quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2016/04/06/in-bps-final-20-billion-gulf-settlement-u-s-taxpayers-subsidize-15-3-billion/#2cdee46b68fc

I guess huntie is aware, at least peripherally, of reality.

Where is the column for externalities in the breakdown of corporate welfare? (e pluribus unum in terms of externalities borne by the citizenry) Heating bills pale in comparison, but even those are corporate welfare.

Interesting article. It doesn't surprise me. You'd think Obama would publicly rail against it. Since he's not, it would seem that he, like Hillary, is really only a product of corporate interest.

The rest of your post is beyond me. I haven't the faintest idea what you mean.

Oh, and again, I have no problem with corporations getting out of taxation. All corporate taxation is, is a pass through tax on to consumers. It's a little hidden tax to the middle class politicians, especially politicians like the Bern, can claim are tough on evil capitalists. When in fact it's just a burden on labor.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2016/04/06/in-bps-final-20-billion-gulf-settlement-u-s-taxpayers-subsidize-15-3-billion/#2cdee46b68fc

I guess huntie is aware, at least peripherally, of reality.

Where is the column for externalities in the breakdown of corporate welfare? (e pluribus unum in terms of externalities borne by the citizenry) Heating bills pale in comparison, but even those are corporate welfare.

Interesting article. It doesn't surprise me. You'd think Obama would publicly rail against it. Since he's not, it would seem that he, like Hillary, is really only a product of corporate interest.

The rest of your post is beyond me. I haven't the faintest idea what you mean.

Oh, and again, I have no problem with corporations getting out of taxation. All corporate taxation is, is a pass through tax on to consumers. It's a little hidden tax to the middle class politicians, especially politicians like the Bern, can claim are tough on evil capitalists. When in fact it's just a burden on labor.

I do, no doubt all costs are passed onto the consumers, why not all profits passed on to the producers?

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

ORIGINAL: Nnanji
All corporate taxation is, is a pass through tax on to consumers.

This is a clear admission by you of collusion amongst the corporations. Why is it that none would seek market share by maintaining the price and paying the tax?

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


ORIGINAL: Phydeaux


So when a company is hit with a $500 dollar fine for a restroom sign that is 1" too low, that is an expense.

Perhaps you might show us where this has happened.
Or is this just something you have pulled out of your ass to put on your dinner plate?[8|]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2016/04/06/in-bps-final-20-billion-gulf-settlement-u-s-taxpayers-subsidize-15-3-billion/#2cdee46b68fc

I guess huntie is aware, at least peripherally, of reality.

Where is the column for externalities in the breakdown of corporate welfare? (e pluribus unum in terms of externalities borne by the citizenry) Heating bills pale in comparison, but even those are corporate welfare.

Interesting article. It doesn't surprise me. You'd think Obama would publicly rail against it. Since he's not, it would seem that he, like Hillary, is really only a product of corporate interest.

The rest of your post is beyond me. I haven't the faintest idea what you mean.

Oh, and again, I have no problem with corporations getting out of taxation. All corporate taxation is, is a pass through tax on to consumers. It's a little hidden tax to the middle class politicians, especially politicians like the Bern, can claim are tough on evil capitalists. When in fact it's just a burden on labor.

I do, no doubt all costs are passed onto the consumers, why not all profits passed on to the producers?

The reason is that everywhere it's been tried it has devistated the economy. While the capatolist systems has raised more people out of poverty than any other thing, or combination of things.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


ORIGINAL: Nnanji
ORIGINAL: thompsonx

So when a company is hit with a $500 dollar fine for a restroom sign that is 1" too low, that is an expense.

Perhaps you might show us where this has happened.
Or is this just something you have pulled out of your ass to put on your dinner plate?[8|]


Umm, Thompson, it's big business in California. If you pay attention to the news you'll see it. My favorite Chinese restaurant stopped doing business rather than comply with the bullshit nazi lawyers who make a living going around and measuring things. The lawyers have a couple of people in wheel chairs in cahoots with them.

Still waiting for the cite to validate that turd you have floating in your cheerios.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

Nnanji, you might find the following article interesting.
http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_29749240/serial-ada-lawsuit-filer-striking-bay-area

As for the rest - back to the topic - which is of course climate fraud.

For the third time in four years, 4000 meteorologists do not agree with AGW - either in its original form, or its current form. While 67& of meteorologists agree that humans are responsible for a majority of global warming - that means 33 % do not. Which means, of course that the science is hardly settled now, is it.

Additionally, it says nothing about agreement with the IPCC models of CO2 forcing. And of course, it points out that temperatures were much warmer around 1000 - violating a basic tenet of the global warming hysteria that temperatures now are warmer than they've ever been.

So lets put another nail in the hypocrisy of the 97% shall we....which has never been anything but a lie. https://www.yahoo.com/