I guess my confusion was about your grave concern that the "Dems" wanted to raise taxes on oil companies and I thought maybe you worked for one, owned a bunch of stock etc...
I guess that's where we obviously differ. I don't favor tax cuts across the board. I actually draw some distinction between a family with 3 kids and a household income of 60k facing the growing costs of energy, healthcare, etc... vs. say an OIL COMPANY with the highest profits of any company in the history of mankind. I even see an obvious distinction between OIL vs. virtually any other industry. Oil is the commodity that drives our entire world economy so it's a bit different than pretty much any other industry.
Your mantra of "tax cuts across the board" is simple minded (IMO)
yes, that's the whole point. First there is a difference between an oil company and a "high income earner". I'm sure you aware of that.
Oil companies control a finite asset which as it becomes more scarce (combined with growing demand due to industrialization and population growth) will only get more expensive. We, as a society, should take some of their EXTREME profit and use it to develop alternatives (for example - we raise their taxes and use the increase in revenue to offer tax credits or various other methods to incentivize investments in the development of alternative energy). Guess what - Those very same oil companies can use these incentives (which were paid for by them) to help develop these absolutely necessary alternatives.
These problems are complicated and require a bit more nuance than just "lower taxes across the board for everyone"
1. I never expressed "grave concern" over Edwards and Hillary purportedly wanting to raise taxes on oil companies.
2. Yes my "mantra" of tax cuts across the board is simple, simple mindeded, etc. That's the way taxes should be: simple and low. I'm not sure how to implement the policy, but people like Steve Forbes have advocated a "flat tax." That's simple too. But it's about a mindset that too many in government don't have: how do we avoid taking more of the people's money.
3. I don't believe in class warfare (no you didn't say you advocated class warfare). When it comes to taxes, I don't make any distinction between the classes, income, etc.
Everyone is entitled to relief IMO. The proverbial "middle class family" is often used to justify class warfare/redistribution, but I don't buy it. The government shouldn't have the right to reach deeper into someone's pocket solely because the person or business has been successful.
4. I said the following is redistribution of wealth: "In other words, they will tax a big oil company and/or a high income earner and spend the revenue received from these companies/individuals elsewhere." You agreed: "yes, that's the whole point."
5. I don't like the idea of targeting specific companies as a means to give that money to someone else. (I'm repeating myself.
)
6. You raise good points about the oil industry. Still, I wouldn't use taxes to attack that industry. I think we have laws on the books to deal the antitrust, price fixing, etc. I'd be all for attacking them in that way for gouging consumers.
