Our City Online

Messageboard - Miscellaneous Events

BP Protest Thursday, June 17th 2010

Home Forums Events Miscellaneous Events BP Protest Thursday, June 17th 2010

This topic contains 209 replies, has 0 voices, and was last updated by  Anise1281 3 years, 9 months ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 136 through 150 (of 225 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #379051
    takeasiesta
    takeasiesta
    Member
    Login to Send PM

    myliftkk wrote >>

    takeasiesta wrote >>

    Tenzo wrote >>
    What, is this like ‘Candy Man’, where you say the name three times

    Actually it’s if you say Jimmy Dean three times, sausage appears!

    Don’t speak ill of Jimmy, he just died… ;)

    I’ve been trying to think up a tasteful Jimmy Dean joke for the past two days and that’s the best one that I’ve got.

    #379052

    pilsner
    Participant
    Login to Send PM

    blammo wrote >>
    I hope being a democrat or liberal isn’t defined by being “anti-republican”. similar to Red Sun’s approach towards veganism instilling in me the desire to eat a hamburger, being labeled a “CU concern troll” for not wanting to demonstrate against Republican party politics (which are remarkably similar to Democratic strategies IMHO) makes me reconsider my left-wing affiliations.

    I’m disgusted with the Democrats most of the time too but don’t you get it? The problem is too much corporate power.

    The oil companies and Wall Street banks make billions because they have corrupted the political process by contributing millions to politicians. The deck is stacked because of money in politics.

    #379053
    Bear
    Bear
    Participant
    Login to Send PM

    pilsner wrote >>

    Bear wrote >>

    pilsner wrote >>
    So in my opinion, it’s worthwhile to hold BP accountable by gassing up and buying slim jims at non-BP stations.


    You get that quite a few of those non-BP stations buy their gas from BP refineries, right?
    And that “gassing up” just perpetuates the mindless demand for oil, which is the necessary (albeit not sufficient) condition for the current ecocide in the Gulf, right?
    So that what you’re saying amounts to, “I don’t actually mind aiding and abetting the company that produced the Gulf disaster, as long as I get to stick it to some Republicans”?
    Is that your final answer?

    Not really. The Republicans have blocked clean energy technologies because the oil companies are their sugar daddies.

    So what you’re saying really is “I don’t actually mind aiding and abetting the company that produced the Gulf disaster, as long as I get to stick it to some Republicans.”

    pilsner wrote >>
    Exxon is the most profitable corporation in the history of the world and did not pay any federal taxes (Exxon actually got a tax return of $150 million last year).

    You make it sound like the Republicans waved a magic tax wand and made Exxon exempt from taxes. Exxon actually paid a total of $15bn in taxes last year, almost half of their pretax earnings, and more than any other U.S. company. But because they did most of their business outside of the U.S., in oil-rich countries with even higher tax rates than ours, they just didn’t pay those taxes to us.

    In general it’s not that unusual for multinationals to set up their operations in such a way that gains happen in low-tax countries and losses happen in high-tax countries, when they can. Nothing sinister about it, just sound business practice, acting responsibly on behalf of one’s shareholders.

    #379054

    pilsner
    Participant
    Login to Send PM

    So you’re down with U.S. based companies using off-shore tax havens like the Cayman Islands?

    From PBS Frontline:

    ….but Cayman is also the fifth-largest financial center in the world. Cayman’s bank privacy laws and the lack of income taxes attract not only tourists in search of a thrill, but also blue-chip U.S. corporations — and IRS tax investigators. In fact, 45 of the world’s top 50 banks have subsidiary or branch operations in Cayman, and in 2003 alone $415 billion in deposits flowed through this sandy resort.

    In recent years, American corporations and wealthy individuals, in ever increasing numbers, have moved to set up companies or subsidiaries in tax havens like the Caymans. This has led to a significant drain on the U.S. treasury. Though precise estimates of the amount of U.S. income sheltered in the Caymans are hard to come by, it is known that between 1983 and 1999, according to the U.S. Commerce Department, the value of American corporate assets in Bermuda, the Cayman Islands and 11 other tax havens grew 44 percent more than their assets in Germany, the U.K. and other countries with tax rates similar to the United States.

    For the U.S. Treasury, offshore jurisdictions like the Cayman Islands pose a double problem: (1) they can offer American corporations and individuals attractive financial deals and access to capital markets at a much lower cost than U.S. banks in America, and (2) they can guarantee virtually complete secrecy about financial deals and assets held by Americans, in accordance with Cayman confidentiality laws (except in the case of criminal activity)…..

    #379055
    Bear
    Bear
    Participant
    Login to Send PM

    pilsner wrote >>
    So you’re down with U.S. based companies using off-shore tax havens like the Cayman Islands?
    From PBS Frontline: (etc.)

    In the abstract? If your goal is the maximization of the welfare of society as a whole, well… it’s got its pluses and minuses.

    When company X uses an off-shore tax haven it shields some revenue from taxation. Which deprives the government of taxes. Which means other taxes have to be increased, or revenue raised from other sources / services cut, to compensate. I don’t like that. But at the same time, it increases that business’ profitability, allows it to pay better salaries, and allows it to provide whatever its service is at less of a cost than it would have otherwise. (To anticipate, yes, the CEO can afford a slightly nicer limo, too.)

    Is society better off with a marginal dollar of income either being shielded or being taxed? I’m not dogmatic: I don’t think there’s an answer that’s independent of particular countries at particular times. In this country at this time, it’s a tough call, because there’s a blistering need for that marginal dollar both in the government coffers (to provide, please God, rapidly dwindling stimulus for recovery and then turn to paying down the debt with alacrity) and in private hands to aid recovery. I suspect it might even be a sector-by-sector decision at this point where it’s best spent. But to be honest, I go back and forth.

    So it’s hard to be completely for them or completely against them. It’d probably be optimal, I suppose, to set up some kind of sliding scale that recaptures some of that income in good economic times, or from companies that are doing well, but leaves it in their hands otherwise. But I’d welcome a better strategy and rationale for dealing with them.

    #379056
    rus
    rus
    Participant
    Login to Send PM

    pilsner wrote >>

    blammo wrote >>
    I hope being a democrat or liberal isn’t defined by being “anti-republican”. similar to Red Sun’s approach towards veganism instilling in me the desire to eat a hamburger, being labeled a “CU concern troll” for not wanting to demonstrate against Republican party politics (which are remarkably similar to Democratic strategies IMHO) makes me reconsider my left-wing affiliations.

    I’m disgusted with the Democrats most of the time too but don’t you get it? The problem is too much corporate power.
    The oil companies and Wall Street banks make billions because they have corrupted the political process by contributing millions to politicians. The deck is stacked because of money in politics.

    You don’t seem to be equally disgusted with democrats, based on your comments.

    If you really believe the deck is stacked, so to speak, then why would you be willing to enhance the role of government? After all, they’re just a proxy for baby eating godless corporations. Right?

    Your argument makes more sense as a call to reform government, but you don’t seem to advocate for that ( or much else, beyond the public execution / torture of republicans ).

    #379057

    JonMyers
    Participant
    Login to Send PM

    pilsner wrote >>
    So you’re down with U.S. based companies using off-shore tax havens like the Cayman Islands?
    From PBS Frontline:
    ….but Cayman is also the fifth-largest financial center in the world. Cayman’s bank privacy laws and the lack of income taxes attract not only tourists in search of a thrill, but also blue-chip U.S. corporations — and IRS tax investigators. In fact, 45 of the world’s top 50 banks have subsidiary or branch operations in Cayman, and in 2003 alone $415 billion in deposits flowed through this sandy resort.
    In recent years, American corporations and wealthy individuals, in ever increasing numbers, have moved to set up companies or subsidiaries in tax havens like the Caymans. This has led to a significant drain on the U.S. treasury. Though precise estimates of the amount of U.S. income sheltered in the Caymans are hard to come by, it is known that between 1983 and 1999, according to the U.S. Commerce Department, the value of American corporate assets in Bermuda, the Cayman Islands and 11 other tax havens grew 44 percent more than their assets in Germany, the U.K. and other countries with tax rates similar to the United States.
    For the U.S. Treasury, offshore jurisdictions like the Cayman Islands pose a double problem: (1) they can offer American corporations and individuals attractive financial deals and access to capital markets at a much lower cost than U.S. banks in America, and (2) they can guarantee virtually complete secrecy about financial deals and assets held by Americans, in accordance with Cayman confidentiality laws (except in the case of criminal activity)…..

    Clearly, the only real solution to stopping the oil spill is to invade the Cayman Islands.

    #379058
    gramarye
    gramarye
    Participant
    Login to Send PM

    JonMyers wrote >>

    pilsner wrote >>
    So you’re down with U.S. based companies using off-shore tax havens like the Cayman Islands?
    From PBS Frontline:
    ….but Cayman is also the fifth-largest financial center in the world. Cayman’s bank privacy laws and the lack of income taxes attract not only tourists in search of a thrill, but also blue-chip U.S. corporations — and IRS tax investigators. In fact, 45 of the world’s top 50 banks have subsidiary or branch operations in Cayman, and in 2003 alone $415 billion in deposits flowed through this sandy resort.
    In recent years, American corporations and wealthy individuals, in ever increasing numbers, have moved to set up companies or subsidiaries in tax havens like the Caymans. This has led to a significant drain on the U.S. treasury. Though precise estimates of the amount of U.S. income sheltered in the Caymans are hard to come by, it is known that between 1983 and 1999, according to the U.S. Commerce Department, the value of American corporate assets in Bermuda, the Cayman Islands and 11 other tax havens grew 44 percent more than their assets in Germany, the U.K. and other countries with tax rates similar to the United States.
    For the U.S. Treasury, offshore jurisdictions like the Cayman Islands pose a double problem: (1) they can offer American corporations and individuals attractive financial deals and access to capital markets at a much lower cost than U.S. banks in America, and (2) they can guarantee virtually complete secrecy about financial deals and assets held by Americans, in accordance with Cayman confidentiality laws (except in the case of criminal activity)…..

    Clearly, the only real solution to stopping the oil spill is to invade the Cayman Islands.

    Actually, I’m gathering that the solution is a massive increase in the power and reach of the government that he believes is corrupt and dancing to the tune of shadowy oligarchs. Maybe he thinks he can make the government too big for these oligarchs to master.

    #379059

    pilsner
    Participant
    Login to Send PM

    How about getting money out of politics?

    We’ve been having the best Congress that money can buy and it doesn’t seem to be working out very well.

    #379060
    Jimbo Jones
    Jimbo Jones
    Member
    Login to Send PM

    pilsner wrote >>
    How about getting money out of politics?
    We’ve been having the best Congress that money can buy and it doesn’t seem to be working out very well.

    As best I can tell, it seems that your answer to getting the money out of politics is to simply vote any and all Republicans out of office.

    #379061

    pilsner
    Participant
    Login to Send PM

    I started the following CU thread. Pretty critical of some Democrats, don’t you think?

    How Gov Strickland & Mayor Coleman sit back while million$ get wasted

    Our tax dollars pay for costly private health insurance for public employees. The city of Columbus has about 8,000 employees and the city’s contribution for health insurance premiums was about $95,000,000 in 2008, according to a city hall employee. That’s a sizable expense of the city budget(about 6.5%).

    The state of Ohio has about 60,000 employees. State government is byzantine and I haven’t been able to determine the state’s contributions for health insurance but it must be in the neighborhood of $500 to $600 million. (Any state workers out there know?)

    btw, I am not opposed to government employees getting health insurance. Health care is a human right, you know, the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. But, taxpayers shouldn’t have to over-pay for it so health insurance CEOs make $100 million a year.

    The point is that Governor Strickland and Mayor Coleman and other government chief executives should be pounding podiums across the nation demanding single-payer (Medicare for all). This would save government at all levels (and school districts) hundreds of billions of dollars per year nationwide. Some of the savings could be used to make sure every American is insured.

    Health care spending, per capita, in the U.S. is $6,714, which is expected to double in the next 7 to 10 years if nothing is done.

    Health care spending, per capita, in Canada is $3,698 (Medicare for all)

    Health care spending, per capita, in the U.K. is $2,760 (socialist medical system).

    The cost savings of single-payer (Medicare for all) for public employees would be in the 40% range. That would mean a wind-fall of about $40 million for the city of Columbus alone. Which would make the recent sales tax increase unnecessary.

    This is all very relevent because Rep. Dennis Kucinich sponsored an admendment that was approved in the House Committee on Education and Labor to the House’s health-care reform bill allowing states to create single-payer health care systems if they so choose.

    http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat/452493

    Our local corporate media has for some reason not reported how single-payer, (Medicare for all) would save Ohio taxpayers billions of dollars by removing the middle-man, the insurance companies, between doctors and patients.

    I think President Obama foolishly took a national Medicare for all off the table right from the start. He should have instructed Democratic poo-bahs to hold rallies for it. At least then, the so-called public option would have been viewed as a middle-ground, compromise position.

    There is still no excuse for governors, mayors, county commissioners and school board members not to be advocating strongly for getting public employees into a Medicare for all system to conserve taxpayer dollars.

    #379062
    Jimbo Jones
    Jimbo Jones
    Member
    Login to Send PM

    So now healthcare is related to protesting BP?

    #379063

    JonMyers
    Participant
    Login to Send PM

    pilsner wrote >>
    How about getting money out of politics?

    Seriously, what isn’t about the money?

    When someone says it isn’t about the money I run for the door.

    #379064

    pilsner
    Participant
    Login to Send PM

    JonMyers wrote >>

    pilsner wrote >>
    How about getting money out of politics?

    Seriously, what isn’t about the money?
    When someone says it isn’t about the money I run for the door.

    Guess you’re right. It’s best to let the billionaires, Wall Street bank execs and oil company CEOs to keep running the place. I’m sure it will work out for the best with enough prayer and thoughts that America is always making progress ;-)

    #379065
    Snarf
    Snarf
    Participant
    Login to Send PM

    pilsner wrote >>

    JonMyers wrote >>

    pilsner wrote >>
    How about getting money out of politics?

    Seriously, what isn’t about the money?
    When someone says it isn’t about the money I run for the door.

    Guess you’re right. It’s best to let the billionaires, Wall Street bank execs and oil company CEOs to keep running the place. I’m sure it will work out for the best with enough prayer and thoughts that America is always making progress ;-)

    ignorance is bliss. i’m glad i’m not angry at politicians and the government all the time, all that energy is wasted.

Viewing 15 posts - 136 through 150 (of 225 total)

The forum ‘Miscellaneous Events’ is closed to new topics and replies.