I guess the dems know better than us stupid people!

Discussion in 'Politics' started by rlm's cents, Nov 18, 2014.

  1. rlm's cents
    Hot

    rlm's cents Well-Known Member

    Breaking News: By a 59-41 vote, the Senate rejects legislation to green-light the controversial Keystone XL pipeline. fxn.ws/1zzsH7t
     
  2. PTD
    Fiendish

    PTD Administrator Moderator

    I am opposed to the pipeline because it's a subsidy to private business. I am opposed to Corporate Welfare in general. The oil companies have enough money without getting taxpayer handouts.
     
  3. rlm's cents
    Hot

    rlm's cents Well-Known Member

    What am I missing? The bill was nothing more than an authorization to construct;
    What does that have to do with "Corporate Welfare". BTW, just how much do you think the oil companies are making per gallon? And just where do you thing that puts them on the profitability scale?
     
  4. PTD
    Fiendish

    PTD Administrator Moderator

    I'm anti-Welfare period, whether it goes to individual people who are too lazy to work, or to Exxon-Mobil. Nothing you can say will ever change me into a pro-Welfare advocate.
     
  5. CoinOKC
    Fiendish

    CoinOKC T R U M P

    Even if you need welfare some day?
     
  6. PTD
    Fiendish

    PTD Administrator Moderator

    I plan on working till the day I drop.
     
  7. PTD
    Fiendish

    PTD Administrator Moderator

    You sayin you're pro-welfare?
     
  8. CoinOKC
    Fiendish

    CoinOKC T R U M P

    Only for those who need it.
     
  9. PTD
    Fiendish

    PTD Administrator Moderator

    Nobody "needs" it. Paul LePage's Welfare Reform plan is a good start at reducing the problem, but it needs to start at every level from the lazy individual who won't work because welfare is too easy all the way up to Exxon-Mobil who obviously doesn't need any taxpayer money at all.
     
  10. rlm's cents
    Hot

    rlm's cents Well-Known Member

    Again I repeat, what does the Keystone bill have to do with corporate welfare?
     
  11. c jay
    Amused

    c jay Well-Known Member

    What about the unemployable. People without the mental or social ability to push a cart from point A to point B. Where do they fit in your plan? People you wouldn't hire? Work houses, prisons, wouldn't that also be considered a form of welfare?
     
  12. CoinOKC
    Fiendish

    CoinOKC T R U M P

    All great questions. Yes, welfare IS needed. The abuse is what needs to be taken out of the equation.
     
  13. c jay
    Amused

    c jay Well-Known Member

    Absolutely, I don't think it's as black and white as Peter is making it out. In Paul LaPage's plan, he provides 5 years of assistance but also has enforcement to make sure people are playing by the rules. The difficult part of enforcement is that there is no such thing as a perfect law or procedure. Truly gifted scumbags know the law better than most of those enforcing it, and are quiet accomplished technocrats when it comes to abusing the system. Finding the right balance of enforcement is exceedingly difficult especially in a bureaucracy which is steeped in procedure in order to dodge accountability.
    Some forms of corporate welfare does have it's place. Tax breaks offered to large employers are common when cities compete for industries. The tax breaks are offset by the spinoffs resulting from the new business. One dollar in tax breaks can generate 3 to 4 dollars of additional revenue from supporting business.
     
    CoinOKC likes this.
  14. rlm's cents
    Hot

    rlm's cents Well-Known Member

    But apparently oil companies are the exception even though they have one of the lowest profit margins out there while Google has a profit margin nearly 10 times any oil company remains everyone's darling.
     

Share This Page