PAUL RYAN: Voted yes on fat federal subsidies to oil companies just before he told voters he was against them | Uppity Wisconsin (http://www.uppitywis.org/node/47368/view?destination=taxonomy%2Fterm%2F652%3Fpage%3D2)


wow...........:coffee:

I would rather see it go to oil than GM or welfare.
Oil I use.
the others I can do without.

PAUL RYAN: Voted yes on fat federal subsidies to oil companies just before he told voters he was against them | Uppity Wisconsin (http://www.uppitywis.org/node/47368/view?destination=taxonomy%2Fterm%2F652%3Fpage%3D2)


wow...........:coffee:

You are a liar

Oil companys are allowed deductions just like every other business but they do not recieve subsidies.

:liar: :loser:

You are a liar

Oil companys are allowed deductions just like every other business but they do not recieve subsidies.

:liar: :loser:

PAUL RYAN: Voted yes on fat federal subsidies to oil companies just before he told voters he was against them | Uppity Wisconsin (http://www.uppitywis.org/node/47368/view?destination=taxonomy%2Fterm%2F652%3Fpage%3D2)


Paul Ryan: Ryan's road showMaybe this is progress, of a strange sort.

Rep. Paul Ryan, the Republican House budget chairman, responding to citizens at a couple more of the contentious town hall meetings he's held, said he favors dropping federal subsidies to oil companies, which are ringing up record profits. The lead of a Milwaukee Journal Sentinel story:




U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan may not agree with President Barack Obama on a lot of things, but he indicated Thursday during town hall meetings [in Oak Creek] and in Watertown that he agrees oil subsidies should end.

Ryan, a Janesville Republican, responded to questions about oil company subsidies in the context of his support for ending "corporate welfare."

"We're talking about reforming the safety net, the welfare system; we also want to get rid of corporate welfare," Ryan had said in both Oak Creek and Waterford.

Oh, do we really, now? The record actually shows that just in this short year alone, Ryan voted the other way, and more than once. As the progressive web site ThinkProgress.org noted, "Ryan voted twice this year to actually extend subsidies to oil companies, once on a motion to recommit on a shorter-term continuing resolution and again when he supported an amendment to the initial House CR. The Ryan budget, meanwhile, doesn’t specifically target oil subsidies, but only generally promises to end “corporate welfare.” [URL below]

In a followup, ThinkProgress added: "Ryan spokesperson Conor Sweeney told The Hill this afternoon that Ryan's budget `obviously' ends tax breaks for big oil companies, yet mysteriously also said Ryan has `made clear we are not for raising taxes' -- the talking point House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) has used to defend oil subsidies."




wow, guess you're wrong,DA!:coffee:

PAUL RYAN: Voted yes on fat federal subsidies to oil companies just before he told voters he was against them | Uppity Wisconsin (http://www.uppitywis.org/node/47368/view?destination=taxonomy%2Fterm%2F652%3Fpage%3D2)


Paul Ryan: Ryan's road showMaybe this is progress, of a strange sort.

Rep. Paul Ryan, the Republican House budget chairman, responding to citizens at a couple more of the contentious town hall meetings he's held, said he favors dropping federal subsidies to oil companies, which are ringing up record profits. The lead of a Milwaukee Journal Sentinel story:




U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan may not agree with President Barack Obama on a lot of things, but he indicated Thursday during town hall meetings [in Oak Creek] and in Watertown that he agrees oil subsidies should end.

Ryan, a Janesville Republican, responded to questions about oil company subsidies in the context of his support for ending "corporate welfare."

"We're talking about reforming the safety net, the welfare system; we also want to get rid of corporate welfare," Ryan had said in both Oak Creek and Waterford.

Oh, do we really, now? The record actually shows that just in this short year alone, Ryan voted the other way, and more than once. As the progressive web site ThinkProgress.org noted, "Ryan voted twice this year to actually extend subsidies to oil companies, once on a motion to recommit on a shorter-term continuing resolution and again when he supported an amendment to the initial House CR. The Ryan budget, meanwhile, doesn’t specifically target oil subsidies, but only generally promises to end “corporate welfare.” [URL below]

In a followup, ThinkProgress added: "Ryan spokesperson Conor Sweeney told The Hill this afternoon that Ryan's budget `obviously' ends tax breaks for big oil companies, yet mysteriously also said Ryan has `made clear we are not for raising taxes' -- the talking point House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) has used to defend oil subsidies."




wow, guess you're wrong,DA!:coffee:

No dickweed..he's not wrong. The only "subsidies" oil companies have ever gotten are tax breaks to encourage development of more production.

You should see the tax breakes that your butt-buddy Barry gives to his butt-buddy Jeffery Immelt..you know,,Barry's favorite economic advisor. The GE CEO..the guy that;s sent a phenomenal number of jobs to China. (Not that I blame him miond you...can you imagine GE building anything in the USA with a window-licker like lettleone on the payroll??)

PAUL RYAN: Voted yes on fat federal subsidies to oil companies just before he told voters he was against them | Uppity Wisconsin (http://www.uppitywis.org/node/47368/view?destination=taxonomy%2Fterm%2F652%3Fpage%3D2)


wow...........:coffee:


PAUL RYAN: Voted yes on fat federal subsidies to oil companies just before he told voters he was against them | Uppity Wisconsin (http://www.uppitywis.org/node/47368/view?destination=taxonomy%2Fterm%2F652%3Fpage%3D2)


..............bump it up.:buddies:

Amazing, eh?

The company reported worldwide profits of $14.2 billion, and said $5.1 billion of the total came from its operations in the United States.

Its American tax bill? None. In fact, G.E. claimed a tax benefit of $3.2 billion.



Its extraordinary success is based on an aggressive strategy that mixes fierce lobbying for tax breaks and innovative accounting that enables it to concentrate its profits offshore. G.E.’s giant tax department, led by a bow-tied former Treasury official named John Samuels, is often referred to as the world’s best tax law firm.



http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/25/business/economy/25tax.html?pagewanted=all