Should the government stop subsidies to oil companies

[no fat chicks]

Since climate change is apparently reaching a critical point now. Should our government switch all energy subsidies towards so called green energies? Would you support such measures?
Would it bankrupt the country?
Could it inspire other nations to do the same?
I feel that this is a real issue and instead of worrying about a few bad apples crossing into our nation amongst some starving needy refugees, we should be pushing for reforms in energy production to prevent future refugees from hostile Muslim states.

EDIT: All fossil fuel subsidies

 

[west42]

Is there a specific subsidy you're referring to? The largest ones seem to be the strategic petrol reserve, then fuel tax breaks for farmers, then the low income energy assistance program.
Then a bunch that are write offs available to any US corporation.

 

[PolishHeadlock]

Is there a specific subsidy you're referring to? The largest ones seem to be the strategic petrol reserve, then fuel tax breaks for farmers, then the low income energy assistance program.
Then a bunch that are write offs available to any US corporation.

Yeah, I'd like to know which subsidies we should switch over as well.

 

[SODACKER]

What a mess of an op. No one knows what subsidies you're talking about and then we get a weird Islam thing at the end. Should we rank all the issues and then just knock the out one at a time. What should we focus on solely first; climate change, wealth inequality, economy stimulation, gun laws, marriage laws, or immigration. Remember you can only pick one to try and fix.

 

[second sight]

you have no idea what a oil subsidy is

edit

before the government created whats referred to as oil subsidies, oil and gas companies had to depreciate their expenses over a period of years. what a subsidy does is allows them to write off their entire out of pocket cost the in the same year the actually spend the money.

an average oil or gas well drilled in the states is going to cost 15 million or so to drill the well, those cost are paid in full at the time the well is completed. you also have all the prior cost exploration, leases etc that they have already invested, however that well won't turn a profit for years. The subsidy just allows them to get their own portion of tax money back.

it's nothing like a farm subsidy, where farmers are paid not to grow crops or the grants that they're giving to solar companies

 

[VivaRevolution]

you have no idea what a oil subsidy is

edit

before the government created whats referred to as oil subsidies, oil and gas companies had to depreciate their expenses over a period of years. what a subsidy does is allows them to write off their entire out of pocket cost the in the same year the actually spend the money.

an average oil or gas well drilled in the states is going to cost 15 million or so to drill the well, those cost are paid in full at the time the well is completed. you also have all the prior cost exploration, leases etc that they have already invested, however that well won't turn a profit for years. The subsidy just allows them to get their own portion of tax money back.

it's nothing like a farm subsidy, where farmers are paid not to grow crops or the grants that they're giving to solar companies

Still sounds like corporate welfare.

I might be OK with this, if we weren't constantly hearing about cutting SS, food stamps, or how we can't afford things.

 

[VivaRevolution]

Since climate change is apparently reaching a critical point now. Should our government switch all energy subsidies towards so called green energies? Would you support such measures?
Would it bankrupt the country?
Could it inspire other nations to do the same?
I feel that this is a real issue and instead of worrying about a few bad apples crossing into our nation amongst some starving needy refugees, we should be pushing for reforms in energy production to prevent future refugees from hostile Muslim states.

EDIT: All fossil fuel subsidies

Let green energy evolve on it's own. We need a focus on efficiency, and I would be more than OK with taking energy subsidies, specifically coal subsidies, and re-allocating to efficiency investment, first and foremost, our 1950's Eisenhower era power generation facilities.

 

[second sight]

Still sounds like corporate welfare.

I might be OK with this, if we weren't constantly hearing about cutting SS, food stamps, or how we can't afford things.

what part of that sounds like corporate welfare, you understand it their money?
http://www.forbes.com/pictures/mef45fkfh/6-microsoft/

 

[Supereem]

Even Democrats know Green energy right now is useless and expensive. Even if all homes and cars are powered by green energy, it will have little impact on the global coal and oil consumption. The plastic on the computer you are making now, how was that made? How about the satellite we are relying on? How was the steel for that smeltered? How is the steel plan powered? How about the cables? How are the ships that move these products to the factories powered?

As of right now we rely on fossil fuels for pretty much everything. They are cheap, easy to extract and there is a lot to last several life times. Of course we will require the use of green energy in the future, but we are no were near reaching that goal. Instead of wasting money making shitty solar panel farms the money should be put into research and development. Those farms are a huge waste of money and at the end of the day do little in regards to climate change. More of a symbol so green lefties can finger themselves to sleep at night over.

 

[VivaRevolution]

what part of that sounds like corporate welfare, you understand it their money?
http://www.forbes.com/pictures/mef45fkfh/6-microsoft/

No it isn't. They have a tax rate. Not paying that tax rate is corporate welfare.

Giving someone a tax rebate for a child tax credit, is welfare for people as well.

Saying it is their money, is a childish Republican talking point.

 

[second sight]

No it isn't. They have a tax rate. Not paying that tax rate is corporate welfare.

Giving someone a tax rebate for a child tax credit, is welfare for people as well.

Saying it is their money, is a childish Republican talking point.

go get em bernie

 

[SODACKER]

No it isn't. They have a tax rate. Not paying that tax rate is corporate welfare.

Giving someone a tax rebate for a child tax credit, is welfare for people as well.

Saying it is their money, is a childish Republican talking point.

It's the same tax break that Apple and Microsoft get, the same than manufacturing and car companies get. It's a standard tax break that oil companies actually benefit from less many others.

But if you'd rather just spew this brainless corporate welfare line then can't any conservative say that we're already very socialist because everyone is on welfare and supported by the government.

 

[second sight]

It's the same tax break that Apple and Microsoft get, the same than manufacturing and car companies get. It's a standard tax break that oil companies actually benefit from less many others.

But if you'd rather just spew this brainless corporate welfare line then can't any conservative say that we're already very socialist because everyone is on welfare and supported by the government.

read the link I gave him

ExxonMobil in 2011 made $27.3 billion in cash payments for income taxes. Chevron paid $17 billion and ConocoPhillips $10.6 billion. And not only were these the highest amounts in absolute terms, when compared with the rest of the 25 most profitable U.S. companies (see our slideshow for the full rundown of who paid what), the trio also had the highest effective tax rates. Exxon’s tax rate was 42.9%, Chevron’s was 48.3% and Conoco’s was 41.5%. That’s even higher than the 35% U.S. federal statutory rate, which is already the highest tax rate among developed nations.


(The lowest taxpayers among the most profitable companies? Automakers Ford and GM, despite $20 billion and $9 billion in net income, respectively, paid a scant $270 million and $570 million in taxes — simply because they have billions in previous-year losses to balance against recent profits.)

 

[second sight]

No it isn't. They have a tax rate. Not paying that tax rate is corporate welfare.

Giving someone a tax rebate for a child tax credit, is welfare for people as well.

Saying it is their money, is a childish Republican talking point.

can I assume you skip all the deductions and decline to depreciate items on your tax return or plan on doing that should you ever get a job?

 

[Cid]

Automakers should be targeted for going green IMO. The industry relies on governments subsidies and can do a hell of a lot better job promoting the electric car than they do.

 

[VivaRevolution]

can I assume you skip all the deductions and decline to depreciate items on your tax return or plan on doing that should you ever get a job?

You can assume whatever you want.

Doesn't change the conversation from how things should be, and how they really are.

 

[VivaRevolution]

Automakers should be targeted for going green IMO. The industry relies on governments subsidies and can do a hell of a lot better job promoting the electric car than they do.

There you go. Here is a green energy subsidy I could get behind. I want a electric car, with a gas ran generator it can switch to when the battery runs out, with a better range then the Volt has.

The solution to your battery charge running out, is to have a gas generator option.

 

[VivaRevolution]

It's the same tax break that Apple and Microsoft get, the same than manufacturing and car companies get. It's a standard tax break that oil companies actually benefit from less many others.

But if you'd rather just spew this brainless corporate welfare line then can't any conservative say that we're already very socialist because everyone is on welfare and supported by the government.

LOL, I don't support the tech industries corporate welfare either. Boeing can go suck a fatty, with their EX-IM bank.

Hear me, and hear me well. You don't get to cut the social safety net, and keep corporate welfare in place.

If we are about deregulation, then let's actually do that, and have a free market, where these companies survive on their own, or die.

If not, then let's quit pretending.

 

[MadSquabbles500]

Since climate change is apparently reaching a critical point now. Should our government switch all energy subsidies towards so called green energies? Would you support such measures?
Would it bankrupt the country?
Could it inspire other nations to do the same?
I feel that this is a real issue and instead of worrying about a few bad apples crossing into our nation amongst some starving needy refugees, we should be pushing for reforms in energy production to prevent future refugees from hostile Muslim states.

EDIT: All fossil fuel subsidies

If they subsidize green energy then does that mean we can all afford green power, and stop polluting the Earth? Then Hell YIPPie KI YAY

What does subsidy actually mean? Does it just mean the Gubment pays for something? If so, then why not just nationalize those companies?

 

[Cid]

There you go. Here is a green energy subsidy I could get behind. I want a electric car, with a gas ran generator it can switch to when the battery runs out, with a better range then the Volt has.

The solution to your battery charge running out, is to have a gas generator option.

Your car already exists. May I present the Hammerhead Eagle i-Thrust.


I think top gear may have been the first people to produce an electric car that ran with a gas generator charging the batteries which goes to show the minimal effort the car industry has gone to to solve the electric car "flaws".