Steve,
You don't have a problem him calling me a liar or implying I am parroting those on talk radio. Why is that, Steve? You have not chastise him...only me.
I though it was obvious that anyone using NET PROFIT only, and repeats it over, over and over as a a reason for punitive measures is laughable. The component SN doesn't mention is revenue. There is a reason for those profits being large that is sales. No comment on his drug deal and pawn shop thingy? I take it you consider that germane to this discussion. 9.5% Net is windfall to be punished extraordinarily?
When someone puts up a canned talking point as gospel rather than giving it some creditable examination...it is what exactly?
What exactly are your views but one-sided? Solar because it is an unlimited source of energy...I get it. There is more to this than than...and I have stated it over and over but you ignore what is going on in Europe. Why should expensive energy not act as impediment to economic activity like higher taxes and regulation? I have been holistic in my approach here.
You have asked why am I sticking up for the oil companies? I am not sticking up them, I am sticking up for the rule of law. I could not care less about the oil companies. If IBM and AAPL get depreciation allowance, why shouldn't XOM, BP, COP or CVX? Just because?
