F
Fitswimmer
Guest
I simply followed your statement that people were in league with the Devil to the logical conclusion…
Q-where does the Devil live?
A-hell
Q if someone is in league with said Devil, where would they end up?
A-hell
- Status
Q-where does the Devil live?
A-hell
Q if someone is in league with said Devil, where would they end up?
A-hell
L
LCMS_No_More
Guest
Wait…are you sure you know what you’re talking about? Remember, there’s a saying about the love of money being the root of all evil. Liberals are not motivated by the love of money, economic conservatives are.
Most economic conservatives don’t know who they in league with.
S
SoCalRC
Guest
It is not hypocrisy if it is two different subjects.
For example, the vast majority of economists and environmentalists oppose ‘gas tax holiday’ ideas. This is because refinery capacity essentially fixed and maximized in summer. So, basic economics would seem to suggest that the bulk of the tax savings would go to oil companies, not consumers, and any nominal savings that gets to consumers would just encourage additional consumption.
The situation with oil companies is that they are pulling in record profits at the same they are receiving $18-20B in tax breaks. If someone is on ‘corporate welfare’ at a massive scale, then they should be prepared to explain that they are, in fact, acting in the public’s interest as well as their own. Since the Enron bankruptcy came to light, there are also legitimate questions about price fixing and exploitation in many segements of the energy market, including oil.
The price of oil is going up, and the long term trend is clear. We have legitimate global competition for oil and little to suggest supply will outpace demand without significant technological change. The mantra about ANWR, for example, can confuse people about its actual significance. ANWR would take a decade to develop and its estimated capacity would be less than the difference between what Saudia Arabia currently produces and its maximum demonstrated capacity. Planning for this seeming reality is important. For example, we could look at the cost/return of spending $1T on a war/occupation in the middle east (and counting) vs. spending $1T on alternate energy research - both in terms of energy effectiveness and in terms of national security.
But being gouged on something as critical as energy during a time of war and of economic slowdown is also important. Remember, about 20-25% of the cost of gasoline right now has nothing to do with supply and demand and everything to do with investment speculation in the commodities market. This is actually the opposite of why we have commodities markets in the first place (to stabalize pricing with items of fluctuating supply) and a legitimate point of discussion in terms of appropriate government regulation. Similiarly, it is legitimate to question rather an industry needs massive government subsidy in a era of record profits, particularly when long term energy and security needs would both seem to suggest that investing in alternatives to the industry may be more to the common good.
H
He_Man
Guest
People who work out of greed are tools of Satan too, obviously.Wait…are you sure you know what you’re talking about? Remember, there’s a saying about the love of money being the root of all evil. Liberals are not motivated by the love of money, economic conservatives are.
Most economic conservatives don’t know who they in league with.
G
gam197
Guest
I’ve never known a liberal who is not motivated by the love of money, -better job and higher pay.
R
ribozyme
Guest
Maybe they want a better paying job so they can pay more taxes to help the poor.
Define “better job”… I do not think pay alone defines what is a “better job.” I suppose most liberals do not want to work doing menial tasks.
R
rlg94086
Guest
Yep. The love of money is in both political perspectives. It is part of the fallacious construct LCMS_No_More has created, so he can justify his disdain of Republicans.
As Catholics, whether Democrat, Republican, Libertarian…whatever…, we need to be faithful Catholics. That means that regardless of our choice of parties, we need to be mindful of our own personal greed. We are not required to reject free enterprise or profit, only the unbalanced desire for profit which sacrifices human dignity to attain it. Where we differ is in the role of government in bringing that balance as a coercive force versus the role of business owners in bringing that balance.
vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html%between%
The bolded section of the Church’s teaching I think applies in the case of these rising oil/gas prices. The free market itself is an effective instrument to bring about new alternative fuels. Some think we should have done it earlier. Attempts were made…the market didn’t demand it, so they failed. My guess is they will succeed this time.
R
rlg94086
Guest
Come on Ribozyme, two can play at that game.
Maybe conservatives want better paying jobs so they can give more to charity to help the poor.
Most people don’t want to work doing menial tasks.
BTW…since you like reading, you should read the whole document I linked, if you haven’t already. I don’t think you and I would agree on the political solutions that can come from Church teaching, but I think you will find what the Church says to be rather satisfying to your general outlook on life.
R
ribozyme
Guest
R
rlg94086
Guest
Gomennasai…I should have been more specific and/or just relinked it in that post.
Enjoy.
W
wapsi
Guest
Now there is an all-American, bipartisan attitude!Because they want their cake and eat it too?
QFT
B
brockmac
Guest
To say that Liberals are not motivated by money is a fallacy. Liberals (especially liberal politicians) are most certainly motivated by money. They want to take money from people who earn it and give it to people who earn less. I would assume that all of us on this forum agree that those who are blessed with wealth have a moral responsibility to help those who are unable to help themselves. But there is a big difference between a rich person CHOOSING to give his money to a homeless shelter that he believes tries to move people away from dependency and the government FORCING him to give up his money to throw at programs that do not hold the recepients responsible for their own choices. For liberal politicians, money = power, and they love power, so they love money. The same can be said for all the non-politician liberals who want the government to provide them with “free” this and “free” that. The “free” things arn’t free at all. They are paid for by the wealthy who pay taxes. The reason that liberal politicians are unhappy with the high gas prices is that all that money is going to the oil companies and the governments of the oil producing nations, not to the US government. Even so, the government’s share per gallon on gasoline taxes is bigger than the profit margin for the oil companies. The big winners, of course are the oil producing nations.Wait…are you sure you know what you’re talking about? Remember, there’s a saying about the love of money being the root of all evil. Liberals are not motivated by the love of money, economic conservatives are.
Most economic conservatives don’t know who they in league with.
I am an economic conservative who has no investments in oil other than what is in my 401K, which may or may not be invested in energy. I don’t follow the individual stock purchases, just the performance. For years there has been talk of raising the fuel economy requirements for cars. Guess what, if gas prices stay at $3 to $4 a gallon, Congress won’t have to legislate this. The consumers will. Few people who don’t need them are buying big SUV’s or trucks. The market works. New research is being spurred into better battery technology, hydrogen fuel cells, better hybrid engines, wind power, geothermal and solar power. These are all good things coming from the high price of oil. So while I hate spending $70 to fill up my minivan (that I need to transport my family of 7), if the high prices cause us to develop better technology so we give less money to oil producing (and in some cases terrorist sponsoring) states, I will live with it.
B
brockmac
Guest
To say that Liberals are not motivated by money is a fallacy. Liberals (especially liberal politicians) are most certainly motivated by money. They want to take money from people who earn it and give it to people who earn less. I would assume that all of us on this forum agree that those who are blessed with wealth have a moral responsibility to help those who are unable to help themselves. But there is a big difference between a rich person CHOOSING to give his money to a homeless shelter that he believes tries to move people away from dependency and the government FORCING him to give up his money to throw at programs that do not hold the recepients responsible for their own choices. For liberal politicians, money = power, and they love power, so they love money. The same can be said for all the non-politician liberals who want the government to provide them with “free” this and “free” that. The “free” things arn’t free at all. They are paid for by the wealthy who pay taxes. The reason that liberal politicians are unhappy with the high gas prices is that all that money is going to the oil companies and the governments of the oil producing nations, not to the US government. Even so, the government’s share per gallon on gasoline taxes is bigger than the profit margin for the oil companies. The big winners, of course are the oil producing nations.Wait…are you sure you know what you’re talking about? Remember, there’s a saying about the love of money being the root of all evil. Liberals are not motivated by the love of money, economic conservatives are.
Most economic conservatives don’t know who they in league with.
I am an economic conservative who has no investments in oil other than what is in my 401K, which may or may not be invested in energy. I don’t follow the individual stock purchases, just the performance. For years there has been talk of raising the fuel economy requirements for cars. Guess what, if gas prices stay at $3 to $4 a gallon, Congress won’t have to legislate this. The consumers will. Few people who don’t need them are buying big SUV’s or trucks. The market works. New research is being spurred into better battery technology, hydrogen fuel cells, better hybrid engines, wind power, geothermal and solar power. These are all good things coming from the high price of oil. So while I hate spending $70 to fill up my minivan (that I need to transport my family of 7), if the high prices cause us to develop better technology so we give less money to oil producing (and in some cases terrorist sponsoring) states, I will live with it.
F
Fitswimmer
Guest
ALL politicians love power-otherwise they would not be politicians.
If anyone believes that only the “poor” get “free this and free that” they’re very mistaken. Anyone ever heard of “corporate welfare”? The HUGE tax breaks given to corporations like oil companies and big pharm? Those gifts are paid for by ALL Americans who pay taxes.
E
estesbob
Guest
Welfare is directly giving money to someone. Tax deductions allow an indvidual or company to keep more of THEIR money. This is not welfare in any way shape or form.
B
brockmac
Guest
Well said. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s goods. In other words, we are all called to be grateful to God for what he has given us, rather than looking over the fence and wishing we had what our neighbor has. I think this suggests that we should not ask the government to take our neighbor’s money to give it to us.
The current mood seems to be that the evil greedy oil companies are making too much money, so the government should take it from them to give it to everyone else. If you want a share of the oil company profits, buy stock. This seems to be a much more in keeping with American traditions of private property rights.
Additionally,
B
brockmac
Guest
Well said. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s goods. In other words, we are all called to be grateful to God for what he has given us, rather than looking over the fence and wishing we had what our neighbor has. I think this suggests that we should not ask the government to take our neighbor’s money to give it to us.
The current mood seems to be that the evil greedy oil companies are making too much money, so the government should take it from them to give it to everyone else. If you want a share of the oil company profits, buy stock. This seems to be a much more in keeping with American traditions of private property rights.
Additionally, if we raise taxes on oil companies, just who do you think will pay those taxes? My guess is that it will be the consumer, at the pump.
F
Fitswimmer
Guest
Corporations are receiving tax breaks that were designed to encourage them to keep their businesses here, to keep prices down, to explore alternatives to high priced goods…how well has that worked out? These corporations passed those lovely tax savings on to their shareholders and not much else.
Tax breaks are a gift from the government and if that isn’t welfare I don’t know what it is.
S
SoCalRC
Guest
Tax credits and deductions are specialized treatment for individuals or entities. They are done supposedly for the common welfare. This is how much of the social welfare system works as well.
Among the economically challenged, tax credits are always seen as the “answer”, but that leaves a significant portion of the population out of the loop. If you are too far down the socio economic ladder, you cannot get ‘in on the action’.
But what I find most interesting about your argument is how far removed it is from reality. A great deal of corporate welfare is quite direct, exemptions from laws, the use of eminent domain to procure property, even letting giant box stores keep the sales tax they collect as incentive…
Sometimes this is done for the perceived public good, for example Mobile bends over to an unbelievable degree to bring job producing plants to their city. Other times, there is no obvious reason - example, in CA most people pay state sales tax on virtually everything, but I can use an intentional loophole to get around it when I buy an airplane or a yacht.
A
Al_Masetti
Guest
- Status