Quantcast

Obama Complains Oil Companies Made $80 Billion in 2011 -- Fails to Mention That Wouldn't Sustain Even 20 Days of His Deficit Spending!

Ken 2012/03/31 18:05:31
OMG! Obama's class warfare is exposed - there is no way "taxing the rich" and corporations can pay for his spending binge!
WTF?  Obama is driving this nation off the bankruptcy cliff, we're worse off than Greece!
In pursuing his personal idea of "fairness" Obama is oblivious to the results of his tax policies!
Undecided
All of the above
None of the above
You!
Add Photos & Videos

Obama
complains the the three largest U.S. Companies Made $80 billion in
2011 – What he fails to mention is that wouldn't even sustain 20
days of his deficit spending, even if he seized ALL of their profits!






  • March 29, 2012 at 11:57
    AM EDT


Five
Reasons to Repeal Subsidies for Oil Companies


In 2011 the three largest
U.S. oil companies made a combined profit of more than $80 billion.
After nearly 100 years of subsidies, President Obama thinks it’s
time oil companies get by without more help from taxpayers who are
already having a tough time filling up their tank




http://www.whitehouse.gov/energy



In (Obama's) first 1,000
days, we’ve seen:


  • The
    national debt increase by $4.2 trillion (that's $4.2 thousand-billion!)


  • 2.2
    million jobs lost


  • 3
    million more people living at or below the poverty line


  • The
    federal government spending $4.2 billion per day than it takes in


  • Unemployment at 9
    percent or higher for 840 out of 1000 days


  • http://www.myheritage.org/news/one-thousand-days-of-obama/




Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • Cognito22 2012/03/31 18:23:03 (edited)
    All of the above
    Cognito22
    +9
    2011 Federal Budget had the gov't spending $4.2 trillion dollars.
    There are 8765 hours in a year:
    $4.2 trillion / 8,765 hours = $479,178,551 = $479 million per hour

    times 24 hours per day = $11,500,285,224 = $11.5 billion per day

    $80 billion? That's less than a week of Obama deficit spending.

    http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How...

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • CUDDLY BUT STILL CRABBY 2012/05/02 19:09:54 (edited)
    All of the above
    CUDDLY BUT STILL CRABBY
    +1
    Two simple words explains it.

    Obama SUCKS.

  • Patric 2012/04/03 21:04:44
    OMG! Obama's class warfare is exposed - there is no way "taxing the rich" and...
    Patric
    +2
    tax oil company at the rate of 100%

    tax the 1 % at the rate of 100%

    tax , tax, tax, there is not enuff money to pay off obomma spending even at 100 % ,,

    hmm,, how about have the 47 % that pay ZERO tax pay a little , maybe 15 % , and stop all the spending ,, naw, that would not get any of them to vote for obomma ... forget it.
  • Ken Patric 2012/04/04 03:48:34
    Ken
    +2
    You have it totally right! I read recently that if they took 100% of the income from the "1%", it wouldn't make a dent in Obama's deficits. Now we see that the oil companies profits, $80 billion, wouldn't either, paying for only 20 days of his deficits. The only answer is to cut the size of the federal government and cut their spending.
  • Patric Ken 2012/04/04 16:44:37
    Patric
    +2
    cut gov't and cut the welfare spending ??

    you are so funny ,, what a novel idea ,, responsible spending ..
  • Charu ∞ijm♥∞ 2012/04/03 17:15:25
    All of the above
    Charu ∞ijm♥∞
  • dispatcher 2012/04/02 16:27:15
    OMG! Obama's class warfare is exposed - there is no way "taxing the rich" and...
    dispatcher
    +2
    He is the BIGGEST HYPOCRITE to ever represent AMERICA, the do as I say & not as I do POTUS..

    OMG = OBAMA MUST GO !!!!
  • Seonag 2012/04/02 15:06:09
    OMG! Obama's class warfare is exposed - there is no way "taxing the rich" and...
    Seonag
    +2
    Why is he not complaining that GE, DuPont and many other massive corporations pay no income tax at all because of the 'tax benefits' business have? Oh, right, their CEOs support him!
  • Bastion 2012/04/02 13:24:50
    None of the above
    Bastion
    +1
    Maybe you should sell everything you own, and make out a check to your favorite oil corporation - and they'll send some 3rd string vp to your house to pat you on the head while you grovel at his feet.
  • Ken Bastion 2012/04/03 01:15:53
    Ken
    That's really brilliant. NOT!
  • Bastion Ken 2012/04/03 11:14:33
    Bastion
    +1
    You'd prefer to do more than grovel?

    kowtow
  • Ken Bastion 2012/04/04 03:49:26
    Ken
    Nonsensical!
  • Bastion Ken 2012/04/04 10:35:56
    Bastion
    The greatest increase in wealth for the smallest percentage of people is American history is what's "nonsensical".

    Kowtowing to our elite corporate owners is what's "nonsensical".

    Queing up like sheeple to praise the aristocracy is what's "nonsensical".

    Willingly laying your own head down on the chopping block is what's "nonsensical".
  • Ken Bastion 2012/04/04 20:36:54 (edited)
    Ken
    All of what you claim would be "nonsensical" if it were true. Fortunately it is nothing but left-wing propaganda, spewed by Obama and spread by his minions like you.

    "Elite corporate owners" happen to be individual shareholders who are counting on their investments to fund their retirements.
  • Bastion Ken 2012/04/04 21:16:31
    Bastion
    Those aren't the people I'm talking about.

    the one percent
  • Ken Bastion 2012/04/05 01:36:04
    Ken
    +1
    Of course they aren't - you are trying to demonize 1% of the population that pays 38% of all income taxes!
  • Bastion Ken 2012/04/05 10:40:08
    Bastion
    And have 50% of all the money!!! They should pay 50% of the taxes.
  • Ken Bastion 2012/04/06 01:39:45
    Ken
    +1
    Another lie - the top 1% of AGI earners have 17% of the income and pay 38% of the income taxes.
  • Bastion Ken 2012/04/06 02:43:04
    Bastion
    Not income, wealth. Here's some numbers, yes, copied and pasted, but research yourself if you wish:


    #1) The Top 1% Owns 40% of the Nation's Wealth:
    Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz points out the richest 1% of Americans now own 40% of the nation's wealth. This disparity is much worse than it was in the past, as just 25 years ago the top 1% owned 33% of national wealth.
    How much does the bottom 80% own? Only 7%.
    #2) The Top 1% Take Home 24% of National Income:
    While the richest 1% of Americans take home almost a quarter of national income today, in 1976 they took home just 9% -- meaning their share of the national income pool has nearly tripled in roughly three decades.
    #3) The Top 1% Own Half of the Country's Stocks, Bonds and Mutual Funds: The Institute for Policy Studies illustrates this massive disparity in financial investment ownership, noting that the bottom 50% of Americans own only 0.5% of these investments.
    #4) The Top 1% of Americans Have Only 5% of the Nation's Personal Debt:
    Using 2007 figures, sociologist William Domhoff points out that the top 1% have 5% of the nation's personal debt while the bottom 90% have 73% of total debt.
    #5) The Top 1% Are Taking In More off the Nation's Income Than at Any Other Time Since the 1920s: Not only are the wealthiest 1% of Americans taking...
    Not income, wealth. Here's some numbers, yes, copied and pasted, but research yourself if you wish:


    #1) The Top 1% Owns 40% of the Nation's Wealth:
    Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz points out the richest 1% of Americans now own 40% of the nation's wealth. This disparity is much worse than it was in the past, as just 25 years ago the top 1% owned 33% of national wealth.
    How much does the bottom 80% own? Only 7%.
    #2) The Top 1% Take Home 24% of National Income:
    While the richest 1% of Americans take home almost a quarter of national income today, in 1976 they took home just 9% -- meaning their share of the national income pool has nearly tripled in roughly three decades.
    #3) The Top 1% Own Half of the Country's Stocks, Bonds and Mutual Funds: The Institute for Policy Studies illustrates this massive disparity in financial investment ownership, noting that the bottom 50% of Americans own only 0.5% of these investments.
    #4) The Top 1% of Americans Have Only 5% of the Nation's Personal Debt:
    Using 2007 figures, sociologist William Domhoff points out that the top 1% have 5% of the nation's personal debt while the bottom 90% have 73% of total debt.
    #5) The Top 1% Are Taking In More off the Nation's Income Than at Any Other Time Since the 1920s: Not only are the wealthiest 1% of Americans taking home a tremendous portion of the national income, but their share of this income is greater than at any other time since the Great Depression, as the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities illustrates in this chart, using 2007 data.
    (more)
  • Ken Bastion 2012/04/07 04:30:18 (edited)
    Ken
    +1
    Not much surprise there when the bottom 50% over the past 25 years have been encouraged to become more and more dependent on the government, rather than fending for themselves. The surprise to me is that it is only 40 % that they own.

    Tell me, what do you think would happen if Obama got his way and totally "Spread the wealth around?" How many years do you think it would be before the exact same distribution was in place? How many multi-million dollar lottery winners are broke within five years? So the top 1% have only 5% of the nation's personal debt, five times their percentage in income? Why should that surprise you?

    Bottom line, did the top 1% (incomes over $344,000) steal the money they are making? Did Bill Gates and Steve Jobs steal from anyone, or did they make tens of thousands of others wealthy too?

    What you and your ilk, such as Barry and Michelle, need to learn is that the wealthy didn't get that way by taking from the "poor" or the less wealthy - they create wealth, and in so doing they bring one hell of a lot of others along for the ride. So stop quoting meaningless statistics and learn how capitalistic free market system actually works -- it has created more goods and services, more wealth, for more people, than any other economic system in history -- there isn't even a close second.
  • Bastion Ken 2012/04/07 08:32:19
    Bastion
    Another apologist for the ruling class.

    Me and my "ilk". Right. Enjoy the coming class war.

    http://asset-server.libsyn.co...
  • Ken Bastion 2012/04/07 18:53:58
    Ken
    +1
    Yes, you and your "ilk" who have no understanding of the workings of the free-market, who villify the "rich" as though they steal money from the "poor" in order to become wealthy.

    And no, not an apologist for the "Ruling Class". Read Angelo Codevilla's book and you will see that the real "ruling class" is the entrenched left-wing bureaucracy that rules this nation from Washington.

     The Ruling Class
  • Bastion Ken 2012/04/07 22:29:46 (edited)
    Bastion
    Nonsense propaganda.

    The "free market" is bullsh*t. If this were a free market, Wall Street would have been shut down after draining $trillions out of the economy while not producing a goddam thing, but instead we gave them socialist welfare. Thanks, Bush.

    So you make a long answer and block me at the same time? What a cowardly thing to do.
  • Ken Bastion 2012/04/09 02:45:29
    Ken
    You can thank the Democrats in congress and the Clinton administration. Bush warned them, again and again, that a failure of the GSEs could cause a "systemic" problem in our economy, and he proposed legislation to fix it. The Democrats fought him tooth and nail on his attempt to regulate Fanny and Freddy, and 76 of them, including all of the usual suspect (Barney Frank, Maxine Waters, et al) wrote him a letter in 2004 complaining that he was trying to regulate F & F for "safety and soundness" at the expense of their mission to provide "subsidized housing."

    Further, the entire housing mess was started under the Clinton administration when it began forcing lenders to make loans (subprimes) to those who couldn't qualify under their normal "due diligence." It was those subprimes that created the derivative markets and all of the financial shenanigans that followed. The Glass Steagall bill was also repealed during the Clinton administration, allowing banks to make risky investments with their customers' money. All in all, it was not Bush's fault - so save your sarcastic "thanks" for the real culprits, Clinton, Barney, Waters, et al.
  • peggy 2012/04/02 07:00:31
    All of the above
    peggy
    +1
    Wow Intresting....thanks for posting
  • Red_Horse 2012/04/02 06:44:06
  • Ken Red_Horse 2012/04/03 01:16:28
    Ken
    +1
    Or ship to Brazil so we can become their "best customer."
  • Red_Horse Ken 2012/04/03 01:17:38
  • Stormy 2012/04/02 05:44:47
    None of the above
    Stormy
    +2
    This question makes no sense. Big Oil subsidies come from tax payer dollars. Obama wants to end them and save money. This contradicts your premise that Obama is spending too much tax money when he wants to cut Big Oil subsidies.
  • Red_Horse Stormy 2012/04/02 06:47:08
  • Stormy Red_Horse 2012/04/02 07:26:53
    Stormy
    +2
    Why would prices rise at the pump ? Big Oil is making vast profits.They are doing just fine without subsidies.
  • Red_Horse Stormy 2012/04/02 07:32:10 (edited)
  • Ken Stormy 2012/04/03 01:20:22
    Ken
    +1
    See my response to Stormy -- "Big Oil" subsidies aren't subsidies at all - they are tax write-offs, no different from what other businesses get on their assets.
  • Ken Red_Horse 2012/04/03 01:20:10
    Ken
    +1
    See my response to Stormy -- "Big Oil" subsidies aren't subsidies at all - they are tax write-offs, no different from what other businesses get on their assets.
  • Red_Horse Ken 2012/04/03 01:29:10
  • MadAsHEck Ken 2012/05/09 18:10:10
    MadAsHEck
    +1
    Why are people so dense??????
  • Hamilton Stormy 2012/04/02 07:10:54
    Hamilton
    +2
    They are not subsidies actually. Do you know what they actually are?
  • Red_Horse Hamilton 2012/04/02 07:14:41
  • Stormy Hamilton 2012/04/02 07:29:11
    Stormy
    What ?
  • Hamilton Stormy 2012/04/03 02:11:16
    Hamilton
    So neither of you actually KNOW??!??!!?!
  • Ken Stormy 2012/04/03 01:19:01
    Ken
    +1
    Uh, no, "Big Oil" subsidies aren't "subsidies" at all - they are a tax break called the "oil depletion allowance" which allows oil companies to treat their oil reserves, which they have spent billions on finding and developing, the same way any business treats its assets - depreciate them over the years as a tax write-off. A subsidy is Obama giving everyone who buys a Chevy Volt $7500 -- that is a direct subsidy paid for with taxpayers' dollars.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

Living

2014/11/24 18:01:43

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals