Rep. Waters (D)-Nationalize oil companies
- Thread starter Ralphie
- Start date
SenateHorn
250+ Posts
TexonLongIsland
2,500+ Posts
she's clearly is auditioning for Sec of Energy
DigglerontheHoof
1,000+ Posts
W/ geniuses like her "running" things, do we really stand a snowball's chance in hell at solving ANY of our problems?
What a bat-crazy, stupid *****.
What a bat-crazy, stupid *****.
I just looked up her bio on wiki. You think she is pushing for some "consulting" gigs for her kids with Shell?
Waters was named in 2005[2] and 2006[3] as one of the "most corrupt" members of congress by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. They said, "Her ethics issues arise from her exercise of this power to financially benefit her daughter, husband and son." They said that Waters' daughter Karen charges other politicians to appear on mailers sent to constituents in Los Angeles showing her mother's support for the politician. Karen has received $450,000 in fees from this endeavor and Waters' son Edward has received $115,000. Waters' husband Sidney benefited from his wife's connections with his hiring as a political consultant by a firm, Siebert, Brandford, & Shank, seeking government investment. Sidney Williams earned $500,000 from this consulting, which consisted of introducing Siebert to politicians his wife had supported. Sidney and Edward Williams also benefitted when they won a contract to run a Los Angeles golf course, with the decision made by a county supervisor who had won a close race after Waters' endorsement and from which they made financial gain of between $140,000 and $400,000.[4] Citizens for Ethics says this violates House ethics rules for family members' financial gains.
Waters was named in 2005[2] and 2006[3] as one of the "most corrupt" members of congress by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. They said, "Her ethics issues arise from her exercise of this power to financially benefit her daughter, husband and son." They said that Waters' daughter Karen charges other politicians to appear on mailers sent to constituents in Los Angeles showing her mother's support for the politician. Karen has received $450,000 in fees from this endeavor and Waters' son Edward has received $115,000. Waters' husband Sidney benefited from his wife's connections with his hiring as a political consultant by a firm, Siebert, Brandford, & Shank, seeking government investment. Sidney Williams earned $500,000 from this consulting, which consisted of introducing Siebert to politicians his wife had supported. Sidney and Edward Williams also benefitted when they won a contract to run a Los Angeles golf course, with the decision made by a county supervisor who had won a close race after Waters' endorsement and from which they made financial gain of between $140,000 and $400,000.[4] Citizens for Ethics says this violates House ethics rules for family members' financial gains.
HornsHornsHorns
500+ Posts
That has to be one of the most remarkable displays of ignorance (not just stupidity, but pure ignorance) in history. It's scary to think that this woman has a voice in policies that affect all of us.
Steel Shank
1,000+ Posts
This is why we shouldn't let women in government.
Iconoclast Texan
250+ Posts
Remarkably stupid comments and I am a lefty.
OK, seriously... what is stopping Big Oil from just relocating all of their corporate centers abroad and removing themselves from this BS? Not a damn thing. They can just become foreign companies and sell us our gas and not pay **** in taxes, which is exactly what they are going to do if this liberal inquisition does not stop. Obviously, refineries would still be here, but clever corporate designations could drastically reduce the outstanding tax obligations of these small companies from their now outsourced parent. All this will do is further reduce the tax rolls and likely increase gas prices. Shut up already.
What leverage do we have to prevent them from fleeing offshore? I guess we could cut off the US marketplace to their product... then we will all enjoy the $100 a gallon gas bought from the Pemex stations in Juarez and sold on this side of the bridge in gas cans.
What leverage do we have to prevent them from fleeing offshore? I guess we could cut off the US marketplace to their product... then we will all enjoy the $100 a gallon gas bought from the Pemex stations in Juarez and sold on this side of the bridge in gas cans.
steve perry
100+ Posts
Michael Knight
1,000+ Posts
O
Oilfield
Guest
Amazing! The inmates are truly running the asylum now. We just need a Dem President and they can go full throttle with their insanity.
Ag with kids
2,500+ Posts
Fat Crazy Hippie
250+ Posts
Comeon guys you are not thinking this through...
Do you honestly think what makes an oil company is its HQ? or its frigging oil fields? A great portion of their revenue comes from US based fields, they are ****** and have nowhere else to go, I love it.
Do you honestly think what makes an oil company is its HQ? or its frigging oil fields? A great portion of their revenue comes from US based fields, they are ****** and have nowhere else to go, I love it.
you obviously know zero about the oil industry and the power they have globally. governments around the world use exxon, shell, and the like to obtain their oil. most governments do not have the capability to do it on their own so they contract with US based companies. the united states would be no different. waters comment is so ignorant on so many different levels i shudder what her more liberal brother obama thinks. companies that try to do it on their own eventually fail, see mexico and eventually venezuela.
Fat Crazy Hippie
250+ Posts
This is stupid with a capital S. It's Maxine Waters degree stupid.
Let's say the Alabama State Teachers pension fund is a shareholder. What would happen to their shares? Incidentally they are a typical shareholder.
Let's say the company owns a well in the South China Sea. Incidentally most of "Big Oil''s holings are overseas. What will happen differently other than taking the profits from the Tecaher's pension fund and giving it to the government? Are they going to employ different people? Would different people decide where to drill? Would that oil in the South China Sea be sold someplace besides China? How would the partners (most all fields are joint ventures) react?
It's stupid. The citizens wouldn't put up with it. The court wouldn't. Legislators wouldn't.
Let's say the Alabama State Teachers pension fund is a shareholder. What would happen to their shares? Incidentally they are a typical shareholder.
Let's say the company owns a well in the South China Sea. Incidentally most of "Big Oil''s holings are overseas. What will happen differently other than taking the profits from the Tecaher's pension fund and giving it to the government? Are they going to employ different people? Would different people decide where to drill? Would that oil in the South China Sea be sold someplace besides China? How would the partners (most all fields are joint ventures) react?
It's stupid. The citizens wouldn't put up with it. The court wouldn't. Legislators wouldn't.
This whole concept does bring up an interesting point that I'd appreciate washpark or any other hornfans constitutional scholars opinion on-
Does the "just compensation" part of the 5th amendment takings clause apply to property of corporations? I assume yes, since it says "private property" and not a "person's property", but then again, before Kelo, I assumed that "public use" actually meant public use and not merely public benefit.
If the corporation is not protected, would the right extend through to the individual shareholders due to the decrease in the value of their shares in the corporation?
Does the "just compensation" part of the 5th amendment takings clause apply to property of corporations? I assume yes, since it says "private property" and not a "person's property", but then again, before Kelo, I assumed that "public use" actually meant public use and not merely public benefit.
If the corporation is not protected, would the right extend through to the individual shareholders due to the decrease in the value of their shares in the corporation?
UT-69745551
250+ Posts
Nobody said that our elected politicians are extremely bright people. Most are very mediocre, some are way below average. It would be great if we had term limitations on every office so that we could allow a new set of "dumb asses" to rule every so often.
fratboy_legend
500+ Posts
LurkerintheDark
250+ Posts
A bit more passion than necessary is being wasted on this thread.
The proper response to the nationalization proposal is to consider the source, roll your eyes, and move on to the real, important issues: namely, the latest Clinton/McCain/Obama gaffe.
The proper response to the nationalization proposal is to consider the source, roll your eyes, and move on to the real, important issues: namely, the latest Clinton/McCain/Obama gaffe.
Weekly Prediction Contest
* Predict TEXAS-KENTUCKY *
Sat, Nov 23 • 2:30 PM on ABC
Recent Threads
-
The Media Industry
- Started by texas_ex2000
- Replies: 8K
- West Mall
-
President Biden Accountability Thread
- Started by 2003TexasGrad
- Replies: 4K
- West Mall
Prediction Results Threads
