Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: Why did the regime hold out for bankster tax breaks?

  1. #1

    Why did the regime hold out for bankster tax breaks?

    All at once now all you regime supporters, repeat after me ... WE WERE ALWAYS IN FAVOR OF HELPING THE BANKSTERS MOVE PROFITS OFFSHORE TO AVOID TAXATION!

    "The "fiscal cliff" legislation passed this week included $76 billion in special-interest tax credits for the likes of General Electric, Hollywood and even Captain Morgan. But these subsidies weren't the fruit of eleventh-hour lobbying conducted on the cliff's edge -- they were crafted back in August in a Senate committee, and they sat dormant until the White House reportedly insisted on them this week.

    The Family and Business Tax Cut Certainty Act of 2012, which passed through the Senate Finance Committee in August, was copied and pasted into the fiscal cliff legislation, yielding a victory for biotech companies, wind-turbine-makers, biodiesel producers, film studios -- and their lobbyists. So, if you're wondering how algae subsidies became part of a must-pass package to avert the dreaded fiscal cliff, credit the Biotechnology Industry Organization's lobbying last summer.

    Some tax lobbyists mostly ignored the August bill "because they thought it would be just a political document," one K Streeter told me. "They were the ones that got bit in the butt."

    Here's what happened: In late July, Finance Chairman Max Baucus announced the committee would soon convene to craft a bill extending many expiring tax credits. This attracted lobbyists like a raw steak attracts wolves.

    Former Sens. John Breaux, D-La., and Trent Lott, R-Miss., a pair of rainmaker lobbyists, pleaded for extensions on behalf of a powerful lineup of clients.

    General Electric and Citigroup, for instance, hired Breaux and Lott to extend a tax provision that allows multinational corporations to defer U.S. taxes by moving profits into offshore financial subsidiaries. This provision -- known as the "active financing exception" -- is the main tool GE uses to avoid nearly all U.S. corporate income tax."

    http://washingtonexaminer.com/tim-ca...7#.UOTPwUbDVSJ

  2. #2
    Senior Member Qtec's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    the Netherlands
    Posts
    13,962
    I agree. Its disgusting, but it passed the senate with bipartisan support. You can't just blame the Dems. Lets not forget that during the last Pres election, the whole Republican party constantly claimed they would raise revenue by limiting deductions and CLOSING LOOPHOLES!
    Now, instead of closing those loopholes when they had the chance, the GOP vote to extend them!

    Q
    Last edited by Qtec; 01-03-2013 at 08:28 AM.
    Remarkable.You leak a story, and then you quote the story. I mean,that's a remarkable thing to do



  3. #3
    Can you not read?

  4. #4
    Senior Member Qtec's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    the Netherlands
    Posts
    13,962
    Quote Originally Posted by LWW View Post
    Can you not read?
    Brilliant argument.

    I'm now totally convinced.

    I have seen the error of my ways.

    Remarkable.You leak a story, and then you quote the story. I mean,that's a remarkable thing to do



  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Qtec View Post
    Brilliant argument.

    I'm now totally convinced.

    I have seen the error of my ways.

    Having a clue will cause that.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Posts
    8,293
    Carney uses two unnamed Senate aides as sources, he says. Who may not have been in the room (he doesn't say). Who may not have been the aides to the senators in the room (he doesn't say, and if not, we have third hand hear-say at best). Who may have ample reason to lie, and no downside for lying, even without the grant of anonymity.

    Carney's scathing book on Obamanomics was published by Regnery, the go-to publisher for the right. He works at the Washington Examiner, the current go-to DC paper for anti-Obama spin now that the WaTimes has declined to such disrepute.

    Does this clearly anti-Obama reporter say the WH held out for these breaks to be included? No. His actual language says the WH 'reportedly' insisted on them. Reportedly, by these unnamed aides who may be passing on 3rd hand claims of unknown provenance and unknown accuracy. For really, WHO is saying that and HOW do they supposedly know it? That's a secret Carney won't disclose. I see. Very compelling.

    A second observation is that the idea these are 'bankster' tax breaks is your own invention, having found one bank mentioned.

    Yet, NASCAR isn't a bank, Hollywood studios aren't banks, algae bio-fuel and wind-turbine makers, bio-tech firms, and etc., are not banks. They represent wealthy companies amply supported by the GOP (as the hiring of oil and gas interests-owned faux Dem Breaux (W's favorite Democrat this side of Lieberman), and Trent Lott, as the key lobbyists shows), and all of whose breaks are continuations of breaks already put in place under prior administrations, including Congresses completely under GOP-majority control, and always with enough GOP senators to block anything they wished to block.

    A bipartisan vote for passage in the Senate committee indicated no GOP issue with these proposed extensions.

    I suggest these are just as plausibly due then to GOP insistence as WH insistence, and the quality of this reporting is not sufficient to, on balance, suggest otherwise. Mitch McConnell is not particularly a purist or fanatic from the right, and more the log-rolling deal maker type, more sleaze than rightie. That the true fanatics on the right have vapors over this, and that the GOP honchos might be given grief over this (along with doing any deal of this sort in the first place), is an excellent tactical reason for floating this kind of anonymously sourced excuse-- hey, THE PREZ made us do that part!!! (He's so scary! We HAD to give in to the powerful black man! He embraces rendition, doncha know? OMG!)
    Last edited by Soflasnapper; 01-03-2013 at 08:36 PM.
    A medium sized fish [...]

  7. #7
    Thanks for making my point.

  8. #8
    Senior Member Qtec's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    the Netherlands
    Posts
    13,962
    Quote Originally Posted by LWW View Post
    Thanks for making my point.
    You don't have one. At least not one that you can back up with facts instead of innuendo from anonymous sources.
    You have offered no proof that it was the WH that insisted on these special interest tax extensions. in fact, the lack of outrage from the GOP over this pork, before the vote, says a lot.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNbuDRCasYY

    Q
    Remarkable.You leak a story, and then you quote the story. I mean,that's a remarkable thing to do



  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Posts
    8,293
    Quote Originally Posted by LWW View Post
    Thanks for making my point.
    Your point was the unreliability of the reporter, his paper, and his sources? I didn't get that impression, but then you are a mysteriously deep thinker or something... what's the word? Oh yes-- poseur.

    There were 5 parties to the negotiations-- the two parties in each of the Houses, and the POTUS. If you want to argue these provisions (directly out of a Senate committee's supermajority-supported bill) were INSISTED UPON BY THE SENATE (even just the Democrats, although the supermajority vote makes that unlikely), that's more plausible on its face than that the POTUS put it in against the Senate's wishes.

    Amirite?
    A medium sized fish [...]

  10. #10
    I actually thought you could read.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •