Questions for our Conservative ATS Members...

I read this on faceborg earlier today, and I wanted to ask these very questions of our always vocal Conservative Republican members:

"I need some Republicans to explain to me how they juxtapose these scenarios: First, Corporate profits has risen to a fifty-yr all time high, while unemployment remain fairly high. Second, Oil companies are making record profit, while gas prices is at its highest.

Now, my question to the Republicans are: 1. If their arguments and economic philosophy that more corporate profits equals more jobs were true, shouldn't unemployment be at its lowest, considering the record profits corporations are making? 2. Why should Americans continue the tax break for oil companies, when the more profits they make, the higher our gas prices? 3. Aftermath of the above facts, who is the Republicans actually working for, the people or Corporations and the wealthy 1%?"

Source

reply to post by JaxonRoberts


There is a difference between a true conservative and a progressive.
Most of the 'conservatives' today are actually progressives. They just dont realize it, because the fanciful leaders they stand behind wear the wrong title.

reply to post by JaxonRoberts

Well... You bring up a very interesting question. It's almost a paradox at first glance...it really is. I had to think a bit on this and I am conflicted. I think I'm one of the few conservatives I'm aware of that actually admit to having protested in Occupy, and this is straight to the heart of that so it seems a good example of the mental conflict you highlight.

After thinking it over I must admit I have no really GOOD answer and definitely no snappy come backs. I think you hit the very core of the crisis our nation is experiencing and it really is to the core of ideological approaches how how things can ever work in the long term.



The SHORT answer I came to is this. Prior to 2000, much of the system and the idea of the Corporations expanding to feed the jobs of the rest of the economy did work. It's worked fairly well for most of the 20th century. Even FDR and Truman largely brought the BOOM of post war years in the manufacturing (Capitalist) base created for the fighting. We've ridden that foundation right to the turn of the century. Without it? Well.......

So what changed? Why a screaming economic boom followed by a short lull for a bad president....immediately followed by another real economic boom period leading to 2000? (I'm referring to Reagan and Clinton as the boom years, BTW..this isn't Party as much as some think...in my opinion)

I believe what both Bush and Obama have done or allowed to happen that is DIFFERENT and changed things is the regulations passed over the last 10-12 years combining to make Profit very very good (as always) but expansion and building very very bad. THAT is new. No expansion means no new jobs..or what we've watched happen. They go to nations that LIKE businesses building new things and huge new bases for employment and don't torture them through years of permits, red tape and court law suits just to open the doors on a new plant or whatever a business does.

Sorry for the length but you just didn't ask something that lends itself to a quicky answer outside of trolls. Thanks for the reason to think hard tonight! S/F

If their arguments and economic philosophy that more corporate profits equals more jobs were true, shouldn't unemployment be at its lowest???

Yes it should. Of course they will claim that they're too regulated, but they've been regulated for decades, and there have been surveys of business people in the last few years that showed that regulation was at the bottom of their list of reasons for not hiring.

I believe that many "Republicans" are probably asking those same questions! Problem is, most of the die hard party members are more concerned with picking a candidate that has the best chance of winning against our current president at election time instead of picking one that will serve the party's core beliefs the best.

I personally am not happy with any of the potential Republican candidates, but I generally vote Republican as they serve in my family's best interest. For example I am sickened by the outrageous and unnecessary price of oil and gas and the ungodly profits that the oil companies are making just like everyone else; however a vast majority of my relatives are employed in oil refinery, transportation, etc. Therefore the better the oil companies are doing the more work there is. While a huge number of Americans have lost their jobs people in oil industry related fields have stayed working (at least everyone I know personally has stayed working).

I think most people just vote with whichever party serves their own family's best interest, even if they disagree with a lot of the bull that goes along with it.

It's my honest opinion that probably 60% of people on unemployment choose to be there. They will always be there just getting by, sucking up that good money. They'll return to work when the bank closes...for a while anyway, until they refill their un em coffers. Oil companies spend a lot of money (nobody thinks about that). They are always rebuilding refineries, adding new improved processes and the pipe and steel required to do so. When other companies spend money on self improvement they get tax breaks (investment). Shouldn't big oil get the same treatment? Don't forget they only provide a service, you can always choose not to participate. Keep your money in your pocket. Don't give it to them. Walk or buy a donkey. The local, state and federal govt.s make more money off a gallon of gas than the oil companies do. Oil profits are at an all time high...consumption of petroleum products is also. China and India are going to get theirs you can count on it. The decreased supply along with the increase in demand will generate higher prices. Oil companies do not just decide to raise prices. Their bottom line is set. They are going to make a profit or go out of business. That is a fact of life. You want to lower the price of gas... remove the tax, plain and simple. Republicans have been calling for this for years. You want a job? Go out and get one, or create one. There is plenty of money here for all of us. Just gotta go get it.

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
I read this on faceborg earlier today, and I wanted to ask these very questions of our always vocal Conservative Republican members:

"I need some Republicans to explain to me how they juxtapose these scenarios: First, Corporate profits has risen to a fifty-yr all time high, while unemployment remain fairly high. Second, Oil companies are making record profit, while gas prices is at its highest.

Now, my question to the Republicans are: 1. If their arguments and economic philosophy that more corporate profits equals more jobs were true, shouldn't unemployment be at its lowest, considering the record profits corporations are making? 2. Why should Americans continue the tax break for oil companies, when the more profits they make, the higher our gas prices? 3. Aftermath of the above facts, who is the Republicans actually working for, the people or Corporations and the wealthy 1%?"

Source

Corporate profits are not just profits for a few. (Well right now they are but that is wrong.) Corporate profits are supposed to be given to the shareholders (common folks) as dividends for investing in that corporation. Why do people think that corporate profits are a bad thing? The profits are given out to the shareholders. However, due to the uncertain economic climate, many corporations are holding those profits because they don't know what the Liberal/Progressive/Socialists are going to force them to do. It is right now their "rainy day fund" to prepare for the mess known as ObamaCaare. Hollywood has loads of money right now but they will not spend it until the future is certain. That is why they are producing such low budget crap.

Corporations in this country cannot compete in the world market because we have the highest corporate tax rate in the world. When corporations pay the highest tax, they have to go to the lowest labor market. Ie, China and Mexico. Corporations are making jobs everywhere but here. It's just that people want to start entry level jobs at 50K a year without any experience or education. Have you seen why American jobs are going overseas? It is because our blue collar workers can't spell, write, or even do basic math which is important in todays industries.

As for the oil companies, they are speculators just like wall street. They are raising prices by leveraging small investments into large holdings. Put up a dime and get a dollar's worth of oil. That is not right. A simple law could be passed that those who buy on leverage or margin should have to take acceptance of the product to get the benefits. The oil companies, the Middle East and the speculators are trading and buying non-existant products. They are buying promises which they sell to others who buy and sell promises.

The oil companies are still making the same percentage (around 4%) on every gallon of gas they sell.. Grocery stores, as I understand it, make around 1% profit. If gas is $1.00, they make 4 cents. If gas is $4.00, they make 16 cents. If you want to tax the corporations, you are taxing yourself because all they do is pass that tax on to you. You pay it, the government collects it and hands it out to those who aren't working and many do not want to work. They are voting themselves paychecks and raises just like Wall Street people are voting themselves paychecks and raises. Who is worse? Those who cheat the system on either side are equally guilty.

If you want to buy a house, you had to be able to pay for it. Now that that Frank Dodd bill has been enacted, you don't have to prove you can pay for it. Just sign the paper, take the keys, and hope you win the lottery. If not, let the banks suffer. Well, the banks don't suffer. When you sign a mortgage, the bank pays the house owner in cash. The bank is now in debt on that house. If you fail to pay, you are cheating the bank. Who cares? How about those people (the working class) who have invested their retirement in banks that others are cheating. Who do you think loses? The common man. He loses his dividends and his investment into the corporation. He has to start going on the dole. Who pays the dole? Other people. Working people.

We have high wages in the country be edict. We have high wages in this country because of unions. We have no jobs because of the high wages, the unions, and truants who want to make it rich overnight.

Most of the "conservatives" as you put it are working or want to work. Most of the "liberals" are either super rich and never have to worry about money (Hollywood Stars) or don't want to work.

If you want to see socialism in action, take everything you have and give 1/2 of it away. See if the person you give it to, gives half of that away. The handout stops with them. That is socialism.

PS. Socialist are beginning to run out of MY money. Then the joke will be on you.

reply to post by HangTheTraitors


I'm glad everyone listens to each other's positions from a starting point of such impartiality. We'd have a heck of a time around here if anyone prejudged a whole side of the political spectrum as being something short of honest before a word has been typed or a thought fully formed. We all laugh at being impartial about the leaders....but indeed. I'm glad we aren't that way toward each other.

I'm not a Republican but I am a conservative so I thought I'd try and add a Canadian conservative perspective on it.

It's wrong. I want companies to make record profits but I also want them to give jobs to Canadians and Americans while doing it. Right now, the unemployment rate in Canada is 7.4%. Not terrible but not great, considering that we rode through the global financial meltdown pretty well. In my province, the unemployment rate is 10.1% yet we have one of the largest oil companies in Canada here and they aren't hiring. They are a private company and not publicly traded so information on their profits isn't public knowledge but what I can say is they are the 3rd richest family in the country. They employ a great deal of people here but getting a job with them isn't easy. We are also a resource based economy here and they are suffering. Wood is big as is mining. We're also in line for a large increase in shale gas production. In my opinion, that's good. It will mean plenty of jobs for the people in my province.

The gas thing is beyond my understanding. Two or three years ago or so, when oil was almost a $150 a barrel, gas was about a $1.40 a litre. A barrel of oil is now $103 and gas is a $1.40 a litre. Gas production is up, and I think I heard that the US has a huge surplus over what was expected in their reserves. Yet the price is almost the same as when oil hit its all time high. The cost of production has not gone up that much in the short time between now and then to justify these prices, imo.

If the Govt EPA regulations and unavailable leases for explorations were to be lifted, those profits would have been spent on developing those new revenue streams. But net, end profit WAS only at about 7% for the oil companies once the oil is purchased on the market and leaves their custody, it still is not that much considering the stunning volume of produce being transferred. But the FedGov FORCING the lack of spending by the oil companies (regulations and lack of leases) to make them look more like villains with now about a 9% profit. This way they can be made a political football to justify the FedGov giving money and tax breaks to GE (ZERO taxes last year), Solyndra, "green energy companies" that are money black holes. The jobs aren't there because the FedGov regulations prevent the work from being authorized to move forward.

The set... the sting... you took the bait all the way down to the intestines, with the enablers being all mass media.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by JaxonRoberts

 

Well... You bring up a very interesting question. It's almost a paradox at first glance...it really is. I had to think a bit on this and I am conflicted. I think I'm one of the few conservatives I'm aware of that actually admit to having protested in Occupy, and this is straight to the heart of that so it seems a good example of the mental conflict you highlight.

So why is it that the two most sensible conservatives on ATS both happen to have bunnies as avatars?

But on topic, I also believe this is beyond party lines and neither camps take fully into account the rest of the factors that have been contributing to our booms and busts. Every conservative can point to boom times with republican presidents and every liberal can do the same with democratic presidents.

Honestly, I'm against fiscally conservative values when it comes to "rich folks are job creators" but I also for totally eliminating big-ticket budget items like defense and oil subsidies. I think, on a fiscal scale, people need to realize there's a bit of wisdom from both camps.

reply to post by JaxonRoberts


Well - unemployment probably isn't high everywhere is it? Part of that has to do with the outsourcing of most everything that doesn't require face-to-face interaction to offshore. Yes, after so many years the cost savings dry up. That's is when companies pack up and move shop to another 3rd world country - and there are plenty of them left.

Look - I lean right on many thing but -. Companies are making record profits because they have globalized to an extent never before - and it has hurt the average American, and that is a shame.

It is much the same with oil companies. America isn't really the best game in town these days for a company wanting to turn a fast buck. It hasn't been for a few years now and we've largely stood by and watched it happen.

I'm for tax breaks etc on business - but only if they hire in the US.

reply to post by JaxonRoberts


What do you think will happen when tax breaks are taken away from oil companies? Do you honestly believe the price of oil will be uneffected? If the liberals would leave the free-market alone, the consumer would help to regulate it.

I think its the uncertainty in the Market that keeps companies from hiring. Look at the fluctuation of gas prices. In the last three years a gallon of gas has doubled in price. That creates all kinds of uncertainty.

Look at Obama Care. Its not just the law that creates economic uncertainty. If it gets struck down, then what happens? Many companies have probably spent 10's of thousands if not millions preparing for this law to take affect. If it gets stuck down its going to create more uncertainty with even more Corporate capital held in reserve based on that newly created uncertainty.

I think its the government that is creating all of this uncertainty that prevents the economic machine our free market is capable of from being unleashed. You have a very small minority of people in Washington creating all this uncertainty and corporations are not confident the "creation of uncertainty" is going to stop anytime soon.

If there is one thing Washington is good at, it's creating uncertainty. This thread is based on the surface of a larger issue. To blame the lack of corporate spending on conservatives is a bit disingenuous. I think we need to look at the root of the problem and Obama Care is a prime example of that uncertainty.

I say the real problem is the liberals idea of utopia. Utopia doesn't exist but uncertainty does. Thanks to Obama and company I don't see Corporate America spending money any time soon.

reply to post by JaxonRoberts


High corporate profits.
High unemployment.
High oil profits.
High price of gas.

You are griping about Republicans yet a Repuplican isn't even in the White House.
That familiar Fear by smear tactic is getting old

reply to post by Alxandro


Excellent job of dodging the original set of questions, as usual. This has to do with current GOP philosophy, as in that which is portrayed by those running for the GOP nomination...

reply to post by Nite_wing


beautifully said.

though i doubt the libs have the brain power to understand it. and since they arent being told that by their hypocrite overlords, they wont listen.

they will keep waiting for all the welfare recipients and all the illegal aliens and occupier campers to hire them and fix the economy with college loan handouts and flushing money down the green tech toilet. oh, and free healthcare and houses for everyone!


maybe oil companies are making more profits because people BUY MORE OIL? seems pretty simple no?

maybe obama should have supported the keystone pipeline and more leases? know what usually happens when more supply hits the market? if 1 person sells oil, you have no choice what to pay, you pay what they want, if 100 people are selling it, prices go down because of competition. those 100 companies fight each other to get YOUR business.

ever noticed how one fast food place puts an item on a $.99 menu, and then all the others put a similar item on for similar price?

conservatives want THAT. you looney socialist liberals want obama to be the only one who sets the price of oil or burgers at your fast food joint. because clearly the idiots behind mcdonalds have NO idea how to run a business like obama does!

also, why the hell should oil companies NOT make money? what service are you doing for society that is something everyone needs, every day, and you are just busting your butt for free? oil companies provide a product we want, and need. if you dont want them to make money, you should probably swim to your own private island and live in a hand made stick hut with nothing but what grows from the earth. otherwise, youre supporting the big bad oil company boogey man. OOOO OOOOO OHHHHHH have fun there castaway. though you dont get a wilson and you dont get an ice skate. because both of those needed evil oil to exist.

you get tax breaks right? why shouldnt companies. ALL companies. not just the ones you think are cool like Solyndra. i figured socialist would know the "good for one, good for all" mentality. they seem to think its great for so many other things. but i guess thats what hypocrisy is isnt it?

seriously, its such basic economics and common sense, yet its completely under attack by fools who just want to bite the hand that feeds.

I have heard it said many times that many Republicans are businessmen, while the Democrats are lawyers...It is true to an extent, and here is why: conservatives preach about "rights", and how they want small government. This normally would be a good thing, but they have an ulterior motive...They want to keep the government from regulating their businesses, so they can continue to screw people like they have been doing for quite a while now.

Trickle down economics is the dumbest thing I think I've ever heard, because it presupposes that businessmen, the "employers", are honest, when in fact they are not. Just look at what caused the recent financial crisis as an example. Conservatives also want to preach about "handouts", and not wanting to help the needy, which just goes to show you that they could give a crap about their employees. This is why they pay the minimum that they have to, ie minimum wage.

Most of your lobbying is done by Republicans, since the the majority of big-business hotshots are Republicans. Do you know how much money Bush Jr. probably made off of oil alone while in office? I hate the standard mold Republicans, as they have less humanness than one should have, and they don't see the problem with greed.