xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#13673 Nov 15, 2012
Save Yourself wrote:
I'm sure, since this country was based on religious freedoms, that you guys would have no problem with your tax dollars going towards teaching the Islamic or Hindu versions of a creation myth in the science classes of our public schools, right? Give yourself a rest. Thank God that you guys lost. Ha ha ha ha!
If a community is Hindu or Islamic, then of course I have no problem with them teaching those religions. After all, school is a locally funded thing. If an Islamic community funds it's public schools, then those who are paying for the school should be allowed to dictate the curriculum--not the federal government.
xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#13674 Nov 15, 2012
Save Yourself wrote:
Hey neat. BP, the oil company that "God's President" GW Bush deregulated just got fined 4 billion dollars for the oil spill caused by the rig that Haliburton bulit. Amen.
Four billion dollars, huh? No kidding?

Now where do you suppose they are going to get that kind of money?
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#13675 Nov 15, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
If a community is Hindu or Islamic, then of course I have no problem with them teaching those religions. After all, school is a locally funded thing. If an Islamic community funds it's public schools, then those who are paying for the school should be allowed to dictate the curriculum--not the federal government.
My, my, my.

Sounds like somebody needs a little refresher on Federal and State Constitutional Law.

woof

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#13676 Nov 15, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem is that even with the GS act, the crash would have happened anyway. Where were all those bad loans supposed to go?
I've said it repeatedly here on Topix: you can't sell bad securities unless you have those bad securities to begin with. Without any bad securities, there are no bad securities to sell thus no housing crash.
no it wouldnt of, wallstreet created alot of bad Securities & investments intentionally and thought they would reap the rewards with derivatives and make easy & quick money but the money wasnt there to pay out on those intentional bad investment simple fact is after Glass Steagall was implemented after 65 years until 1999 there was no problems and that behavior from wallstreet that created the mess in 2008 was illegall and was not allowed prior to 1999.

A derivative instrument is a contract between two parties that specifies conditions—in particular, dates and the resulting values of the underlying variables—under which payments, or payoffs, are to be made between the parties.
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#13677 Nov 15, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Four billion dollars, huh? No kidding?
Now where do you suppose they are going to get that kind of money?
I dunno, stashed behind a secretary's file cabinet maybe? Or maybe they can just cash a couple of federal subsidy checks.

woof
Che Reagan Christ

Lodi, OH

#13678 Nov 15, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
If a community is Hindu or Islamic, then of course I have no problem with them teaching those religions. After all, school is a locally funded thing. If an Islamic community funds it's public schools, then those who are paying for the school should be allowed to dictate the curriculum--not the federal government.
Because, of course, Jews, Christians, Hindus, Muslims and atheists don't all live together in the same communities. Aye carumba.
xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#13679 Nov 15, 2012
Anonymous of Indy wrote:
<quoted text>no it wouldnt of, wallstreet created alot of bad Securities & investments intentionally and thought they would reap the rewards with derivatives and make easy & quick money but the money wasnt there to pay out on those intentional bad investment simple fact is after Glass Steagall was implemented after 65 years until 1999 there was no problems and that behavior from wallstreet that created the mess in 2008 was illegall and was not allowed prior to 1999.
A derivative instrument is a contract between two parties that specifies conditions—in particular, dates and the resulting values of the underlying variables—under which payments, or payoffs, are to be made between the parties.
You're losing me Indy. How does Wall Street create bad investments? Wall Street ended up with these bad investments, not created them. What they did was bundle bad securities with good ones. Who stamped those securities AAA?

But let's say that Wall Street had these bad loans and nowhere to get rid of them. What happens to these bad loans now?
xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#13680 Nov 15, 2012
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>
I dunno, stashed behind a secretary's file cabinet maybe? Or maybe they can just cash a couple of federal subsidy checks.
woof
Oh yes, those mythical government checks oil companies get.
Save Yourself

Canton, OH

#13681 Nov 15, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Four billion dollars, huh? No kidding?
Now where do you suppose they are going to get that kind of money?
I know. They might have to go back to the days of George W Bush and charge $4 a gallon again. Kinda walked right into that one, huh Pig Pen?
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#13682 Nov 15, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh yes, those mythical government checks oil companies get.
There's nothing mythical about the lost federal tax and royalty revenues.

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/may/25/natio...

woof

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#13683 Nov 15, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
You're losing me Indy. How does Wall Street create bad investments? Wall Street ended up with these bad investments, not created them. What they did was bundle bad securities with good ones. Who stamped those securities AAA?
But let's say that Wall Street had these bad loans and nowhere to get rid of them. What happens to these bad loans now?
for one look to Bernie Madoff, a prime example of how to create bad investments but he wasnt betting on derivative market.

THE PURPOSES OF DERIVATIVE MARKETS

http://www.financialpost.org/the-purposes-of-...

A derivative instrument is a contract between two parties that specifies conditions—in particular, dates and the resulting values of the underlying variables—under which payments, or payoffs, are to be made between the parties.
xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#13684 Nov 15, 2012
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>
There's nothing mythical about the lost federal tax and royalty revenues.
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/may/25/natio...
woof
Oil and Gas Company Tax Breaks
Posted on February 28, 2008

Both candidates are referring to a feature of the U.S. tax code that allows domestic companies to defer taxes on “unrepatriated income.” In other words, revenue that companies earn through their overseas subsidiaries goes untaxed by the IRS as long as it stays off the company’s U.S. books.

But economists, including left-leaning ones, do not agree that eliminating this provision will bring an end to off-shoring. And here’s why: In the U.S., companies are taxed 35 percent on earnings of $10 million to $15 million or on all earnings over $18.3 million. That’s one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world, making an overseas move somewhat attractive to companies that wish to avoid the U.S. tax rate. But that’s not the leading reason companies send jobs overseas. According to a 2005 report by the Government Accountability Office, global technological advancement, increased openness of countries such as China and India, the higher education level of foreign workers in technological fields, and the reduced cost per foreign worker are all contributing factors to off-shoring.

We first addressed this popular theme in 2004, when we reported on a John Kerry campaign ad in which he blamed President George W. Bush for providing tax incentives to companies “outsourcing” jobs overseas. At the time we found that such tax breaks, which do exist, pre-dated the Bush administration and that even Democratic-leaning economists did not support the idea that changing the corporate tax code would end the movement of jobs overseas.

Oil Company Tax Breaks?

Both leading Democratic candidates have referred to tax breaks to oil companies:

Clinton, July 23, 2007: First of all, I have proposed a strategic energy fund that I would fund by taking away the tax break for the oil companies, which have gotten much greater under Bush and Cheney.

Obama, June 22, 2007: In the face of furious lobbying, Congress brushed aside incentives for the production of more renewable fuels in favor of more tax breaks for the oil and gas companies.

Both candidates are referring to H.R. 6, the 2005 energy bill that contained $14.3 billion in subsidies for energy companies. However, as we’ve reported numerous times, a vast majority of those subsidies (all but $2.8 billion) were for nuclear power, energy-efficient cars and buildings, and renewable fuels research. In addition, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, the tax changes in the 2005 energy bill produced a net tax increase for the oil and gas companies, as we’ve reported time and time and time again. They did get some breaks, but they had more taken away.

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/oil-and-gas-...
xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#13685 Nov 15, 2012
Save Yourself wrote:
<quoted text>
I know. They might have to go back to the days of George W Bush and charge $4 a gallon again. Kinda walked right into that one, huh Pig Pen?
Congrats. I didn't think you were that smart. Yes, you are correct, they will get that money from us--the consumers. In fact, that's where most large companies and wealthy people recoup their losses--us, the little people.

I know you're a big lib, but there's hope for you yet.
Pops

Cincinnati, OH

#13686 Nov 15, 2012
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you still beating your wife?
woof
Are you still beating your meat?
Pops

Cincinnati, OH

#13687 Nov 15, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Four billion dollars, huh? No kidding?
Now where do you suppose they are going to get that kind of money?
From the average Joe that buys their product of course.
So the people that purchase BP products will pay the 4 billion. And for those that think that personally boycotting BP means that they won't be paying...wrong. When Shell, Exxon or whoever have their retail sales go up, they will supplement their own then inadequate production by purchasing crude or refined from BP.
There is NO way that the end consumer will not be paying the 4 billion.
Good question XXX.
xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#13688 Nov 15, 2012
Pops wrote:
<quoted text>From the average Joe that buys their product of course.
So the people that purchase BP products will pay the 4 billion. And for those that think that personally boycotting BP means that they won't be paying...wrong. When Shell, Exxon or whoever have their retail sales go up, they will supplement their own then inadequate production by purchasing crude or refined from BP.
There is NO way that the end consumer will not be paying the 4 billion.
Good question XXX.
It's more than that. I would assume that BP has insurance to cover some of their liability. Now gee, who else carries insurance? Just oil companies?

It's true. We all pay. In fact, several years ago, my home insurance dropped me because of a major fire caused by one of my tenants. When I finally got another insurance to cover me, they stated that my last company drastically underinsured me for major repairs. They had to charge much more.

So I asked my new agent what do they base total loss on? Surprise! Union labor to rebuild my home in the event of tragedy. So now I have to pay higher premiums on my properties based on union scale whether I use them or not.

These are all intrinsic costs that most of us don't see. Just like with BP, they increase their prices; maybe not on gasoline, but a few cents more on coffee, doughnuts, cigarettes or pop. But one way or another, these indirect costs pay for losses, and those costs are passed on to all of us. Yet, liberals celebrate when the "big guy" gets his. LOL!
Che Reagan Christ

Lodi, OH

#13689 Nov 15, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
It's more than that. I would assume that BP has insurance to cover some of their liability. Now gee, who else carries insurance? Just oil companies?
It's true. We all pay. In fact, several years ago, my home insurance dropped me because of a major fire caused by one of my tenants. When I finally got another insurance to cover me, they stated that my last company drastically underinsured me for major repairs. They had to charge much more.
So I asked my new agent what do they base total loss on? Surprise! Union labor to rebuild my home in the event of tragedy. So now I have to pay higher premiums on my properties based on union scale whether I use them or not.
These are all intrinsic costs that most of us don't see. Just like with BP, they increase their prices; maybe not on gasoline, but a few cents more on coffee, doughnuts, cigarettes or pop. But one way or another, these indirect costs pay for losses, and those costs are passed on to all of us. Yet, liberals celebrate when the "big guy" gets his. LOL!
Yeah. We should encourage these guys to blow up people and destroy the oceans.
Che Reagan Christ

Lodi, OH

#13690 Nov 15, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Congrats. I didn't think you were that smart. Yes, you are correct, they will get that money from us--the consumers. In fact, that's where most large companies and wealthy people recoup their losses--us, the little people.
I know you're a big lib, but there's hope for you yet.
What are you worried about? The free market will sort it out.
Spookstillhere f trolls

Detroit, MI

#13691 Nov 15, 2012
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah. We should encourage these guys to blow up people and destroy the oceans.
Chinese are drilling and they don't give a Rats a*s if tar balls wash up on our shore or if a few people get killed.
Che Reagan Christ

Lodi, OH

#13692 Nov 15, 2012
Spookstillhere f trolls wrote:
<quoted text>
Chinese are drilling and they don't give a Rats a*s if tar balls wash up on our shore or if a few people get killed.
Of course. Let's set what the Chinese would do as our basis for conduct. What other behaviors of the Chinese government do you advocate we adopt?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Westerville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
What ails the black family? Hard realities! 4 hr BacGameon 29
America needs Jesus Christ and the Word of God 5 hr Pope Che Reagan C... 7
Ohio charter schools identified as among worst ... 5 hr Big Johnson 5
INJUSTICE….for sure! 5 hr now hey 29
School Funding Facts 5 hr Big Johnson 2
Every state has ISIS recruits 7 hr They cannot kill ... 124
New Evidence Reveals Central Ohio Rapist Tied T... Feb 25 They cannot kill ... 3
Westerville Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Westerville People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 3:48 pm PST

Yahoo! Sports 3:48PM
Josh McCown decides to sign with the Cleveland Browns
Yahoo! Sports 4:05 PM
Browns agree to terms with QB McCown
CBS Sports 4:56 PM
QB Josh McCown agrees to terms with the Browns: Three things to know
Bleacher Report 5:19 PM
McCown Signing Doesn't Improve Brutal QB Situation
NFL 8:50 AM
Josh McCown: I want to help Manziel as much as I can