Does America really want a change?

[dananderson32]

JML if obama wins drinks are on me next time your in buffalo :thumbs: :thumbs:

[homedawg]

The Wall Street Journal
August 29, 2008, 3:32 pm

A Sarah Palin Primer: What McCain’s VP Pick Means for Wall Street
Posted by Heidi N. Moore
Presumptive Republican presidential nominee John McCain today picked his running mate: Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.

One pollster calls her “Saint Sarah” for her 83% approval rating and campaign against corruption in Alaska, as well as her tough negotiations with oil producers ConocoPhillips and BP. The bio: big family with five children; one-time mayor of small-town Wasilla, Alaska; midway through her first term as governor; a star on her high school basketball team. Her one scandal seems to center around an investigation of her effort to get her former brother-in-law fired from his job as state trooper.


Of course, Deal Journal primarily cares about what she means for Wall Street and deal making. That can be a tough read. Deal Journal has noted before that neither presidential candidate has a considerable track record on economic issues, and their VP picks–Joe Biden for the Democrats and Palin–are no different. You might think that the governor of Alaska would be a friend to the oil industry, but Palin may surprise you. Read on.

Taxes: Palin has adhered to her party’s dislike of taxes for individuals, but that sympathy doesn’t necessarily extend to corporations. Alaska has some of the nation’s highest gas prices. Palin just signed a bill to suspend Alaska’s gasoline tax until Aug. 31, 2009, actually implementing in her state what John McCain advocated this year on the national scene. And she is using royalties from oil-and-natural gas production to give all residents a one-time payment of $1,200 to defray the cost of gasoline. The bill, signed Aug. 25, also suspends taxes on marine fuel and aviation fuel for a year. Last year, Palin raised taxes on oil companies–big operators there include ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips and BP–doubling state revenue from the oil patch to $10 billion in the fiscal year ended June 30. Alaska now gets about $49 of each $120-a-barrel of crude pulled from its fields, according to the Seattle Times. ConocoPhillips has said the state gets about 75% of the price of each barrel. The Alaska tax jump has been termed a windfall-profit tax. Congressional Republicans including John McCain have opposed windfall-profits taxes from oil companies on a national level, while Barack Obama has supported it.

Energy: Her primary business dealings have, naturally, been with oil companies, and she has taken some hard lines. According to Bloomberg, she “threatened to evict Exxon Mobil Corp. and its partners BP PLC, Chevron Corp. and ConocoPhillips from a state-owned gas field, winning a promise from them to boost Alaska’s natural-gas output by 17 percent.”

Palin has sought to reduce the oil companies’ hold on the state. Her higher taxes are expected to reduce oilfield development and oil-company investment, and drew complaints from the Alaska Oil & Gas Association.

Still, she has criticized high energy costs and has pushed the big oil producers to build a natural-gas pipeline. If she extends these sympathies into her time in national office, it may be a mixed bag for auto makers and airlines. On one hand, a Palin energy policy may reduce the influence of Big Oil; on the other, if they pay higher taxes or limit their development, supply may become scarcer and costs would go up. The auto makers are begging for $50 billion in loans from the federal government in order to build fuel-efficient vehicles. The airlines are struggling with high fuel prices–considered one motivation behind the decision of Delta Air Lines and Northwest Airlines to strike a merger agreement this year.

[dananderson32]

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/J9pnzQ96kWA&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/J9pnzQ96kWA&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

that makes 2/2 on the republican side that don't have a clue

[homedawg]

:beerbang:


"I am use to being very productive and working real hard!"

Sarah Palin


Dan, just in case you missed her message (slam): Why don't we ever hear about the VP?

[homedawg]

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/3EGiqfkO8ss&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/3EGiqfkO8ss&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>


<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/48ukevR1wpc&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/48ukevR1wpc&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

:thumbs:

[homedawg]

Congressional Republicans including John McCain have opposed windfall-profits taxes from oil companies on a national level, while Barack Obama has supported it.

In a February 12, 2008 editorial titled "Record Profits Mean Record Taxes," Investor's Business Daily said that regular income taxes already take into account the high profits, and that there's no need to do anything extra to tax or punish the oil companies. As an example, the editorial states "Consider the magnitude of the contributions from Exxon alone. On those 'outlandish' 2006 profits, the company paid federal income taxes of $27.9 billion, leaving it with $39.5 billion in after-tax income. That $27.9 billion was more than was collected from half of individual taxpayers in 2004. In that year, 65 million returns — which represent far more than 65 million taxpayers because of joint returns — paid $27.4 billion in federal income taxes."

In an August 4, 2008 editorial titled "What Is a 'Windfall' Profit?" the Wall St. Journal wrote, "What is a 'windfall' profit anyway? ... Take Exxon Mobil, which on Thursday reported the highest quarterly profit ever and is the main target of any 'windfall' tax surcharge. Yet if its profits are at record highs, its tax bills are already at record highs too. Between 2003 and 2007, Exxon paid $64.7 billion in U.S. taxes, exceeding its after-tax U.S. earnings by more than $19 billion... Maybe they have in mind profit margins as a percentage of sales. Yet by that standard Exxon's profits don't seem so large. Exxon's profit margin stood at 10% for 2007... If that's what constitutes windfall profits, most of corporate America would qualify. Take aerospace or machinery -- both 8.2% in 2007. Chemicals had an average margin of 12.7%. Computers: 13.7%. Electronics and appliances: 14.5%. Pharmaceuticals (18.4%) and beverages and tobacco (19.1%)... 51 Senators voted to impose a 25% windfall tax on a U.S.-based oil company whose profits grew by more than 10% in a single year... This suggests that a windfall is defined by profits growing too fast.... But if 10% is the new standard, the tech industry is going to have to rethink its growth arc. So will LG, the electronics company, which saw its profits grow by 505% in 2007. Abbott Laboratories hit 110%... Berkshire Hathaway. Warren Buffett's outfit pulled in $11 billion last year, up 29% from 2006. Its profit margin -- if that's the relevant figure -- was 11.47%, which beats out the American oil majors. Or consider Google, which earned a mere $4.2 billion but at a whopping 25.3% margin... General Electric profits by investing in the alternative energy technology that Mr. Obama says Congress should subsidize even more heavily than it already does. GE's profit margin in 2007 was 10.3%, about the same as profiteering Exxon's."

[dananderson32]

just ordered my Obama/Biden 08 shirt HD, and i plan on wearing it everyday from now till november 5th were taking back the white house :beerbang: :beerbang: :beerbang:

[homedawg]

just ordered my Obama/Biden 08 shirt HD, and i plan on wearing it everyday from now till november 5th were taking back the white house :beerbang: :beerbang: :beerbang:

How can you wear it now, if you just ordered it?

Make sure you have 'spray n wash'! :thumbs:

[dananderson32]

How can you wear it now, if you just ordered it?

Make sure you have 'spray n wash'! :thumbs:

well when it gets here ill wear it everyday through nov 4th who cares if it smells or anything its worth it cause theres too much at stake in this election to not care

[homedawg]

well when it gets here ill wear it everyday through nov 4th who cares if it smells or anything its worth it cause theres too much at stake in this election to not care

"who cares if it smells....theres too much at stake in this election to not care"

dananderson32


:bang:

[dananderson32]

"who cares if it smells....theres too much at stake in this election to not care"

dananderson32


:bang:

oh god what did i say wrong in that? :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

[homedawg]

oh god what did i say wrong in that? :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

Analysis: You do not care, therefore, You have not exhausted the ramification of your decision! :beer2:

[dananderson32]

Analysis: You do not care, therefore, You have not exhausted the ramification of your decision! :beer2:

LOL how about if Obama wins free whole winter of shoveling on my company starting november 5th of this year and ending when the last bit of snow melts in 2009? deal? :thumbs: :thumbs:

[homedawg]

LOL how about if Obama wins free whole winter of shoveling on my company starting november 5th of this year and ending when the last bit of snow melts in 2009? deal? :thumbs: :thumbs:

No thanks! I don't need a handout! :beerbang:

[homedawg]

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/1nA1MwOE86U&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/1nA1MwOE86U&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>