House passes clean energy tax package.
By on Feb 27th, 2008 at 5:08 pm
House passes clean energy tax package.
In a 236-182 vote, the House approved an extension and expansion of tax breaks and incentives for wind, solar, and other alternative energy sources, as well as the closing of $18 billion in tax loopholes and subsidies for Big Oil.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Guantanamo
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Technology
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
They should vote on the fair tax.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:10 pmThis looks good for the long term…I hope Big Oil doesn’t just pass it along to the consumer in the short term.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:13 pmOhh!
Now that’s sexy!!
February 27th, 2008 at 5:13 pmI’m getting a Boehner, just thinking about it.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:14 pm“They should vote on the fair tax.”
Yeah, then we can really squeeze the poorest among us.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:14 pmOoooh! Watch out, folks! Batten down the hatches! Cover Ruggie with a tarp!!
Chimpy’s gonna be hooting and flinging feces before you know it…
February 27th, 2008 at 5:16 pmclosing of $18 billion in tax loopholes and subsidies for Big Oil
Gee, I wonder if the President will threaten to veto this….
February 27th, 2008 at 5:17 pmYeah, then we can really squeeze the poorest among us.
Comment by Mr.Bungle — February 27, 2008 @ 5:14 pm
I’m very sorry you don’t understand the fair tax.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:17 pmWaste of time, as it will be vetoed if the merger of the Senate and House bills maintains the elimination of tax incentives for the oil industry, which were put in place after Hurricane Katrina.
All the Congress had to do was extend all the current programs already on the books, and renewable energy would eventually eliminate the import of foreign sources of energy. Now, American renewable energy companies will continue to sell in Europe, because the solar tax incentives will expire.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:17 pmFrom the link:
President Bush is expected to veto the legislation if it passes Congress.
What a sorry fcuking traitor to America.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:17 pmThis looks good for the long term…I hope Big Oil doesn’t just pass it along to the consumer in the short term.
Comment by Keltoi — February 27, 2008 @ 5:13 pm
I agree. I hope Big Oil takes their exhorbitant profits and uses them to smear, lie and try to elect their waterboys-the Republics-so we can continue the downward spiral that started with the Shrub administration.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:17 pmAnyone care for a sour, crappy, worthless bottle of troll whine?
Didn’t think so.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:20 pmBy the time this gets through the legislative process, chance are good Chimpo won’t be able to touch it, ’cause he’ll be too busy, prying all the “o”’s off the White House computer keyboards, before his exit.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:20 pmI agree. I hope Big Oil takes their exhorbitant profits
Comment by woodguy — February 27, 2008 @ 5:17 pm
Do you know what a profit margin is?
February 27th, 2008 at 5:20 pm#2, Keltoi,
Of course the oil companies will pass these costs along, they have their own credit ratings / stock prices to maintain. Congress just can’t seem to leave well enough alone.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:20 pmJust read the entire bill, and to my disappointment, not a word about hydrogen, no R&D, credits, nothing.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:20 pmBut, it is a good start…
(Sale price – cost) / sale price.
Any other math you need help with?
February 27th, 2008 at 5:21 pmHillary took more Oil money than McCain, woodguy. Obama is pretty far down the list, to his credit.
http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/recips.asp?Ind=E01&cycle=2008
I think EITHER of the candidates for 08 will have better alternative energy policies than Bush – how could they not?
February 27th, 2008 at 5:23 pmOf course the oil companies will pass these costs along, they have their own credit ratings / stock prices to maintain. Congress just can’t seem to leave well enough alone.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler
And congress will have them on the carpet to prove it’s not gouging. Ain’t oversight wunnerful?
February 27th, 2008 at 5:24 pmRUCerious,
At this point, there is enough Venture Capital for all renewable energy sources, that hydrogen will have its own traction. Below is a company that has a non-platinum catalyst approach that claims to make hydrogen cheaper than gasoline:
http://www.qsinano.com/
Hydrogen will be the ultimate energy source, because it is completely carbonless, and has the highest specific energy (energy to weight ratio).
February 27th, 2008 at 5:24 pmBush has already threatened to veto this bill if it passes the Senate without the loopholes for big oil. Big surprise. Hopefully next year a stronger bill will be passed that will finally start moving us away from the polluting, health hazzard, greedy bastards in the oil industry. Hopefully Lee Raymond will be in the dock with Bush and Cheney for crimes against humanity.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:24 pmFunny how the wingtards want to give huge tax breaks to the oil companies while denying similar incentives for clean/renewables.
Sounds like a financial CYA move to me.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:26 pmOf course the oil companies will pass these costs along, they have their own credit ratings / stock prices to maintain. Congress just can’t seem to leave well enough alone.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — February 27, 2008 @ 5:20 pm
I dunno, JMH, I can’t imagine their stock holders are hurting all that bad.
On this one issue I am a flaming liberal – FOSSIL FUEL USE IS STUPID! We are using the same basic power technology Henry Ford did – DUMB.
Solar, Solar, Solar with a side order of geothermal NOW.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:26 pm“Ronnie Reagan was just a TRAITOROUS dupe. Luckily, he is now BURNING IN HELL for his GENOCIDAL WAYS.
The Bushes are NEXT…”
Cheney already has a condo picked out, overlooking the Styx…
February 27th, 2008 at 5:27 pmAnd Cerberus can’t wait to meet Barney.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:28 pm#18, barfly,
Oil company profits hover around 10%, so by no means can it ever be considered gouging. Moreover, there are a few large oil companies selling petroleum products, so competition keeps prices low, and proving collusion is nearly impossible.
Dems try this every election cycle, and they never get anywhere. Dems are just minor despots, trying to push their world view on Americans, with little to no understanding of market forces.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:28 pmAnd congress will have them on the carpet to prove it’s not gouging. Ain’t oversight wunnerful?
Comment by barfly — February 27, 2008 @ 5:24 pm
If the cost of the production of your product the end cost will go up. Your profit margin stays the same. That’s not gouging.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:29 pm“Oil company profits hover around 10%, so by no means can it ever be considered gouging.”
That’s reported profits, from multi-nationals…
Excuse me? You were saying something?
February 27th, 2008 at 5:30 pm#24, barfly,
… so you claim that Cheney will be welcomed into the Elysian Fields?
February 27th, 2008 at 5:31 pmThey should vote on the fair tax.
Comment by VA Voter
Tell it to your neocon overlords. they had six years to to vote on the fait tax. I guess they were just to busy, what with the divving up of the clinton surplus amongst bush’s cronieys, embarking on an illegal wars clearing brush while the terrorists plotted to kill us.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:31 pmthere are a few large oil companies selling petroleum products, so competition keeps prices low,
Oxymoron anyone? Fewer outlets for a product KEEPS PRICES HIGH.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:32 pmThat’s not gouging.
Comment by VA Voter
Let’s have the professionals look at it first, eh?
Congression oversight will exhonerate these poor, benighted, conglomerates.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:33 pmComment by Jason M. Hendler — February 27, 2008 @ 5:24 pm
Thanks for the link!
There is a russian american scientist, whose name escapes me, who has a process for creating hydrogen out of metal shreds. Also looks promising, I just wish Congress and Jay Inslee would put some funding behind implementation!
February 27th, 2008 at 5:34 pmso you claim that Cheney will be welcomed into the Elysian Fields?
Comment by Jason M. Hendler
If you want to call it that. Let’s just say he won’t have to worry about his heart anymore. But there’s an imp who’s even now practicing with an infernal shotgun…
February 27th, 2008 at 5:36 pmThere is a russian american scientist, whose name escapes me, who has a process for creating hydrogen out of metal shreds. Also looks promising, I just wish Congress and Jay Inslee would put some funding behind implementation!
Comment by RUCerious — February 27, 2008 @ 5:34 pm
Or he can start his own company and make a profit.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:36 pmWingtards, when your company is subsized, by tax incentives, rebates, what have you, YOU CAN STILL MAKE A PROFIT.
How fcuking clueless…
February 27th, 2008 at 5:39 pmIf the cost of the production of your product the end cost will go up. Your profit margin stays the same. That’s not gouging.
Comment by VA Voter — February 27, 2008 @ 5:29 pm
Lets see, prices skyrocketed, then the oil companies post the largest PROFITS of any corp in the world and the largest increase in profits for 2006, 2007 and are well on the way for breaking those records for 2008 and its just February.
Guess that makes you either ignorant or a liar, which is it?
February 27th, 2008 at 5:39 pmA question: does a tank of liquid hydrogen have a lesser explosive value than a comparable tank of gas?
Or isn’t the hydrogen liquefied in these cars?
February 27th, 2008 at 5:41 pmComment by Wayne
And here in Dallas, Shell/Mobil stations are closing everywhere.
While posting all-time high profits.
Mmm-hmm.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:41 pmA question: does a tank of liquid hydrogen have a lesser explosive value than a comparable tank of gas?
No. One of hydrogen’s stumbling blocks is it’s volatility an need for highly specialized, crash-proof fuel cells.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:46 pmLets see, prices skyrocketed, then the oil companies post the largest PROFITS of any corp in the world and the largest increase in profits for 2006, 2007 and are well on the way for breaking those records for 2008 and its just February.
Guess that makes you either ignorant or a liar, which is it?
Comment by Wayne — February 27, 2008 @ 5:39 pm
I’m sorry you don’t understand how economics works. But if the price of your product goes up (the cost of crude) and you have a 10% profit margin you make more money.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:47 pmbarfly, in the Japanese Rx rotary dual power hybrid, the hydrogen is stored as gas in a separate tank, as I recall.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:49 pmVaVuum, the ‘price’ of your product would be correctly referred to as the ‘cost’. Here’s your F in econ 101.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:50 pmbarfly ~ check out This
February 27th, 2008 at 5:52 pmBMW has been pioneering hydrogen fuel for decades.
LINK
February 27th, 2008 at 5:52 pmI’m sorry you don’t understand how economics works. But if the price of your product goes up (the cost of crude) and you have a 10% profit margin you make more money.
Comment by VA Voter — February 27, 2008 @ 5:47 pm
I passed all my economics classes in college in the top10%, so I may have a vague idea on how economics works. I also can program machine language on the fly.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:52 pmBut thanks for showing us that you are just ignorant.
BMW actually only modifies the fuel and ignition system to convert their existing cars to run on hydrogen.
THE REST OF THE CAR, AND ENGINE, ARE UNCHANGED!
February 27th, 2008 at 5:54 pmBut thanks for showing us that you are just ignorant.
I’ve got the perfect name for “it”.
CLETUS.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:56 pmI’m sorry you don’t understand how economics works. But if the price of your product goes up (the cost of crude) and you have a 10% profit margin you make more money.
Comment by VA Voter — February 27, 2008 @ 5:47 pm
i’m sorry you don’t understand the terms “war profiteering” and ‘treason”, or you’d see how antiAmerican the forces of Big Oil are. A “fair tax” on them would involve forcing them to invest in alternative nergies, instead of taking American money to off shore bank accounts.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:56 pmI passed all my economics classes in college in the top10%, so I may have a vague idea on how economics works. I also can program machine language on the fly.
But thanks for showing us that you are just ignorant.
Comment by Wayne — February 27, 2008 @ 5:52 pm
I would be very impressed if only you understood profit margins.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:56 pmI’m sorry you don’t understand how economics works. But if the price of your product goes up (the cost of crude) and you have a 10% profit margin you make more money.
Comment by VA Voter — February 27, 2008 @ 5:47 pm
If I ever need to get information from somebody as stupic as you, the price of your product (!), I’ll just shoot myself in the brain and be done with it. And Fair Tax, you believe it’s equitable because it’s call the Fair Tax, right, Einstein?
February 27th, 2008 at 5:57 pm’ll just shoot myself in the brain and be done with it.
Comment by Shayne — February 27, 2008 @ 5:57 pm
I think you would miss.
February 27th, 2008 at 5:59 pmBig oil companies could and should offset costs by reducing compensation of their officers and directors and eliminate their lobbying expenses. They would do that if they weren’t greedy bastards.
February 27th, 2008 at 6:03 pmI would be very impressed if only you understood profit margins.
Comment by VA Voter — February 27, 2008 @ 5:56 pm
THAT’S JUST YOUR BULLSHIT SPIN. MARGINS ARE MEANINGLESS WHEN THE AMERICAN PUBLIC IS BEING RIPPED OFF FOR BILLIONS AND BILLIONS EVERY MONTH.
Your “framing” technique is that of Hitler. You’re just a vile, ignorant liar.
February 27th, 2008 at 6:03 pmThey should vote on the fair tax.
Comment by VA Voter — February 27, 2008 @ 5:10 pm
it’s pretty clear that you have no idea how government works.
February 27th, 2008 at 6:05 pmHmmm, 57 comments but only 46 are showing.
Who knew that a thread on clean energy would attract comments too radical to publish?
I guess we should add it to the list of things one is not supposed to bring up in polite company?
Politics, religion and clean energy efforts.
February 27th, 2008 at 6:07 pmHere is a link about that hydrogen technology that RUCerious mentioned:
http://www.technologyreview.com/Energy/20134/
Back on topic, I think this is a good start. We need as many domestic, renewable energy sources as we can get right now and throwing this kind of money at it can only help build momentum. We’ll need a lot more capacity across the board if we ever want to overcome our domestic and foreign policy problems.
February 27th, 2008 at 6:10 pmThanks, RU.
But I’m curious about this:
“The vehicle is powered by energy produced when hydrogen combines with oxygen in the air to emit only clean water. A conventional rotary engine runs on gasoline, but the one in the new hybrid runs on hydrogen stored in a tank, although it can switch to gas when hydrogen runs out.”
Some sort of reverse- electrolysis?
February 27th, 2008 at 6:12 pm“he’ll hope up an engine that runs off seawater in less than a week.”
Too bad we can’t design one to run off chickenhawk troll droppings. It would solve the crisis overnight.
February 27th, 2008 at 6:15 pmVA Voter
February 27th, 2008 at 6:15 pmWhy do you think your beloved fair tax never gets anywhere?
“Why do you think your beloved fair tax never gets anywhere?”
Truth be told, it’s a “treat the wealthy fair tax.”
But wait a minute: wealthy+fair… wealthyfair… welfare?
February 27th, 2008 at 6:19 pmjdc,
And McBush would just invade Iran and drive up the cost of gas to $5 a gallon, what’s your point?
February 27th, 2008 at 6:20 pmI’m sorry you don’t understand how economics works. But if the price of your product goes up (the cost of crude) and you have a 10% profit margin you make more money.
Comment by VA Voter
You would be well advised not to challenge Wayne on topics such as economics and the dynamic effect it has on our nation.
Wayne is a very smart person who speaks clearly about things which can be confusing. You do yourself no favors by presuming to know more than the regular bloggers here at TP. In fact, based on reading your posts, it appears you have a rather incomplete education – which probably deserves your attention. No matter, we have your number: ZERO.
February 27th, 2008 at 6:22 pmI read an article recently about the future of sea-farming. The scientists they spoke to said our future energy needs will be provided by massive sea-farming of kelp/seaweed. They showed models of enormous, stacked “fields” in the deep ocean growing kelp/seaweed. They said the kelp is far more energy efficient than other products used in bio-diesels, especially corn. Using the deep ocean will remove the need for more and more land to grow bio-fuels. We won’t have to buy up huge amounts of land and drive people off their land to produce our energy. They even claimed the kelp farms would not adversely affect the environment or sea life. The ocean and sun provide the nutrients needed, so we won’t be spraying massive amounts of dangerous fertilizers and insecticides.
It was amazing to see how scientists are always thinking of new solutions to our problems. We need more federal funding to develop these kinds of technologies.
February 27th, 2008 at 6:27 pmOptimisticMF, thanks for that link, one great quote from it.
“What’s more, Guerra says, the Nanoptek technology can be located closer to customers than large-scale natural-gas processes, which could significantly reduce transportation costs, thereby helping make the technology attractive. And if in the future carbon emissions are taxed or regulated, Nanoptek’s carbon-free approach is another advantage.”
and barfly, the hydrogen gas, as I understand (not very well) is pumped into a compressor tank… and fed through a dual intake system. Gets about half the horsepower of gasoline with current technology…
February 27th, 2008 at 6:36 pmI’m sorry you don’t understand how economics works. But if the price of your product goes up (the cost of crude) and you have a 10% profit margin you make more money.
Comment by VA Voter — February 27, 2008 @ 5:47 pm
Or, if you were interested in the rest of the country’s economy, you’d reduce your already massive profit margin because, in the long term, you’d make more money. I’m sorry you don’t understand anything about economics.
February 27th, 2008 at 6:47 pmCause for guarded optimism?
Sen. Reid to defy Bush on foreclosure rescue plan
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said on Wednesday he planned to defy a threatened White House veto and try to win passage of a bill to curb rising home foreclosures by changing bankruptcy law.
“I have no expectation of reaching any agreement with the White House,” said Reid a day after the administration warned the bill would need changes to get President George W. Bush’s signature.
“I have tried for seven years” to reach agreements with Bush on a variety of issues, but have repeatedly failed, said Reid, a Nevada Democrat, at a news conference.
“So we are going to do what we think is best for the country,” Reid said. “If we get 67 votes (in the 100-member Senate to override a possible Bush veto), that’s great.”
Has Harry finally found his nutsack?
February 27th, 2008 at 6:52 pmPerhaps Harry realizes that a 29% approval rating gets you zero political capital, and this administration has, for months been running on bravado, fumes and mirrors.
February 27th, 2008 at 7:02 pmGreat point, RU, and its time for the democratic leadership to recognize that 29% approval does not merit bipartisanship. It’s time for Nancy to find a table, and for Harry, as you stated clearly, to find his testicular fortitude.
February 27th, 2008 at 7:22 pmI know this is all predicable, given that we have any election in just over eight months, but its still heart warming to see signs of life from the Democratic representatives in the House and Senate.
Maybe this year will be when we finally trade in fear for hope.
February 27th, 2008 at 7:26 pmOooh! OptimistyMoFo! Do I hear a subtle ObamaRing to that phrase well turned?
February 27th, 2008 at 7:31 pmThey should vote on the fair tax.
Comment by VA Voter — February 27, 2008 @ 5:10 pm
For 7 years your Republicans had full control.
Why didn’t they pass it then, with all the other crap bills they rammed down our throats?
What is your reasoning on that?
And as far as oil prices and economics:
The record high energy prices and record oil company profits is not a simple case of “supply and demand” and profits.
To have a full understanding of the todays “oil economics” you need to know about the questionable corporate mergers, consolidation of energy infrastructure assets and almost non-existent regulatory oversight of those mergers or the energy-trading markets since the Bush Administration has taken over.
Add the fact that Consumers are paying record prices, not just on gas but every product, because businesses are also hit hard. All while the Oil Companies have raked in record profits.
Not that I expect you tounderstand a damn thing I just said….
February 27th, 2008 at 7:44 pmRUCerious,
I’m just a hack, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night…
February 27th, 2008 at 7:50 pmYou probably weren’t AWARE that ECONOMISTS see COMMODITIES and NON-COMMODITIES differently, WERE YOU, YOU DUM BASS TARD?
Comment by republicans hate facts — February 27, 2008 @ 7:53 pm
Kind of a big clue that if these trolls ever took Economics 101, they flunked, LOL
February 27th, 2008 at 7:58 pmComment by republicans hate facts — February 27, 2008 @ 7:53 pm
Nice, RHF… nice!
February 27th, 2008 at 8:54 pm#14 – Thank god there’s nothing about hydrogen. It’s a big waste of time. Fuel cells are expensive and unreliable. And where are you going to get the hydrogen from? (hint: these people sell you gasoline now)
The answer is wind, wave, solar, etc. and electric cars with batteries.
February 27th, 2008 at 9:00 pmHydrogen is NOT an energy source. You have to make H2 from other things. Either H20 or CH4 (which makes CO@ in the process, btw). To make it from water, it takes more energy than you get out. Where does that energy come from? Might as well charge a battery with it.
February 27th, 2008 at 9:04 pmIf you subtract out the energy it took to compress the hydrogen (and no it’s not liquid; liquid hydrogen would make your car a rocket) then no.
It takes many times the energy you would get from hydrogen to first produce the hydrogen (you can’t dig it out of the ground like oil) then to compress it so that it’s usable.
Hydrogen is one big dead end.
February 27th, 2008 at 9:08 pmToo bad that thing will make about a gallon of hydrogen a day at atmospheric pressure. IOW, it’s actually quite useless as an auto fuel.
February 27th, 2008 at 9:15 pmHere is a link about that hydrogen technology that RUCerious mentioned:
http://www.technologyreview.com/Energy/20134/
Too bad that thing will make about a gallon of hydrogen a day at atmospheric pressure. IOW, it’s actually quite useless as an auto fuel.
Comment by Alejandro — February 27, 2008 @ 9:15 pm
Actually, that advance in using solar is a good leap. Funny thing about advances in science, the next advance builds on it.
Right now you can store 2 gigs on a small SD chip, 1990, a 2 gig comsumer usable Hard Drive was not even on the market yet.
The breakthrough is actually very interesting.
February 27th, 2008 at 10:00 pmIt’s not a NEW thing. It’s an old technology that no one uses for a reason.
February 27th, 2008 at 10:22 pmAnd people keep forgetting that hydrogen fuel cells are relatively delicate and expensive things.
February 27th, 2008 at 10:28 pmIt’s not a NEW thing. It’s an old technology that no one uses for a reason.
Comment by Alejandro — February 27, 2008 @ 10:22 pm
No, sorry, the results using changes to the nanostructure to increase the efficiency of the energy usage is not new.
February 27th, 2008 at 10:48 pmThat was meant as a question.
Because that is actually new, building on what was already known.
February 27th, 2008 at 10:50 pm#14, #19, et. al.
Hydrogen is a dead end, folks. The energy stored doesn’t match the energy consumed. It would take decades to develop the technology and create the infrastructure. Nobody has any incentive to scrap their gas-burners.
But I invite everyone, TPer and troll alike, global climate change believer and non-believer alike, to examine a book by Robert Zubrin, called “Energy Victory” (http://www.energyvictory.net/)where he advocates that Congress do one simple thing to start us down the path to freeing ourselves from dependence on oil. By mandating that all new vehicles sold in the US run on any blend of gas and alcohol (either ethanol OR methanol) we move from an oil-based transportation infrastructure to one based on alcohol. By including methanol in our fuels picture, we reduce the impact of alcohol fuels on food supplies. By moving away from oil we reduce the power of Saudi Arabia to bankroll fundamentalist terrorists to kill us. And we reduce greenhouse gas emissions to boot.
Please, keep an open mind and read the book. Then flame all you want…
February 28th, 2008 at 12:07 amThe Farce Tax isn’t going anywhere!
February 28th, 2008 at 8:16 amSo far 2 co-sponsors have died and 6 have either retired or lost their seats in the primaries! When it takes you 9 years to gather up roughly 75 co-sponsors and you lost 8, in a matter of months, the Farce Tax is regressing not progressing!
The only person who profits off the Farce Tax hype is Kneel BBBBBBBOOOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRRTTTTTTTTZZZZZZ!
(Pronounced just like the sound of gas, exiting your arse)