[Rhodes22-list] Herb said, ".... (Big Al, Political, but)

[Herb Parsons]

I realized I was over-simplifying, but let me see if I understand this.

You're saying that if we "take" too much of the profits from those evil 
oil companies, they may reach a tipping point where they may decide to 
gather their marbles and play elsewhere?

As soon as those evil oil companies made that business decision, 
couldn't we just force them to stay in the US?

Don't they have a name for that?

You know, if people were serious about wanting to encourage "alternate 
energy sources", there are ways to do it within the free enterprise 
system without trying to take money away from a business.

Here's a wild thought - a one time 100% income (personal, not corporate) 
for any individual purchasing a hybrid car.

Wanna take bets on how many much demand there would be?

If you really want to get creative, announce it two years in advance, 
and give the auto companies a chance to ramp up.

Tootle wrote:
> Herb said, "You keep taking money from them, guess what? Investors will look
> for other places to invest."
>
> Actually that is a little inaccurate in describing today’s world.  What will
> happen is that they will move offshore.  They will move their tax base and
> taxable incomes to where they are not taxed.  There are several countries
> actively recruiting businesses on those concepts.  
>
> The result will be that the company will be based where? Dubai? Some south
> Pacific island?  They will hide their assets and income.  This happens
> today, it is not just costs of labor that influence where companies go.  How
> many are completly based in socialist countries?
>
> Oh yea, they exists, but are their markets there or elsewhere?  Are the
> money making assets there or elsewhere?  Do they have insider privileges in
> their home country?  Why does Michelin make so many tires elsewhere from
> France?  It is not just transporting the tires to markets.  
>
> The 'March of the Wooden Solders' continues.  The marchers say that they are
> not socialist, but are free to support socialist candidates that support
> change that they envision.  
>
> The change that is made public is an ethereal ‘change from what we now
> have’.  Very little is specific on what they want to change to, because if
> you look at the background of the persons involved, you find that their
> beliefs were socialistic.  Yet the chief advocates of ‘change’ march on… 
>
> These people are quick to blame 'Republicans' and support 'Democrats'.  They
> say that the Republican policies are causing national disaster.  First,
> analyze the Republicans involved.  You will find that those supporting the
> recent past policies are more Rino than Republican in philosophy. 
>
> Bush their favorite repository of hate rhetoric met with the National
> Democratic leaders to create legislation that they would support.  The
> resulting legislation was not consistent with Real Republican beliefs, but
> rather supports traditional Democrat Party Ideology.  They embellish the
> idea of working together, to get along...
>   
> The failure here and of those supporting the current National Democratic
> candidates is the only person they want to impeach is Bush.  I would suggest
> that Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are more responsible for any criminal acts
> because they had the where with all to fight those policies and chose to get
> along.  
>
> There are honest people in Politics.  But they are not these.  Vent your
> anger on Harry and Nancy.
>
> Ed K
> Greenville, SC, USA
> attachment: 
> http://www.nabble.com/file/p16324307/media%2Breporting.gif
> media+reporting.gif 
>