i don't share much in common with obama and i am not out to get any votes so i don't have anyone to please or spin for
progressive taxation is acceptable on an individual taxation basis but is inappropriate for businesses and an excess profits tax is totally unacceptable unless it is a goverment owned business and is never acceptable for the energy business if you make alot you should pay more taxes if you tax the business the business leaves and moves to a lower tax district (look at hal and ir) and moves jobs to countries where the cost of doing business (i.e. taxes) is lower if you tax excess profits you open up a bag of worms - define excess profits? what business will be next? msft? goog? ko? is it gross profit? gross margin? net profit? ebita? who is going to define this? finally if you tax US oils when things are good will the US bail them out if things get bad again? most gas companies plow back every dollar into capital expenditures and acquisitions. the oil majors are the only ones that are really rewarding investor by throwing off free cash flow that isn't all being reinvested and if you tax them they will just cut back on capital expenditures and the upstream will suffer and other oil companies that are subsidized by their goverments like aramco or sinopec or gazprom will put xom and cop out of business
when there are no more businesses with no more workers who are you going to tax? but hey ... don't worry because health care is a right and food and shelter so why should i have to work anyways ... i am entitled to it
To continue: Where could they move to? The can of worms question is easy enough - the revenue officers can and will decide the fiscal basis of any tax (i.e. EBITDA etc.), and there's no arguing with them. The reinvestment argument won't wash, given that BP has spent $50 billion (if I remember correctly) since 2000 on buying back its own shares. That money could be seen as a painless source.
I won't argue with you about spending on social programs, for which this isn't quite the right forum.
if i am running a country wouldn't i want to attract business how do i do that? raise or lower taxes compared to other locations? guess i should never say never my looking glass is in real estate where i can't get an american to work my workers were all immigrants who worked for contractors who worked for me and now my government tells me i have to hire americans or verify all the workers i can't verify all the workers and i can't find an american to work - not because i don't pay enough but because americans don't want to paint, install bathrooms, lay sod, or lay block that is a job for an immigrant they say so i retired and i have nomorehomes the goverment wants to chase away business just like it chased away my workers now there is no more business and i don't pay as much in taxes i just don't want to deal with the higher taxation of dealing with the american construction workers who barely ever showed up to work when they were supposed to
who gives the government the right to take away private property in my country? the oil companies already paid the government huge sums for leases that the government wants to take away from the oil companies. i guess its like the mortgage messs - if someone made a bad deal the government should be able to come in and change the contract whenever they want? my country is becoming like france was and france is becoming like what my country was. anyways taxing the oil companies hurts the 401k retiree, it hurts other retirees who have invested in mutual funds that own bp, it hurts the shareholder reduces the price of the stock making raising capital more expensive for the enterprise. it is a redistribution of wealth and there is no good evidence that the money will be spent better by the government on its citizens than just letting the owners of the enterprise that have taken the risk of investing spend the money and receive the dividends it just doesn't make any sense to add another layer of government - an agency that will spend tens or hundreds of millions of dollars determining how the money will be spent kind of like the agency that received 65 million dollars to look over fannie mae and freddie mac that was taxpayer money well spent?
You assert, "progressive taxation is acceptable on an individual taxation basis but is inappropriate for businesses and an excess profits tax is totally unacceptable unless it is a goverment owned business and is never acceptable for the energy business."
I'm not necessarily disputing the assertion, but it's offered without evidence. Why is it acceptable for the individual, but not for the individual when he is a stock-holder in a business? Why is an excess profits tax totally unacceptable? (Isn't this a logical solution to gouging, for instance?). Why is energy different?