Bug Posted October 30, 2008 Posted October 30, 2008 I saw the speech. It was a politicians wet dream to have this much money to spend this late in the election. I heard on the news that the air time alone cost $3mil. Probably another $300k to produce it under time contraints. But at least it is paid for by people who volunteered their money to to this specific cause. Bush has been using all our taxes to build bigger government and prop up oil company profits. Exxon reported record profits yesterday. $43 billion in profits this year. That is up 58% from last year which was another record profit year. McCain would cut taxes on the stockholders or anyone who makes over $2mil a year. Hope that puts it in perspective for you Bill. Good luck with that vote for McCain. Swallow hard cause that is exactly what it was. Quote
billcoe Posted October 30, 2008 Author Posted October 30, 2008 Back on topic- this really was a great speech. I think the end really showed Obama has a lot humility. The whole thing was great. I was not drawn in until @ 1/2 way through, but the sucking sound could probably be heard next door. I felt like ripping out all the McCain Lawn signs in the neighborhood when it was over. I was going to include an autograph of Robert Kennedys wife Ethyl. She signed it for me in sympathy after the secret service knocked me flat, but it's in PDF. Quote
Skeezix Posted October 30, 2008 Posted October 30, 2008 I watched the infomercial on YouTube. It was well done. Pretty much everything Obama has done has been done well. That's because he is a quality individual, which is what the voters are responding to. And that's why the repugnicans' attempts to tear him down aren't working. McPalin can try to impugn him as a socialist, or accuse him of consorting with terrorists. Our own Fairweather can mockingly refer to him as the Messiah. None of these pathetic bleatings will be effective in the end. Quote
rob Posted October 30, 2008 Posted October 30, 2008 fairweather's just pissed that his party couldn't come up with anyone better than McCain/Palin, so he has to resort to making fun of Obama's popularity. Of course he thinks it's bizarre for people to admire a leader, because that's an experience the republicans haven't had in a long, long time. They've tried everything to bring Obama down, and failed. So what's left? Making fun of his popularity. He doesn't feel included. It's normal for people who feel left out to criticise things like that. It makes them feel better about being an outsider. Quote
prole Posted October 30, 2008 Posted October 30, 2008 Of course he thinks it's bizarre for people to admire a leader, because that's an experience the republicans haven't had in a long, long time. Yeah, Republican's wouldn't know anything about cult-worship... Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted October 30, 2008 Posted October 30, 2008 Bill's voting for Obama? Shit, now I gotta stop fucking with 'im. Welcome to the movement. Quote
marylou Posted October 30, 2008 Posted October 30, 2008 Wow, just watched the video. Fuckin' amazing. Quote
glassgowkiss Posted October 30, 2008 Posted October 30, 2008 america prefers moron-killers If you consider Osama bin Laden a moron, then yes. don't spin it fader. this administration did nothing to catch him. Quote
STP Posted October 31, 2008 Posted October 31, 2008 Obama will have a mandate. That together with the powers gained by the Executive Branch during the Bush Administration could mean we're in for some real change. Quote
prole Posted October 31, 2008 Posted October 31, 2008 america prefers moron-killers If you consider Osama bin Laden a moron, then yes. don't spin it fader. this administration did nothing to catch him. A couple more days to go yet... Quote
Fairweather Posted October 31, 2008 Posted October 31, 2008 I saw the speech. It was a politicians wet dream to have this much money to spend this late in the election. I heard on the news that the air time alone cost $3mil. Probably another $300k to produce it under time contraints. But at least it is paid for by people who volunteered their money to to this specific cause. Bush has been using all our taxes to build bigger government and prop up oil company profits. Exxon reported record profits yesterday. $43 billion in profits this year. That is up 58% from last year which was another record profit year. McCain would cut taxes on the stockholders or anyone who makes over $2mil a year. Hope that puts it in perspective for you Bill. Good luck with that vote for McCain. Swallow hard cause that is exactly what it was. Wow, that's a whole lotta taxes! And all that profit for those evil shareholders? Take a look at your 401k--it's probably one of the only bright spots. Don't know what 2008 looks like for the taxes v profits picture, but feel free to research. Obama wants to impose a 'windfall profits' tax? All he'll be doing is stealing from investors like you and me and forcing still more companies to move offshore. Quote
murraysovereign Posted October 31, 2008 Posted October 31, 2008 FW, do you know if the profit shown is before, or after taxes? Quote
Fairweather Posted October 31, 2008 Posted October 31, 2008 FW, do you know if the profit shown is before, or after taxes? "[update: The $40.6 billion and $39.5 billion figures are after-tax profits. For 2006, Exxon's EBT (earnings before tax) was $67.4 billion, it paid $27.9 billion in taxes (41.4% tax rate), and its NIAT (net income after tax), or profit, was $39.5 billion.]" Quote
AlpineK Posted October 31, 2008 Posted October 31, 2008 It's good to know Exxon has 80 billion dollars on hand. Ya know just in case they need a few 100 executive mansions or they have to bribe some politicians. I bet they could set up a bunch of test drills in Tacoma, or off the Olympic Peninsula. Maybe a TV add champaign telling viewers how eco loving they are. Quote
Bug Posted October 31, 2008 Posted October 31, 2008 I saw the speech. It was a politicians wet dream to have this much money to spend this late in the election. I heard on the news that the air time alone cost $3mil. Probably another $300k to produce it under time contraints. But at least it is paid for by people who volunteered their money to to this specific cause. Bush has been using all our taxes to build bigger government and prop up oil company profits. Exxon reported record profits yesterday. $43 billion in profits this year. That is up 58% from last year which was another record profit year. McCain would cut taxes on the stockholders or anyone who makes over $2mil a year. Hope that puts it in perspective for you Bill. Good luck with that vote for McCain. Swallow hard cause that is exactly what it was. Wow, that's a whole lotta taxes! And all that profit for those evil shareholders? Take a look at your 401k--it's probably one of the only bright spots. Don't know what 2008 looks like for the taxes v profits picture, but feel free to research. Obama wants to impose a 'windfall profits' tax? All he'll be doing is stealing from investors like you and me and forcing still more companies to move offshore. Cute picture there FW. Too bad it is sooo inaccurate. See, if you are going to compare profits to taxes the economic value has to be calculated which you did not do. That leaves out the impact of the multiplier effect of removing that kind of money directly out of the economy. As usual, you are taking for granted that a gang of eletist oil barons are going to paint an honest picture for you. To be clear, that blue bar should be higher by 28 billion and the brown bar higher by 30 billion. And no that is not a lot of taxes for the military protections and government leases they get with no price tag. Do you understand economics at all FW? Do you know what the multiplier effect is? That is when you put $1 dollar into the general economy and it generates a multiple of transactions. That is called "volume of transactions". The lower the volume of transactions, the fewer oportunities for profit there are. The fewer profits there are, the less disposable income there is and the tailspin starts. So you might ask why oil profits do not count in this effect. It is because most oil stocks are held by an elite few who will not buy more or fewer consumable goods realative to their annual income. The net effect is that the money is removed from circulation in the overall economy and the volume of transactions deminishes by a mutliple of that amount. To sum it up, my entire 401k would be healthier if it were not for the huge gouge oil and gas prices are taking out of the economy. Combined with the deregulation of lending and the SEC oversight slacking off and you come up with economic suicide. You and your ilk are sure to find a way to blame this whole mess on the liberals. You poor, poor, mistreated republicans. You have control of all three branches of government for 6 years and two branches for the remaining 2 and you still get out-smarted by the democrats who foil you plans that otherwise would have worked just fine. I'll bet you don't take responsibility for anthing. You got your pipe dream for the last eight years and it failed. It failed miserably. Man up you fool. Quote
Fairweather Posted October 31, 2008 Posted October 31, 2008 That is when you put $1 dollar into the general economy and it generates a multiple of transactions. That is called "volume of transactions". The lower the volume of transactions, the fewer oportunities for profit there are. The fewer profits there are, the less disposable income there is and the tailspin starts. So you might ask why oil profits do not count in this effect. It is because most oil stocks are held by an elite few who will not buy more or fewer consumable goods realative to their annual income. The net effect is that the money is removed from circulation in the overall economy and the volume of transactions deminishes by a mutliple of that amount. To sum it up, my entire 401k would be healthier if it were not for the huge gouge oil and gas prices are taking out of the economy. Can you back up this assertion? Who are these evil barons holding "most" of this paper? All I see in your statement is froth. BTW: How are mom and dad? Quote
dougd Posted October 31, 2008 Posted October 31, 2008 That is when you put $1 dollar into the general economy and it generates a multiple of transactions. That is called "volume of transactions". The lower the volume of transactions, the fewer oportunities for profit there are. The fewer profits there are, the less disposable income there is and the tailspin starts. So you might ask why oil profits do not count in this effect. It is because most oil stocks are held by an elite few who will not buy more or fewer consumable goods realative to their annual income. The net effect is that the money is removed from circulation in the overall economy and the volume of transactions deminishes by a mutliple of that amount. To sum it up, my entire 401k would be healthier if it were not for the huge gouge oil and gas prices are taking out of the economy. Can you back up this assertion? Who are these evil barons holding "most" of this paper? All I see in your statement is froth. BTW: How are mom and dad? Nonresponsive... Quote
STP Posted October 31, 2008 Posted October 31, 2008 That is when you put $1 dollar into the general economy and it generates a multiple of transactions. That is called "volume of transactions". Also known as 'velocity of money'. As velocity increases on a very large scale, it has the effect of inflating the money supply. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.