Tonight's MEC email
#171
Banned
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,655
Likes: 0
From: Narrow/Left Wide/Right
But Norway is very homogenous and most of it's 5million inhabitants have much more in common than the typical diversity that you see in most other western countries. That allows for much more consensus on how to govern for sure.
#173
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,508
Likes: 109
Your misplaced belief that govt can do anything as profitable and efficiently as private enterprise is the fundamental flaw in your argument.
#174
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
#175
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,213
Likes: 14
From: guppy CA
While current Federal royalty rates are lower than 'market' at 12.5% (a rate that has remained constant since Warren G Harding was President), it's not excessively lower than what oil companies pay to state and private landholders. There's a recent GAO report that proposed different royalty rates, the top being 22.5%. Still, calling 12.5% 'next to nothing' is an exaggeration.
The decline in federal royalties from mineral rights over the last decade is due to lower energy prices which has decreased production on federal lands; it's not due to any change in royalty percentages.
#176
Banned
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,655
Likes: 0
From: Narrow/Left Wide/Right
Source?
While current Federal royalty rates are lower than 'market' at 12.5% (a rate that has remained constant since Warren G Harding was President), it's not excessively lower than what oil companies pay to state and private landholders. There's a recent GAO report that proposed different royalty rates, the top being 22.5%. Still, calling 12.5% 'next to nothing' is an exaggeration.
The decline in federal royalties from mineral rights over the last decade is due to lower energy prices which has decreased production on federal lands; it's not due to any change in royalty percentages.
While current Federal royalty rates are lower than 'market' at 12.5% (a rate that has remained constant since Warren G Harding was President), it's not excessively lower than what oil companies pay to state and private landholders. There's a recent GAO report that proposed different royalty rates, the top being 22.5%. Still, calling 12.5% 'next to nothing' is an exaggeration.
The decline in federal royalties from mineral rights over the last decade is due to lower energy prices which has decreased production on federal lands; it's not due to any change in royalty percentages.
The rest of the world, US included, spends everything and then some on current expenses.
That ship has sailed since the '50's though and our future generations will have to pick up the tab.
#177
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,213
Likes: 14
From: guppy CA
It's not the "rate" that we were discussing, it's the fact that the US FEDS tend to spend every cent (plus borrow more to spend) as it comes in vice what the Norwegians have accomplished by setting up a trust fund that now tops $1 Trillion USD and will continue to spin off income for the Norwegians to enjoy for the future generations.
The rest of the world, US included, spends everything and then some on current expenses.
That ship has sailed since the '50's though and our future generations will have to pick up the tab.
The rest of the world, US included, spends everything and then some on current expenses.
That ship has sailed since the '50's though and our future generations will have to pick up the tab.
As for the US spending everything plus some since the 1950s - that is an incorrect statement. President Eisenhower is the last President in power when the US ran a federal budget surplus - you should have stated since the 1960s, since the US has run a federal budget deficit every year since JFK took office. Clinton had a unified budget surplus, but when the Social Security Trust Fund is removed from that, he ran a federal budget deficit.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post



