Posted on 04/28/2012 2:55:39 PM PDT by reaganator
There is no federal revenue problem.
There is a federal spending problem.
How would causing the spenders to have more money to spend solve the spending problem?
No one can actually believe this way, it must be purposeful and deliberate destruction.
ANY process that reduces current or planned future tax revenues is touted as a subsidy by the progressives. Another example of them being still in control of the language of the debate.
************************
I’ve even heard a couple of Dem Reps and Sens, as well as Dem Strategists on cable news, flatly state that the Federal Gov’t. is subsidizing home owners by permitting them to deduct mortgage interest. Some feel that eliminating that deduction would add tremendously to the Federal revenue.
Yes I am aware of that as I was subject to it once when I lost $150,000 in a motorcycle shop that I once owned was only going to be able to write off $21,000 (3,000 over 7 yrs). That in my opinion is entirely unfair.
Fortunatly I was starting a new business and was able by keeping the other corporation active, and was able to transfer the losses to the new corp as management fees over a few years. But most people are not in that kind of position.
Here are the real numbers......
Big Oil and Tax Breaks
By Randall Hoven
To hear the president and Democrats talk, you’d think that Big Oil was sucking the Treasury dry with huge subsidies. Almost a year ago I wrote about the federal government’s “subsidies” to Big Oil. I said then, “They are all tax ‘breaks’... about $4.3 billion per year — about 0.2% of this year’s deficit and enough to fund about 10 hours of current US government spending.”
I was wrong. The tax breaks for all fossil fuels was not $4.3B in 2011. It was only $2.5B — about 0.19% of that year’s deficit, and enough to fund only six hours of U.S. government spending. The source for such heresy? The Congressional Budget Office.
Just to be clear, that $2.5B was not just for Big Oil, but also for Big Coal and Big Gas: all fossil fuels. Here, more exactly, are those subsidies, in the CBO’s words.
• “Expensing of exploration and development costs for oil and natural gas.” ($0.8B)
• “Option to expense 50% of qualified property used to refine liquid fuels.” ($0.8B)
• “Option to expense investment costs on the basis of gross income rather than on production.” ($0.9B)
He has been a Senator from Ohio for at least two terms. He used to be on that socialist list that West is publishing, but some way or other Brown had his name removed. His ads are really trashing Josh Mandel. one of them asserts that a PAL of mandel is involved in a scandel. Of course Brown had no problem Voting for Obama who has a pal that was a murderer. They have accused Mandel of being accused od some scandel too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.