If you want to stimulate the economy with tax policy, you have to reduce marginal tax rates, so that people have more incentive to earn money. Don’t just give us money–make us work for it. This is especially true for the highest earners.

Other things you could do to stimulate the economy:
-Outlaw unions.
-Eliminate the corporate profits tax, and tax dividends as income.
-Simplify the tax code.
-flatten the tax code.

Jason Coleman on October 13, 2008 at 2:31 PM

Jason I am not saying all is lost. I am saying it takes time depending on the situation. Some areas have been analyzed for years before the start of exploration in which the permits could be fast tracked. Others don’t have a chance in hell, whether State or Federal, because they have not taken the time to go through the motions and try to keep up with the organizational instructions. Usually it is the smaller companies whom have this issue and in the long run cost everyone more money due to lack of information.

Most permits can usually be fast tracked with the right system… but the little guys are the ones who usually have a problem due to many different items.

Angry Dumbo on October 13, 2008 at 2:45 PM

LOL, I’m on the Buy Ammo and Drink Heavily plan meself.

Romeo13 on October 13, 2008 at 2:15 PM

Agreed, McCain is no small government alternative, what then is a small government conservative to do this election?

IF there are 10 obstacles before you in a task. Removing 2 of the 10 allows more energy and resources toward the remaining 8. Removing the first two does not mean that number 6 will go any fast or slower, BUT it does mean than in total the time/money/effort to achieve the goal will reduce. That time/money/effort can be used to pursue other goals.

Removing FEDERAL obstacles WILL give substantial incentive to the market. Oil companies will respond, jobs will be created and the economy will improve. As STATES remove obstacles (which some would) the effect will compound.

Yes, fast tracking will cause SOME problems for SOME exploration, but NOT all for all. We, as an economy, can afford having some projects fail or become overly costly, if the majority succeed in creating jobs, wealth and a better economic picture.

You seem to be saying that “all is lost and the regulations are insurmountable and perfect in their scale and scope”. My position is that we strip away as many as we can to speed development. Do you have a logical reason for keeping the regulation levels and evironments static and not reducing the governmental burden?

Remove FEDERAL restrictions and the ball can roll forward. Jobs will be created, the economy will be stimulated and trillions will be generated over the near term (5 years). Some states will go along some won’t and consumers can vote with their feet.

Want a stimulus? Cut taxes and spending!

The idea behind the stimulus is the central (fallacious) concept of Keynesian economics, which argues that government or consumer spending on anything, no matter how inane, drives the economy. Keynes hated investing, as he thought (wrongly) that it takes time before its effects show up in economic activity.

To a Keynesian, then, your headline makes no sense—the stimulative effects of cutting taxes are more than offset by the reduction in stimulus provided by government spending, as at least some of the tax cuts will result in increased savings.

Of course, to an economist as such, investment spending is the indisputable driver of economic growth. But also, to an economist, the entire idea of “stimulus” is a bogus one.

It is unfortunate that economics, which once served as the basis for Classical Liberalism, the only scientific political philosophy, has been reduced to nothing more than a partisan talking-point shouting match. The Keynesians, whose central ideas are nothing more than a rehash of Mercantilism, take the side of the Democrats, and the Republicans are feebly represented by Supply-Siders, who understand just enough of actual economic science to be dangerous to the cause of human freedom and the Night-Watchman State.

It was a peculiar mix of irony and displeasure that I felt while I observed our “free market, free trade” president attempt to use a Keynesian stimulus to achieve a Supply-Side goal. No one since Reagan has done more damage to the cause of free enterprise, and, like Reagan, Bush has done it by acting as free enterprise’s champion.

House Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) on Sunday indicated that he is open to working on a second stimulus package as long as it “makes sense.”

Sounds like a plan, Trent Lott, I mean, Mr. Blunt.

Come on, get a freakin’ clue, Republicans! This “stimulus” crap is ridiculous. It’s nothing more than an election-year bribe. It’s insulting and you’re a sell-out if you push it. The only real stimulus plan is what Ed said, cut taxes and cut spending! Now!

Jason Coleman on October 13, 2008 at 2:07 PM

Jason, many of the drillings are public. Some have a time frame but usually they are public. Unless it is BLM land.. then it will be confidential forever or until they decide to release which is rare.

But I am trying to point out, that even though EPA is State run, it is still concidered Federal and will never be taken out of the system. Thank our wacko environmenalists. The Conservationists are more down to earth and will think about it unlike “others”.

But also you can’t put everything on fast track. Reasons are fields and pools after you get a lease of land. Federal and State, will have to figure on issues like pool rules, feild infringement, unitization rights.. due to leases.

The reason I say you can’t fast track everything is this example. Say you are a oil comp and you lease some land and want to drill via your studies in this one area. But it is also within (depending on State or Federal laws) 100 acres of another Oil Comp. So the other oil comp who already has a well wants the Gov to investigate (very time consuming) so they don’t get their pool (or bubble) of oil taken by the other Comp.
Sometimes they freeze the drilling, other times they tell the Comp who wants to drill too drill and get a sample before they go any further. Now the Gov will check that or have the Comp analyze it to determine if it is from the same bubble. If it is, the Comp that wants that area they just leased, has to plug and abandon that well and leave it alone. Sometimes both Companies can work it out on shares and marginal percetages. other times it is a lawsuit.

There is so much involved in items like this, I can make your head spin. This example is the usual issue… but they can become more extreme as time go one.

This is one reason why not all regs can just go away. Especially if it is State and Federal land butted up next to each other and the directional drilling going on.

Permitting is one thing… disputes due to fast tracking after the fact is more costly in the end.

Angry Dumbo on October 13, 2008 at 2:09 PM

McCain can’t comlain about tax credits, because his own Health Care plan is based on Tax credits.

Way too easy to disrupt this attack.

I understand that each state has their own issues. HOWEVER, as I said, get the Federal Government out of the way, either through Congressional or Executive action and let the markets and industry do the rest.

There isn’t alot of incentive to for the oil companies to deal with the states if then they have to again or before go through the feds. Remove the feds from the equasion and there is incentive to move forward with the states.

Let’s face facts. As financial pressures increase, one, if not multiple states will cut through their bureaucracies to make it more attractive for oil companies to come through them. Other states will make it less attractive.

I don’t posit that the DOE runs it all, but if you remove federal restrictions, the ball can roll forward. If you take your approach, which is to lament that the remaining restrictions are insurmountable is simply defeatist.

Remove the federal restrictions and the market and industry will take care of the rest, one of the fifty will break first and that’s where the economic benefit and job creation will be the greatest the fastest. Others will follow suit based on example.

Get the government out of the way, let the market work and we don’t have to tax, or spend and we’ll all do better.

Which ones to fast-track? The more the better, and make it public. Highlight obstructionists and let the governors take some initiative, there are more than a few who are up to the task.

Regarding the Republicans, anyone using Republican and conservative in the same breath might want to do a reality check.

With McCain or Obama it will simply be more of the same. Obama will just hurt more.

So what is it I’m not understanding?

Jason Coleman on October 13, 2008 at 1:41 PM

Jason, what do you concider a fast track?

Permitting for drilling? Permitting due to environmental reasons? Permitting of mineral rights (Federal, State and private)? Permitting of disposal issues (water, core samples, Methane Injectable or to haul the gas away, casings, etc)? Permitting of subsurface and surface findings of animals (endangered or other), environmental water ways (ponds, stnading water, lakes, swamp, rivers, the ocean), possible archilogical digs, geological discoveries (fossils), etc. Permitting of Injection wells (water, gas, cabon based re-cycled and/or other)? Pemitting of co-sponserships of companies?

Shit that list goes on and on and on.

Which ones are you referring too? Federal? State? Environmental? Welfare? Municpality/County? City/Town (because it has happened)? Not to mention Private surface and subsurface rights and holdings.

You really do not understand what I am talking about. There are State whom do not go off the guidelines of Federal juristiction… they have their own. Other States who operate on both their own standards and Federal also go off a National Standard which is in part a Conservationist issue and they are called I.O.G.C.C. and work with other States who are part and feel the need to be part of it. Alaska, Oklahoma, and Texas are part of this. Also who guides the mineral rights on Private Land? State? Federal? Is it the right of the individual(s) whom own it… or otherwise.

I am speaking frankly and you aren’t getting the jist. Federal (D.O.E.) does not run everything.

However, your freedom will be guaranteed for as long as you live.

Bishop on October 13, 2008 at 1:37 PM

Bishop, I am already doing that… wth is my pay check?

And if you think I am being “obtruse” is the fact I work in Oil and Gas and I am just telling you how it is. And if you don’t believe me, check out the Regulations concerning permitting, leasing, expiditing on environmental issues.. etc. Dealing with State, Federal, EPA (whihc is now environmental per State) and possibly Corps of Engineers if it is land given back. Not to mention private land owners who may or may not have the mineral rights.

Your making my point for me. That’s EXACTLY what I am talking about.

Get the governement(regulations) out of the way, and the oil companies will bend over backwards to drill. Yes, SOME STATES will take issue, so what, let them, and they will reap the wirlwind for it in higher prices. Other states will fast-track approvals and bend over backwards to get wells uncapped, platforms erected, new holes drilled etc, etc.

First step, get the feds out of the way. Executive order or congressional action, I don’t care which will get the ball rolling. Remove the federal restrictions and the market and industry will take care of the rest. Some states will say no, and they’ll miss out on the opportunity, others will line up and that’s where the jobs will be created.

No need for increased taxes, no need for economic stimulus checks, no need for increased spending. Just remove federal restrictions and “Drill Now!” (include uncapping wells in the mid-south and shale oil and all it’s other forms) and the economy will grow, jobs will be created trillions of dollars will be generated.

So what is it I’m not understanding?

It makes my skin crawl to think of what Obarky would consider “unnecessary” spending.

Say goodbye to missile defense, new aircraft carriers and air-superiority fighters.

Tax revenues are about to drop like a rock…

aero on October 13, 2008 at 1:21 PM

You’re more right than you think. You see, this is actually part of the Obama Tax Plan:

Obama’s plan will cut taxes overall, reducing revenues to below the levels that prevailed under Ronald Reagan (less than 18.2 percent of GDP).iii The Obama tax plan is a net tax cut – his tax relief for middle class families is larger than the revenue raised by his tax changes for families over $250,000. Coupled with his commitment to cut unnecessary spending, Obama will pay for this tax relief while bringing down the budget deficit.

However, your freedom will be guaranteed for as long as you live.

Buy Danish on October 13, 2008 at 1:27 PM

Key to this one is how you are Incorporated. If you are an LLC, as most small business’s are, then company income is taxed as personal income… after business deductions and such.

If you are a “C” corp, then income is taxed at the business level, which in America is one of the highest rates in the Western world…

So, your question as to Net vs. Gross is a very important one… and one Barry won’t answer about his “evolving” tax plan.

Hey aero, if you have a finance background the FDIC is hiring like crazy.

Bishop on October 13, 2008 at 1:32 PM

So’s “Cash ‘n Carry”… the guy in charge of spending the $700 billion (when they get around to actually spending this emergency money).

CC

Hey aero, if you have a finance background the FDIC is hiring like crazy.

Cut spending? You have got to be kidding me. Spending is going through the roof. The yearly deficit is going to be over a trillion dollars.

MB4 on October 13, 2008 at 12:43 PM

optimist…

CC