Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

dc_dux · 05-08-2008, 11:30 AM

I'm not particularly interested in comparisons to Home Depot, Starbucks or Microsoft.

IMO, and for the purposes of a national energy policy, the more relevant comparison would be the tax breaks/incentives to oil companies as opposed to renewable energy resources and alternative energy development.

The tax breaks/incentives in the 2005 energy bill were weighted heavily (65%-35%...if i recall correctly) towards oil and coal companies ($18 billion..if i recall correctly) at the expense of renewables and new energy technologies.

A 2008 bill try to reverse (or at least equalize) those tax breaks/incentives, but has been blocked by Repubs in the Senate, along with a Bush veto threat.

A national energy policy should be far more balanced in its tax treatment...and IMO, if its tilted at all, it should be tilted towards getting us off a dependency on oil.

05-08-2008, 11:30 AM	#4 (permalink)
dc_dux Location: Washington DC	I'm not particularly interested in comparisons to Home Depot, Starbucks or Microsoft. IMO, and for the purposes of a national energy policy, the more relevant comparison would be the tax breaks/incentives to oil companies as opposed to renewable energy resources and alternative energy development. The tax breaks/incentives in the 2005 energy bill were weighted heavily (65%-35%...if i recall correctly) towards oil and coal companies ($18 billion..if i recall correctly) at the expense of renewables and new energy technologies. A 2008 bill try to reverse (or at least equalize) those tax breaks/incentives, but has been blocked by Repubs in the Senate, along with a Bush veto threat. A national energy policy should be far more balanced in its tax treatment...and IMO, if its tilted at all, it should be tilted towards getting us off a dependency on oil. __________________ "The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire Last edited by dc_dux; 05-08-2008 at 11:40 AM..