituted, removed, instituted. Some of those have been beneficial and some have not. You make it sound that only Republicans remove regulations (not all regulations are beneficia). That is not true.

Pertaining to your more recent post, China is not building our weapsons systems. Considering the quality of their products, do you think we would trust them to build secret weapons systems?? China has an economy based of the manufacture of basic. products. Interestingly, I think China is making a big mistake. On the other hand, India is smarter, they are developing a service oriented economy. Anyway, you will probably see robots manufacturing much of the future clothes, furniture, etc. At that point, China will be left out in the cold