Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock


Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict


Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links


Regional News


News Publications

Hillary reverts to form
Posted by: McQ on Friday, October 28, 2005

Newsmax claims Hillary Clinton has reverted to form, at least when it comes to energy, by recommending increasing taxes on gasoline:
2008 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said yesterday that she backs a plan to hike gasoline taxes through the roof.

Speaking to a group of alternative energy investors in Washington, D.C., Clinton proposed to sock oil companies with $20 billion in new fees that would be used to fund research on clean energy - driving up costs for oil producers that they would inevitably pass along to consumers.

The top Democrat said her goal is to get "oil companies that have experienced these amazing profits either to reinvest them in our energy future to reduce our dependence on oil or to contribute to a strategic energy fund that will provide incentives for companies and consumers who want to be part of an energy solution."

Mrs. Clinton's whopping tax hike proposal comes just as prices at the pump are beginning to decline from records highs in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, which caused a bump in energy inflation that experts warned could tip the economy into recession.

Mrs. Clinton insisted that her $20 billion fee plan was "not about new energy taxes on consumers" - but she declined to say how oil companies would absorb the additional costs without charging consumers.
The last line is key. I don't know of single tax that the business "absorbs". That's simply not how it's done. Any tax placed on business is passed along to the consumer. Econ 101.

Remember as Ms. Clinton moves toward '08 and her inevitable run for the presidency that at base her philosphy can be summed up by a quote of hers made at San Francisco Democratic fund raiser:

"We're Going to Take Things Away From You on Behalf of the Common Good"

And she means it.

Fair warning.
Return to Main Blog Page

Previous Comments to this Post 

You are of course well aware of the egregious overspending on behalf of Bush and the GOP-led congress, but rather than look to your "leaders" for answers on why they are screwing you you find it simpler to blame it on Hillary. Take my word for it, it wasn’t Hillary who increased pork spending by more then 10X in the last 4 years. It wasn’t Hillary who voted to give Exxon Mobil (who already has $27 billion in cash) another $2.5 billion of your tax dollars. It’s not Hillary who has advocated increasing non-defense discretionary spending at a rate greater than that of the LBJ was your friends in the Republican majority. You’re getting raped by your so-called "allies" and all you can do is blame Hillary, you morally and intellectually bankrupt buffoon. Here, maybe you should read this:

All you so-called “conservatives” surely know that they don’t come much more conservative than the Cato Institute, at least on fiscal policy. Well the Cato Institute has concluded that George W. Bush and the Republican Congressional Majority has been viciously screwing you, me and every other ordinary American. Don’t take my word for it, read the article yourself, if you have the stomach for it.
Written By: phil
phil: It’s always a good practice to know what has been said on a blog before opening your mouth and inserting your foot. Other than this particular article, what other article have you read on this blog?

I’d guess none.

So try the search engine, plug in "spending" and see what you get. Then you can come back and fess up that you were uninformed when you wrote the above comment.
Written By: McQ
And Phil, why don’t you look back at Hillary’s Senate voting record and check how many times she voted against spending legislation vs. how many times she did. She’s part of the problem bub, just as you are with your uninformed perspective.

Written By: Unknown
URL: http://
Michelle Malkin, either, of late. Today, she links a story that I’ve linked as well... that suggests we’re in really desperate shape in the oil situation...

Yep.. In another 500 years, even at the current consumption groth rates, we’re gonna run out.

500 years. Gee... we’ve gotta raise taxes and fund pie in the sky ’alternative programs... why, it’d be irresponsible to do else.

Written By: Bithead
Correction, first line, Insert:

"Phil hasn’t read...."
Written By: Bithead
I don’t suppose you noted Exxons record making profits this quarter?
Written By: cindy bravo
URL: http://
Uhh cindy, their job is to generate profits for their stock holders by selling goods and services. If you don’t like how much they’re charging for their product don’t frickin’ buy it. Enough people do that, you won’t be hearing about record profits. The question we never hear asked is if consumers are purchasing more product, margins have increased or a combination of the two. I haven’t seen exxon’s balance sheets but, I suspect that consumption has continued to increase globally, which would account for an increase in profits.
Written By: Curt Mitchell
URL: http://
I don’t suppose you noted Exxons record making profits this quarter?

No I haven’t, and frankly that has nothing to do with this one way or the other.
Written By: McQ
Why doesn’t anyone ever complain about how much Hollywood stars and film studios make?
A 700% profit for Miramax on one film seems to be just dandy, for some reason.
Written By: Nathan
Exxon has increased profits by both increasing sales and slight margin expansion. Heaven forbid a well run company make a profit. All of the calls for a windfall profit tax are absurd. I didn’t hear anyone shouting for a subsidy when margins and revenues were falling in the late 1990’s.

I received a research note yesterday about a proposal that’s being floated on a one time tax on oil profits that will be used to fund the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program. The analyst considered this a positive for the industry because demand will increase because of the subsidy and the cost will be passed through to the consumer. The thought that these taxes somehow punish the oil industry is ridiculous. We all end up paying for it.
Written By: Tom
URL: http://
Profits today are jobs tomorrow, Curt. Businesses do not pay taxes. When you tax a business, regardless of its form, you are taxing the customers directly, and the owners and operators indirectly.
Written By: Charles D. Quarles
Anyone ever realize that there is no such thing as ’corporate profits’? I mean, is there some kind of shadow organization there called a corporation? No. There are people who own stock in these companies. And they make money when companies do well. And they spend that money giving us all jobs and income and nice stuff like that. Man, someone really needs to start teaching economics 101 in government high schools these days. Kids have no idea how capitalism works.
Written By: meagain
URL: http://

Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Vicious Capitalism


Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks