Posted on 01/23/2010 10:19:54 AM PST by rabscuttle385
Strangely, the Obama administration has been a wake-up call to many who previously were not interested in the debate.
This is the part I don't get: From what I understand of Sarah Palin's values and philosophical commitments (i.e., traditional, constitutional, specifically American), I would have thought she'd have preferred campaigning for J. D. Hayworth.
It seems clear to me Sarah "agrees" more with Hayworth philosophically and even temperamentally than she does with McCain.
Is this a stupid question: "Why is she then campaigning for McCain?"
My response on FR on the thread you threaten to resurrect was the same as it is now: to ask lurkers and FReepers to do their own due diligence and not take YOUR or MY word for it. It is a complicated and convoluted issue which you deceitfully attempt to simplify by falsely labeling it with scary communist-sounding buzzword terminology "windfall profits tax." I would have cut-and-pasted from blog posts I LINKED FOR ALL TO EASILY ACCESS on the thread, which addressed and refuted your arguments years before you posted them here on FR, but to cut-and-paste verbatim would be in violation of ethics and would probably get JimRob in trouble. I'm not going to spend the hours it would take to absorb, analyze, and summarize their informed posts to oblige you; instead, I urged then and urge now any FReepers and lurkers who wonder whether you are telling the truth or not to go investigate for themselves.
Is what you're really saying that instead of basing the State's leasing charge to oil companies (I think that's what you're calling a "windfall profits tax") on the unit of oil produced, the leasing charge is based on the going price of the unit of oil produced?
And IF that is so, if the going price of oil was at a low and the unit charge was fixed at a price that made its production too costly, wouldn't the oil companies be a whole lot less incentivized to increase production? And if the unit charge was fixed at a price extremely low compared to the going price of oil, while the companies would have incentive to produce more oil, would that be an extraordinarly stupid business move on the part of the owners of the land being leased? Wouldn't that be a pretty dumb exective decision for someone watching out for the state's self interests?
In other states, lease income derived from activities on state-owned land goes right back into government bureacracy. If I correctly understood the material I spent hours reading after googling the issue online (which, again, I urge FReepers and lurkers to do as well, because this serious charge against Palin is worth investigating) the leasing negotiation change that Palin made ended up putting more than $1000 MORE on top of the $1200 already being paid in dividends to individual citizens in Alaska that year (I think it was 2007) to spend, invest, or save as they please. HOW exactly was that a negative impact to business?
From the OLR Group... ALASKA OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION TAX
Alaska's oil and gas production tax (Alas. Stat. Sec. 44. 55. 011) applies a percentage tax rate on the net value of oil and natural gas produced in the state. In the case of oil, the net value is the market value of the oil that is shipped to the West Coast, after deducting the producer's production costs (currently about $ 25 a barrel). The law provides for transferable credits against the tax for various expenditures, including oil and gas exploration investments and contributions to higher education institutions in the state. This tax is in addition to royalties paid to the state from production on state land and income and property taxes.
There is a minimum tax based on the gross value of oil produced from the state's North Slope. The minimum is 4% of the gross value so long as the average price of oil on the West Coast is at least $ 25 per barrel (the percentage decreases if the price falls below this level).
There are separate tax rates for (1) oil and gas produced from the fields around the Cook Inlet in southern Alaska and (2) oil and gas produced from property that constitutes a landowner's royalty interest.
In 2007, HB 2001 increased the base tax rate from 22. 5% to 25. 0% of the net value of the oil or gas. The legislation modifies a feature of the tax under which the tax rate increases once the market price reaches a specified level. Under the act, if the net value of oil or gas is less than $ 92. 50 per barrel of oil equivalent, it is subject to a tax of 25% of the net value plus 0. 4% times the difference between the net value and $ 30. Thus, if the net value was $ 80 per barrel equivalent, the tax would be $ 20. 20 (25% times $ 80, plus 0. 4% times $ 50). The rate of the added tax falls to 0. 1% times the difference between the net value and $ 30 if the net value exceeds $ 92. 50.
The act has many other provisions. These include (1) increasing credit for exploration expenditures, (2) making certain expenditures, such as those associated with cleaning up spills, ineligible for the credits; (3) establishing a state fund for purchasing the credits.
Now let me repeat the key aspect of point... and please.....repeat please tell me how this is not a windfall profits tax?
In 2007, HB 2001 increased the base tax rate from 22. 5% to 25. 0% of the net value of the oil or gas. The legislation modifies a feature of the tax under which the tax rate increases once the market price reaches a specified level. Under the act, if the net value of oil or gas is less than $ 92. 50 per barrel of oil equivalent, it is subject to a tax of 25% of the net value plus 0. 4% times the difference between the net value and $ 30. Thus, if the net value was $ 80 per barrel equivalent, the tax would be $ 20. 20 (25% times $ 80, plus 0. 4% times $ 50). The rate of the added tax falls to 0. 1% times the difference between the net value and $ 30 if the net value exceeds $ 92. 50.
Nice spin trying to rationalize the amount of extra money for lease holders and not state the increase tax revenues that the Alaska realized. Sounds like a democratic party talking point. Tell the whole story.... how much did this tax increase add to the Alaskan government coffers?
Secondly, which is really jaw dropping you state "How is this a negative impact to business". Any time (extra) money changes hands from business to a government is a negative impact.
McCain's character is a perfect fit for what I call the independent mindset. This mindset is a culture of its own. It is the get along Charley who goes with the flow. They are fence sitters and reachers across the aisle. Their independent characteristic is a reflection their doing what works best for them.
Sarah Palin is everything that the independent is not. She is what the independent wishes they could be but are afraid to do it. They have no faith and strength in their convictions. I think this is the attraction that McCain has for her. He wants to be able to do what she does and endure the stress that comes with it. He could learn from her and this is how: She could teach him about her own relationship with Jesus Christ that brings her the strength he needs to endure all that brings him pain. Instead of a “bipartisan spirit” he will have the power of the Holy Spirit at work in his heart. If she succeeds, don't you think it would be even better than a magic wand?
This is a very good point. This is the dynamics that has the DemonRATs in great fear. The Tea Party has successfully appealed to the uncommitted independent who, because of the failure they see with the Obama regime, are very fearful and frustrated. Through the Tea Party Movement, independents are being transformed by the conservative message. Independents are finding out it is alright to stand up for their convictions and give up their get along Charley philosophy. They are finding out that if they do nothing, the government will take it from them.
Rush spoke about this transformation last week. The Tea Party is causing independents to vote Republican. It has brought new life into the Republican Party. And the Republican Party everyone thought was road kill has now been brought back to life. How? The conservative message seemed before to be just empty words that spoke about political theories that did not relate to reality. However, with the events brought forth by the Obama regime, the conservative message has taken on a reality that people can relate to. The Obama regime is the embodiment of everything the conservative message opposes. The Tea Party Movement has provided that incubator in which the conservative message can grow in new believers.
Sheeesh, what a comment that is totally devoid of any common sense logic.
Yes, we get it - Juan's name was at the top. But most Americans voted for the TICKET because of 1 person, Sarah Palin, in spite of Juan's name anywhere on the ticket.
Your attempt at semantics falls laughably short and sounds quite clintonian (his "IS means" comment).
Nice tag line Al!
The fact of the matter is that you couldn’t have voted for Sarah Palin w/o voting for Juan McCain! It doesn’t matter what your “feelings” were...you voted FOR McCAIN!
Deal w/ it.
Sorry :)
Now go back to your losing 3rd party nonsense....
"A windfall profits tax is defined as a higher tax rate on profits that ensue from a sudden windfall gain to a particular company or industry."
Since the amount collected by the state of Alaska is tied to the price of oil, hence profit (i.e price of oil tends to increase the profit margin)(see earlier note)Explain to me, how this is not a windfall profit tax.
No one will doubt that Sarah is generally pro business, but for someone like me who works in the oil industry, how do I know she won't pull the same stunt as president.
Again a little hint for those who may question my motive for not wanting to support this woman.
Yes I got it all backwards,someone suggested I consider a lobotomy, perhaps I think about it :)
Sarah Palin is NOT a RINO.
She energized folks and still does.
Had it been a Palin-McRINO ticket instead
of the McRINO-Palin ticket, we might not
have The Obamassiah Wrecking Ball in DeeCee
right now. Who knows? :)
Conservatives may be fooled if Brown votes more like Snowe than DeMint, but he is obviously no reliable conservative. Hardly anyone is.
Otay.
Now back to FB and Mafia Wars for me. :)
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?ref=profile&id=1794667501
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.