Debt Ceiling Bill

[UNI88]

Heritage Foundation is biased Fake News, Brookings is more reliable.

I agree that the government has a spending problem but cutting taxes without corresponding spending cuts can increase the debt and did with trump's cuts. It's ok, he lied about being a stable genius and not everything he did worked out.

Brookings is as left as Heritage is right.

Nope, Trumps tax cuts didn't increase the debt. But too much spending under him did, esp his last year.

Sure BDKJsoMU. Next you're going to tell me that I should believe you because you won a junior high science fair.

[BDKJMU]

Brookings is as left as Heritage is right.

Nope, Trumps tax cuts didn't increase the debt. But too much spending under him did, esp his last year.

Sure BDKJsoMU. Next you're going to tell me that I should believe you because you won a junior high science fair.

Ok JSO88. Your opionion on Brookings v Heritage is no more valid than mine.

[kalm]

Sure BDKJsoMU. Next you're going to tell me that I should believe you because you won a junior high science fair.

Ok JSO88. Your opionion on Brookings v Heritage is no more valid than mine.

Brookings is center.

[UNI88]

Ok JSO88. Your opionion on Brookings v Heritage is no more valid than mine.

Brookings is center.

They’re center left. Heritage is right, not center right.

I would argue that as someone whose average position is close to center that my opinion on what is left, right and center is probably less biased than yours or BDKs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BDKJMU]

Brookings is center.

They’re center left. Heritage is right, not center right.

I would argue that as someone whose average position is close to center that my opinion on what is left, right and center is probably less biased than yours or BDKs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Whatver you say there JSO. At least you make your claim without the charts, graphs, and 5k words.

[kalm]

Brookings is center.

They’re center left. Heritage is right, not center right.

I would argue that as someone whose average position is close to center that my opinion on what is left, right and center is probably less biased than yours or BDKs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Maybe and I’m fine with that. I’m certainly to the left of you economically. There is often greater realism from the right and greater idealism on the left.

It’s an endless debate.

[houndawg]

We guarantee their safety anywhere they extract oil and anwhere they ship it.

But that’s not a direct payment hence not a subsidy.

They should provide at no cost to the taxpayer all the fuel that keeps the sea lanes open at the very least.

[houndawg]

Start with foreign policy. And yes…we all benefit from it but that’s true of bigger industries and it still helps the bottom line.

Next: healthcare costs associated with fossil fuels.

Next: infrastructure

Next: environmental damage including wildfires and storm damage.

We’ve been through this before. You may not like the argument but it’s still a thing.

Next:

Yes, we have, because those things you throw out there are so vague and so abstract that they're not even useful.

- Foreign policy - how is that specifically oil-related? It's a small world, everything we do and make is either sourced from outside the US or is sold outside the US, and that's in virtually every industry. Even if we just keep it isolated to the energy industry, even solar panels and windmill rotors come from outside the US in large measure, so our foreign policy is implicitly wrapped up in non-fossil fuel activities just as much as it's with industries specifically centered on fossil fuels. So again, what subsidy is the oil industry getting here, or more of, that other industies don't? Answer - none.

- Health care costs associated with fossil fuels - Huh? What industry out there right now isn't using fossil fuels? We use fossil fuels for energy, so every industry or economic sector that uses electricity is part of that (so everyone except maybe the Amish). We all use fossil fuels to drive or to take public transit. So unless we're strictly all using pedaled bicycles (ignoring the sourcing of the rubber for the tires and the energy used in the manufacture of that bike) we're all part of this. The oil industry has plenty of company when it comes to generating health issues from the use of fossil fuels. So again, what subsidy is the oil industry getting here, or more of, that other industies don't? Answer - none.

- Infrastructure - Don't tell me that you're including roads and bridges and other things here because that's been debunked even more than the first two categories. And again, allowing for capital depreciation of equipment and such, regardless of its size, is not a subsidy first off (it's an accounting method) and second it's not any different than every other industry or sector is allowed to do and in fact actually do. So again, what subsidy is the oil industry getting here, or more of, that other industies don't? Answer - none.

- Environmental damage including wildfires and storm damage - Just like the foreign policy argument, everyone's hands, including yours and mine, are in on this. We're all consumers and it's not like we've put up a fight either. And when there is specific environmental damage done by the oil industry, they're not being subsidized - they get fined, they're on the hook financially for the cleanup, and their insurance rates skyrocket. None of that comes from anywhere but their own finances. There's not a government subsidy that pays that. So again, what subsidy is the oil industry getting here, or more of, that other industies don't? Answer - none.

Just because we've had this argument before doesn't mean that you've satisfactorily answered the question of what specific subsidies does the oil industry "get", that no other industry or sector "gets", that is so egregious to warrant special consideration when looking at government spending? Even the puff-ball ones you just threw out are specious at best and easily refuted. There's no doubt that our dependence on fossil fuels for a whole host of things that we depend on and rely on today comes with some serious negative consequences. But that's a different argument from the one that the oil industry only exists because it's lobbied for and gets so much more than anyone else in terms of lax government or government largesse. It betrays a complete lack of understanding of how the world works and how government interacts with that world to keep claiming that the oil industry is propped up by subsidies that no other sector of the economy is also privy to. But again, I welcome the chance to see that with links or information to the contrary.

nice move, but that wasn't the point at all. The point is pretty much the old "privatize the profits, socialize the risks" wheeze.

They don't pay fines, we do. They don't pay for clean up, we do. They don't pay exorbitant insurance rates, we do. Its all right there in the pump price. The only thing they do is pocket record profits every quarter and buy back stock.

We should nationalize oil.

[kalm]

Yes, we have, because those things you throw out there are so vague and so abstract that they're not even useful.

- Foreign policy - how is that specifically oil-related? It's a small world, everything we do and make is either sourced from outside the US or is sold outside the US, and that's in virtually every industry. Even if we just keep it isolated to the energy industry, even solar panels and windmill rotors come from outside the US in large measure, so our foreign policy is implicitly wrapped up in non-fossil fuel activities just as much as it's with industries specifically centered on fossil fuels. So again, what subsidy is the oil industry getting here, or more of, that other industies don't? Answer - none.

- Health care costs associated with fossil fuels - Huh? What industry out there right now isn't using fossil fuels? We use fossil fuels for energy, so every industry or economic sector that uses electricity is part of that (so everyone except maybe the Amish). We all use fossil fuels to drive or to take public transit. So unless we're strictly all using pedaled bicycles (ignoring the sourcing of the rubber for the tires and the energy used in the manufacture of that bike) we're all part of this. The oil industry has plenty of company when it comes to generating health issues from the use of fossil fuels. So again, what subsidy is the oil industry getting here, or more of, that other industies don't? Answer - none.

- Infrastructure - Don't tell me that you're including roads and bridges and other things here because that's been debunked even more than the first two categories. And again, allowing for capital depreciation of equipment and such, regardless of its size, is not a subsidy first off (it's an accounting method) and second it's not any different than every other industry or sector is allowed to do and in fact actually do. So again, what subsidy is the oil industry getting here, or more of, that other industies don't? Answer - none.

- Environmental damage including wildfires and storm damage - Just like the foreign policy argument, everyone's hands, including yours and mine, are in on this. We're all consumers and it's not like we've put up a fight either. And when there is specific environmental damage done by the oil industry, they're not being subsidized - they get fined, they're on the hook financially for the cleanup, and their insurance rates skyrocket. None of that comes from anywhere but their own finances. There's not a government subsidy that pays that. So again, what subsidy is the oil industry getting here, or more of, that other industies don't? Answer - none.

Just because we've had this argument before doesn't mean that you've satisfactorily answered the question of what specific subsidies does the oil industry "get", that no other industry or sector "gets", that is so egregious to warrant special consideration when looking at government spending? Even the puff-ball ones you just threw out are specious at best and easily refuted. There's no doubt that our dependence on fossil fuels for a whole host of things that we depend on and rely on today comes with some serious negative consequences. But that's a different argument from the one that the oil industry only exists because it's lobbied for and gets so much more than anyone else in terms of lax government or government largesse. It betrays a complete lack of understanding of how the world works and how government interacts with that world to keep claiming that the oil industry is propped up by subsidies that no other sector of the economy is also privy to. But again, I welcome the chance to see that with links or information to the contrary.

nice move, but that wasn't the point at all. The point is pretty much the old "privatize the profits, socialize the risks" wheeze.

They don't pay fines, we do. They don't pay for clean up, we do. They don't pay exorbitant insurance rates, we do. Its all right there in the pump price. The only thing they do is pocket record profits every quarter and buy back stock.

We should nationalize oil.

All of this.

[BDKJMU]

Yes, we have, because those things you throw out there are so vague and so abstract that they're not even useful.

- Foreign policy - how is that specifically oil-related? It's a small world, everything we do and make is either sourced from outside the US or is sold outside the US, and that's in virtually every industry. Even if we just keep it isolated to the energy industry, even solar panels and windmill rotors come from outside the US in large measure, so our foreign policy is implicitly wrapped up in non-fossil fuel activities just as much as it's with industries specifically centered on fossil fuels. So again, what subsidy is the oil industry getting here, or more of, that other industies don't? Answer - none.

- Health care costs associated with fossil fuels - Huh? What industry out there right now isn't using fossil fuels? We use fossil fuels for energy, so every industry or economic sector that uses electricity is part of that (so everyone except maybe the Amish). We all use fossil fuels to drive or to take public transit. So unless we're strictly all using pedaled bicycles (ignoring the sourcing of the rubber for the tires and the energy used in the manufacture of that bike) we're all part of this. The oil industry has plenty of company when it comes to generating health issues from the use of fossil fuels. So again, what subsidy is the oil industry getting here, or more of, that other industies don't? Answer - none.

- Infrastructure - Don't tell me that you're including roads and bridges and other things here because that's been debunked even more than the first two categories. And again, allowing for capital depreciation of equipment and such, regardless of its size, is not a subsidy first off (it's an accounting method) and second it's not any different than every other industry or sector is allowed to do and in fact actually do. So again, what subsidy is the oil industry getting here, or more of, that other industies don't? Answer - none.

- Environmental damage including wildfires and storm damage - Just like the foreign policy argument, everyone's hands, including yours and mine, are in on this. We're all consumers and it's not like we've put up a fight either. And when there is specific environmental damage done by the oil industry, they're not being subsidized - they get fined, they're on the hook financially for the cleanup, and their insurance rates skyrocket. None of that comes from anywhere but their own finances. There's not a government subsidy that pays that. So again, what subsidy is the oil industry getting here, or more of, that other industies don't? Answer - none.

Just because we've had this argument before doesn't mean that you've satisfactorily answered the question of what specific subsidies does the oil industry "get", that no other industry or sector "gets", that is so egregious to warrant special consideration when looking at government spending? Even the puff-ball ones you just threw out are specious at best and easily refuted. There's no doubt that our dependence on fossil fuels for a whole host of things that we depend on and rely on today comes with some serious negative consequences. But that's a different argument from the one that the oil industry only exists because it's lobbied for and gets so much more than anyone else in terms of lax government or government largesse. It betrays a complete lack of understanding of how the world works and how government interacts with that world to keep claiming that the oil industry is propped up by subsidies that no other sector of the economy is also privy to. But again, I welcome the chance to see that with links or information to the contrary.

nice move, but that wasn't the point at all. The point is pretty much the old "privatize the profits, socialize the risks" wheeze.

They don't pay fines, we do. They don't pay for clean up, we do. They don't pay exorbitant insurance rates, we do. Its all right there in the pump price. The only thing they do is pocket record profits every quarter[/b] and buy back stock.

We should nationalize oil.

And Big Govt profits more off a gallon of gas than the oil companies do.

Nationalize oil? And how’s that worked out for Venezuela, which is practically floating in oil.

[BDKJMU]

nice move, but that wasn't the point at all. The point is pretty much the old "privatize the profits, socialize the risks" wheeze.

They don't pay fines, we do. They don't pay for clean up, we do. They don't pay exorbitant insurance rates, we do. Its all right there in the pump price. The only thing they do is pocket record profits every quarter and buy back stock.

We should nationalize oil.

All of this.

So you want to nationalize oil, too? Yeah, I’m sure with the governemt exploring, extracting and refining oil it would work out great.

[GannonFan]

Exactly what subsidies are the oil companies getting that aren't also available to every other company in other sectors? I keep hearing this whine but no one ever comes up with details. Being able to depreciate capital equipment over 10 years isn't a subsidy and everyone can do it, not just oil companies. Please link or list oil specific subsidies so we can see exactly what the gripe is about.

We guarantee their safety anywhere they extract oil and anwhere they ship it.

And you know who else we do that for? Every single business or corporation in America, from the one person small business to the biggest corporations out there, that buys anything outside of this country or sells anything outside of this country. So again, pretty much every business in America. We don't have a Navy and other armed forces just for oil. I can't believe that you honestly believe that, that kind of baseless idea has to be a troll attempt.

[GannonFan]

nice move, but that wasn't the point at all. The point is pretty much the old "privatize the profits, socialize the risks" wheeze.

They don't pay fines, we do. They don't pay for clean up, we do. They don't pay exorbitant insurance rates, we do. Its all right there in the pump price. The only thing they do is pocket record profits every quarter and buy back stock.

We should nationalize oil.

All of this.

All of what? I'm not even getting the sense that you even know what you're arguing anymore. Again, what advantages and subsidies does big oil get from the government that virtually every other business entity in the US also gets? You've had plenty of time to come up with an answer but you keep swinging and missing.

[kalm]

All of this.

All of what? I'm not even getting the sense that you even know what you're arguing anymore. Again, what advantages and subsidies does big oil get from the government that virtually every other business entity in the US also gets? You've had plenty of time to come up with an answer but you keep swinging and missing.

Go back and read the thread more slowly. Houndy already mentioned an example or two.

We’re big picture guys. Deciders if you will. We let you worry about the details but the answers you seek are quite obvious.

And kudos for not flooding the zone with a longer screed this time. Executive summaries will serve you better when debating us.

[houndawg]

All of this.

All of what? I'm not even getting the sense that you even know what you're arguing anymore. Again, what advantages and subsidies does big oil get from the government that virtually every other business entity in the US also gets? You've had plenty of time to come up with an answer but you keep swinging and missing.

You already struck out so you're going with a different strike zone..

[houndawg]

All of what? I'm not even getting the sense that you even know what you're arguing anymore. Again, what advantages and subsidies does big oil get from the government that virtually every other business entity in the US also gets? You've had plenty of time to come up with an answer but you keep swinging and missing.

Go back and read the thread more slowly. Houndy already mentioned an example or two.

We’re big picture guys. Deciders if you will. We let you worry about the details but the answers you seek are quite obvious.

And kudos for not flooding the zone with a longer screed this time. Executive summaries will serve you better when debating us.

What he said, Ganster - bottom line, stick to the facts, don't go wandering in the weeds, and you'll make a helluva staff member for our post-partisan think tank.

[GannonFan]

All of what? I'm not even getting the sense that you even know what you're arguing anymore. Again, what advantages and subsidies does big oil get from the government that virtually every other business entity in the US also gets? You've had plenty of time to come up with an answer but you keep swinging and missing.

Go back and read the thread more slowly. Houndy already mentioned an example or two.

We’re big picture guys. Deciders if you will. We let you worry about the details but the answers you seek are quite obvious.

And kudos for not flooding the zone with a longer screed this time. Executive summaries will serve you better when debating us.

The two examples houndy brought up where the guaranteeing the safety of wherever we drill for oil and the safety to get it back here and then he mentioned that oil corporations pass the fines and costs of malfeasance back onto the consumers. If you see something else then feel free to bring it up.

- Safety of the seas - again, EVERY business and corporation in America benefits by this, as too do the many American tourists who leave the US for business or vacation or studying abroad. That is not a subsidy to Big Oil. It's not even a subsidy, per se.

- Passing on costs to the consumers - what a shock! What a stunner? Who knew that businesses and corporations pass on costs whenever and wherever they can to the consumers so they can keep more in profits. Just imagine if every business and corporation in America caught on to this little nugget of business acumen. Oh wait, they already have. Again, NOT a subsidy.

And yes, I do realize that executive summaries are better when talking to you or houndy. Words are difficult for some. And yes, you guys are big picture guys - you absolutely loath talking about details because you either don't have the details or the details undermine your position. I believe you're entering the realm of blissful ignorance. Houndy has had a retirement place there for years, he can certainly set you up with your own place.

[kalm]

Go back and read the thread more slowly. Houndy already mentioned an example or two.

We’re big picture guys. Deciders if you will. We let you worry about the details but the answers you seek are quite obvious.

And kudos for not flooding the zone with a longer screed this time. Executive summaries will serve you better when debating us.

The two examples houndy brought up where the guaranteeing the safety of wherever we drill for oil and the safety to get it back here and then he mentioned that oil corporations pass the fines and costs of malfeasance back onto the consumers. If you see something else then feel free to bring it up.

- Safety of the seas - again, EVERY business and corporation in America benefits by this, as too do the many American tourists who leave the US for business or vacation or studying abroad. That is not a subsidy to Big Oil. It's not even a subsidy, per se.

- Passing on costs to the consumers - what a shock! What a stunner? Who knew that businesses and corporations pass on costs whenever and wherever they can to the consumers so they can keep more in profits. Just imagine if every business and corporation in America caught on to this little nugget of business acumen. Oh wait, they already have. Again, NOT a subsidy.

And yes, I do realize that executive summaries are better when talking to you or houndy. Words are difficult for some. And yes, you guys are big picture guys - you absolutely loath talking about details because you either don't have the details or the details undermine your position. I believe you're entering the realm of blissful ignorance. Houndy has had a retirement place there for years, he can certainly set you up with your own place.

Jimmy Carter vowed to end our dependence on foreign oil 40 some years ago. He planned to accomplish this through a variety of methods from easing restrictions on pipelines and drilling to focus on renewables.

Here are we today still relying on approximately 35% of oil from foreign suppliers. After several costly (monetarily, human, environmental) wars of protection.

The largest user of fossil fuels in the world is the US military. We’re spending almost a trillion dollars annually to protect the Argentinian beef trade with the US, shipped 1,000 of miles by sea because what? They can’t raise beef in Montana? Oh yeah I forgot…it’s to benefit all companies and help Argentina not have to spend money on their own navy (they’re still probably recovering from the Falklands war)

But please…go on with your “details”.

[UNI88]

The two examples houndy brought up where the guaranteeing the safety of wherever we drill for oil and the safety to get it back here and then he mentioned that oil corporations pass the fines and costs of malfeasance back onto the consumers. If you see something else then feel free to bring it up.

- Safety of the seas - again, EVERY business and corporation in America benefits by this, as too do the many American tourists who leave the US for business or vacation or studying abroad. That is not a subsidy to Big Oil. It's not even a subsidy, per se.

- Passing on costs to the consumers - what a shock! What a stunner? Who knew that businesses and corporations pass on costs whenever and wherever they can to the consumers so they can keep more in profits. Just imagine if every business and corporation in America caught on to this little nugget of business acumen. Oh wait, they already have. Again, NOT a subsidy.

And yes, I do realize that executive summaries are better when talking to you or houndy. Words are difficult for some. And yes, you guys are big picture guys - you absolutely loath talking about details because you either don't have the details or the details undermine your position. I believe you're entering the realm of blissful ignorance. Houndy has had a retirement place there for years, he can certainly set you up with your own place.

Jimmy Carter vowed to end our dependence on foreign oil 40 some years ago. He planned to accomplish this through a variety of methods from easing restrictions on pipelines and drilling to focus on renewables.

Here are we today still relying on approximately 35% of oil from foreign suppliers. After several costly (monetarily, human, environmental) wars of protection.

The largest user of fossil fuels in the world is the US military. We’re spending almost a trillion dollars annually to protect the Argentinian beef trade with the US, shipped 1,000 of miles by sea because what? They can’t raise beef in Montana? Oh yeah I forgot…it’s to benefit all companies and help Argentina not have to spend money on their own navy (they’re still probably recovering from the Falklands war)

But please…go on with your “details”.

US protection of shipping lanes has probably done more to foster economic cooperation and reduce armed conflict then anything else the government has done since WWII. How many thousands of lives have been improved by the commerce and saved by the conflict reduction? Do you want to join the MAGAts with their America First approach and withdraw from the world stage?

It would be nice if other countries would help pay the bill but you illiberals got your undies all in a bunch when trump pushed NATO countries to step up and pay their share. Why the change of heart?

[BDKJMU]

The two examples houndy brought up where the guaranteeing the safety of wherever we drill for oil and the safety to get it back here and then he mentioned that oil corporations pass the fines and costs of malfeasance back onto the consumers. If you see something else then feel free to bring it up.

- Safety of the seas - again, EVERY business and corporation in America benefits by this, as too do the many American tourists who leave the US for business or vacation or studying abroad. That is not a subsidy to Big Oil. It's not even a subsidy, per se.

- Passing on costs to the consumers - what a shock! What a stunner? Who knew that businesses and corporations pass on costs whenever and wherever they can to the consumers so they can keep more in profits. Just imagine if every business and corporation in America caught on to this little nugget of business acumen. Oh wait, they already have. Again, NOT a subsidy.

And yes, I do realize that executive summaries are better when talking to you or houndy. Words are difficult for some. And yes, you guys are big picture guys - you absolutely loath talking about details because you either don't have the details or the details undermine your position. I believe you're entering the realm of blissful ignorance. Houndy has had a retirement place there for years, he can certainly set you up with your own place.

Jimmy Carter vowed to end our dependence on foreign oil 40 some years ago. He planned to accomplish this through a variety of methods from easing restrictions on pipelines and drilling to focus on renewables.

Here are we today still relying on approximately 35% of oil from foreign suppliers. After several costly (monetarily, human, environmental) wars of protection.

The largest user of fossil fuels in the world is the US military. We’re spending almost a trillion dollars annually to protect the Argentinian beef trade with the US, shipped 1,000 of miles by sea because what? They can’t raise beef in Montana? Oh yeah I forgot…it’s to benefit all companies and help Argentina not have to spend money on their own navy (they’re still probably recovering from the Falklands war)

But please…go on with your “details”.

The United States was a total petroleum net exporter in 2020 and 2021
In 2021, the United States exported about 8.54 million barrels per day (b/d) and imported about 8.47 million b/d of petroleum,1 making the United States an annual total petroleum net exporter for the second year in a row since at least 1949. Total petroleum net exports were about 0.06 million b/d in 2021, and total petroleum net exports in 2020 were 0.63 million b/d. Also in 2021, the United States produced2 about 18.77 million b/d of petroleum and consumed3 about 19.89 million b/d. Even though U.S. annual total petroleum exports were greater than total petroleum imports in 2020 and 2021, the United States still imported some crude oil and petroleum products from other countries to help to supply domestic demand for petroleum and to supply international markets.

The United States remained a net crude oil importer in 2021, importing about 6.11 million b/d of crude oil and exporting about 2.96 million b/d. However, some of the crude oil that the U.S. imports is refined by U.S. refineries into petroleum products—such as gasoline, heating oil, diesel fuel, and jet fuel—that the U.S. exports. Also, some of imported petroleum may be stored and subsequently exported.

https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/oil ... xports.php

If you click on the link the EIA has nice fancy charts, graphs & tables. 2022 numbers not posted yet. We might have slipped back below being a total petroleum net exporter to being a net importer thanks to Brandon's war on oil, but thank you Trump for getting the US to being a total petroleum net exporter, and thereby energy self reliant, for the 1st time since 1949 when you left office.

[kalm]

Jimmy Carter vowed to end our dependence on foreign oil 40 some years ago. He planned to accomplish this through a variety of methods from easing restrictions on pipelines and drilling to focus on renewables.

Here are we today still relying on approximately 35% of oil from foreign suppliers. After several costly (monetarily, human, environmental) wars of protection.

The largest user of fossil fuels in the world is the US military. We’re spending almost a trillion dollars annually to protect the Argentinian beef trade with the US, shipped 1,000 of miles by sea because what? They can’t raise beef in Montana? Oh yeah I forgot…it’s to benefit all companies and help Argentina not have to spend money on their own navy (they’re still probably recovering from the Falklands war)

But please…go on with your “details”.

US protection of shipping lanes has probably done more to foster economic cooperation and reduce armed conflict then anything else the government has done since WWII. How many thousands of lives have been improved by the commerce and saved by the conflict reduction? Do you want to join the MAGAts with their America First approach and withdraw from the world stage?

It would be nice if other countries would help pay the bill but you illiberals got your undies all in a bunch when trump pushed NATO countries to step up and pay their share. Why the change of heart?

Ssshhhh. Quiet. I’m blue hen hunting.

Valid points and yes I’m aware. To go further, without our massive military capabilities, Ukraine would have fallen.

There’s good and bad in everything but to deny we haven’t heavily subsidized our oil production through a broad range of spending that massively benefits corporate profits is silly.

Heck the very nature of our infrastructure, urban planning and sprawl, economic and cultural reliance on car ownership vs. public transportation and short walkable/bikeable commutes makes it a nice gig. Again for both good and bad. But the corporate greed is endless. Carter knew this 45 years ago and tried to start us down the right path but that was politically torpedoed by big oil. Think of what those 45 years would have brought us.

That’s the 30,000 foot view I was getting at.

[GannonFan]

US protection of shipping lanes has probably done more to foster economic cooperation and reduce armed conflict then anything else the government has done since WWII. How many thousands of lives have been improved by the commerce and saved by the conflict reduction? Do you want to join the MAGAts with their America First approach and withdraw from the world stage?

It would be nice if other countries would help pay the bill but you illiberals got your undies all in a bunch when trump pushed NATO countries to step up and pay their share. Why the change of heart?

Ssshhhh. Quiet. I’m blue hen hunting.

Valid points and yes I’m aware. To go further, without our massive military capabilities, Ukraine would have fallen.

There’s good and bad in everything but to deny we haven’t heavily subsidized our oil production through a broad range of spending that massively benefits corporate profits is silly.

Heck the very nature of our infrastructure, urban planning and sprawl, economic and cultural reliance on car ownership vs. public transportation and short walkable/bikeable commutes makes it a nice gig. Again for both good and bad. But the corporate greed is endless. Carter knew this 45 years ago and tried to start us down the right path but that was torpedoed by big oil. Think of what those 45 years would have brought us.

That’s the 30,000 foot view I was getting at.

No one is saying that Big Oil hasn't been helped by government spending - the point is that EVERYONE has been helped by government spending. Again, point to the subsidies that go exclusively to Big Oil and aren't available for everyone else.

The problem with your 30,000 foot view is that the oxygen is pretty thin up there and you end up not thinking clearly. Get off your high horse, come down closer to ground level and breathe a little bit - it should help wake up your brain.

[UNI88]

Ssshhhh. Quiet. I’m blue hen hunting.

Valid points and yes I’m aware. To go further, without our massive military capabilities, Ukraine would have fallen.

There’s good and bad in everything but to deny we haven’t heavily subsidized our oil production through a broad range of spending that massively benefits corporate profits is silly.

Heck the very nature of our infrastructure, urban planning and sprawl, economic and cultural reliance on car ownership vs. public transportation and short walkable/bikeable commutes makes it a nice gig. Again for both good and bad. But the corporate greed is endless. Carter knew this 45 years ago and tried to start us down the right path but that was torpedoed by big oil. Think of what those 45 years would have brought us.

That’s the 30,000 foot view I was getting at.

No one is saying that Big Oil hasn't been helped by government spending - the point is that EVERYONE has been helped by government spending. Again, point to the subsidies that go exclusively to Big Oil and aren't available for everyone else.

The problem with your 30,000 foot view is that the oxygen is pretty thin up there and you end up not thinking clearly. Get off your high horse, come down closer to ground level and breathe a little bit - it should help wake up your brain.

kalmy also likes to blame all of our woes on corporations and either ignores or doesn't understand that people's wants and desires contribute to the situation.

Historically people have wanted houses with yards and the geography of America has allowed it. Europeans don't have the space so they learned to live with higher density and more public transportation. You can't compare the two and blame American sprawl only on Big Oil.

Corporate greed is as endless as government greed and I know which one is more likely to produce products and innovations that improve my life.

[kalm]

No one is saying that Big Oil hasn't been helped by government spending - the point is that EVERYONE has been helped by government spending. Again, point to the subsidies that go exclusively to Big Oil and aren't available for everyone else.

The problem with your 30,000 foot view is that the oxygen is pretty thin up there and you end up not thinking clearly. Get off your high horse, come down closer to ground level and breathe a little bit - it should help wake up your brain.

kalmy also likes to blame all of our woes on corporations and either ignores or doesn't understand that people's wants and desires contribute to the situation.

Historically people have wanted houses with yards and the geography of America has allowed it. Europeans don't have the space so they learned to live with higher density and more public transportation. You can't compare the two and blame American sprawl only on Big Oil.

Corporate greed is as endless as government greed and I know which one is more likely to produce products and innovations that improve my life.

Don’t get me started on the ridiculousness of American lawns. Especially in semi-arid climates.

[GannonFan]

kalmy also likes to blame all of our woes on corporations and either ignores or doesn't understand that people's wants and desires contribute to the situation.

Historically people have wanted houses with yards and the geography of America has allowed it. Europeans don't have the space so they learned to live with higher density and more public transportation. You can't compare the two and blame American sprawl only on Big Oil.

Corporate greed is as endless as government greed and I know which one is more likely to produce products and innovations that improve my life.

Don’t get me started on the ridiculousness of American lawns. Especially in semi-arid climates.

That gets filed under personal greed, to go along with corporate (which is really collective personal greed) greed and governmental (again, collective personal) greed.

Unless, of course, you think the lawn industry (Big Lawn) has been unfairly subsidized all these years compared to other industries.