Lawyer-Wearing-Yarmulka
Friday, February 02, 2007
Hillary "Chavez" Clinton
Be afraid, be very afraid.
posted by LWY, 2:55 PM
8 Comments:
whats to be afraid? who doesn't agree with that???
whats to be afraid?
I'm afraid when a presidential candidate announces that she wants to take someone's money.
who doesn't agree with that???
Anyone who isn't a socialist.
I'm afraid when a presidential candidate announces that she wants to take someone's money.
who doesn't agree with that???
Anyone who isn't a socialist.
Sounds like a soundbite that's a proposal for a carbon energy tax which is widely supported by many economists across the political spectrum. Are you seriously trying to say that you think Hillary want to nationalize the oil industry
For more information on supporters of large gas taxes, see: http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2006/09/rogoff-joins-pigou-club.html
Of course perhaps Greg Mankiw is just some wacky socialist who happened to be the director fo the Council of Economic Advisors under W.
For more information on supporters of large gas taxes, see: http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2006/09/rogoff-joins-pigou-club.html
Of course perhaps Greg Mankiw is just some wacky socialist who happened to be the director fo the Council of Economic Advisors under W.
Since it's a soundbite, I can't say for sure, but I think she's talking about a "windfall profits" tax, and not a carbon tax. And a "windfall" tax, from an economic standpoint, is pure stupidity.
From a political standpoint, it's pure thievery, hence the Hugo Chavez line.
From a political standpoint, it's pure thievery, hence the Hugo Chavez line.
I know almost nothing about windfall profits taxes, but here's what google turned up about the last windfall profits tax in the 1980's:
http://www.taxhistory.org/thp/readings.nsf/cf7c9c870b600b9585256df80075b9dd/edf8de04e58e4b14852570ba0048848b?OpenDocument
The WPT was collected on the first sale of taxable oil, typically when a producer sold a barrel to a refiner. The refiner was required to withhold applicable tax from the payment to the producer and deposit the money semimonthly into an account. The purchaser filed quarterly returns reflecting those collections.
I skimmed the whole article and, besides the populist sounding name this sounds pretty much like a standard gas tax. How is it thievery. Do you have any information that a modern windfall gas tax would try to take already earned money (i.e. what Chavez is doing)?
http://www.taxhistory.org/thp/readings.nsf/cf7c9c870b600b9585256df80075b9dd/edf8de04e58e4b14852570ba0048848b?OpenDocument
The WPT was collected on the first sale of taxable oil, typically when a producer sold a barrel to a refiner. The refiner was required to withhold applicable tax from the payment to the producer and deposit the money semimonthly into an account. The purchaser filed quarterly returns reflecting those collections.
I skimmed the whole article and, besides the populist sounding name this sounds pretty much like a standard gas tax. How is it thievery. Do you have any information that a modern windfall gas tax would try to take already earned money (i.e. what Chavez is doing)?
It's not a standard gas tax, not by a longshot.
Here's a recent proposed example.
http://dorgan.senate.gov/issues/economy/windfall/
Here's a recent proposed example.
http://dorgan.senate.gov/issues/economy/windfall/
That link is a 50% tax on all profits over $40/barrel. Whether you or I agree with it or not, that sounds like a fairly standard tax structure. It's also definitely not what Hillary was proposing since she was talking about investing the profits in other energy research while this proposal wanted it to subsidize lower gas costs - the exact opposite of a carbon tax.
What does Hillary have against the oil company? Does it bother her that someone out there has a REAL job??
