Why did the Republicans block the Dems’ iniative for windfall taxes on Big Oil companies profits?
Dems introduced a windfall tax for the unreasonably/unjustifiably high profits of oil companies. Republicans took it down:)
Is ths where their loyalties are? What does Mccain think, did he support the tax?
Tags: windfall, companies, taxes, Dems', Republicans, iniativeRelated posts:
- Why do the Republicans say it’s wrong to tax windfall profits of big oil companies but ??
- Should “Big Soda” be penalized for their windfall profits with higher taxes?
- How many more “Why are republicans opposed to taking windfall profits from BIG OIL” questions will be asked?
- What is Taking the Dems so Long to Put a Windfall Profits Tax on Big Food for Food Prices Going up?
- Why do Republicans promote privatization of Profits, but the Socialization of Loss for big Business?
The didn’t want the price of gas going up. Any taxes on corporations would only be passed on to the consumer. Basic Economics 101.
Because it was STUPID.
No oil company is ever going to pay a windfall tax. They simply pass the expense on to the consumer.
Any tax levied on the oil industry isn’t a tax on them, it’s a new tax on US.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080610/ap_on_go_co/congress_oil_profits
Rather than me try to explain, you can read the rational in the link I’ve provided.
And who would of paid for these windfall taxes? Do you think the oil companies would of just ate it? It would only be passed down to the consumer.
mary please just wise up and quit pandering to the lowest common denominator. Even a monkey would know corporation do not pay taxes just people taxes go up and the price goes up.
Think about it, do you truly believe that the oil companies will EAT the higher tax? NO!!! They’ll pass it on to the consumers….
That’s right, you and I will just pay the tax for the oil companies. If they really cared about the citizens of the USA at all, they’d already be doing their part to assist with the economy.
Why does everything have to point at McCain or Bush? They are single people, and CONGRESS voted no on a poorly thought out bill…
There needs to be more control on oil companies, and more control on the international market of oil producing countries… Not more taxes that will just trickle down to you and me at the gas pump, or at the dinner table.
They need omre tax fa oil comapanies! Obama!!
This is not about oil companies but about whether markets or politics should determine economic rewards. Once one accepts the principle that reward must be proportional to effort or investment, one opens the door to all manner of confiscatory mischief.
Many individuals and firms—not just oil companies—reap extraordinary profits in a capitalist economy. These include inventors, authors, and Hollywood moviemakers. The patents and copyrights they hold “create monopoly rights which can produce monopoly rents which, by definition, are abnormal profits.” If the patent or copyright holders are lucky enough to be at the right place at the right time, they may get very rich. Of course, most risk-takers bomb several times before they succeed. But that is the point. Without the prospect of an occasional bonanza to make the risks worth taking, far fewer people would invent new products, write books, or make movies.
Housing markets exhibit capitalism, risk-reward nexus in spades. People who buy homes when the real estate market is soft and later sell them at two and three times what they paid might also be said to reap a “windfall.” Housing is as basic to human welfare as motor fuel. So should Congress set “reasonable rates of return” on housing sales and tax away the difference as “unearned” gains? Fortunately, you don’t need a Ph.D. in economics to foresee that such a policy would destroy the investment value of most people’s homes and crash real estate markets nationwide. It should also be obvious that assessing “windfall profits” taxes on oil companies would depress energy infrastructure investment and the value of oil company stock.