It's one thing to say we shouldn't tax companies much...

But it's quite another, I think--and easily done--to say that we shouldn't be giving tax breaks to big, extremely profitable industries, don't you agree?

Like "Big Oil"?

Check this out, from Political Animal and The Washington Monthly this morning: 

GET THE ENERGY SECTOR OFF THE DOLE.... With global warming deniers about to take charge of the House of Representatives, there would seem to be little hope for major clean energy legislation in this Congress. But all is not lost, argues Jeffrey Leonard in the latest issue of the Washington Monthly. Last fall's election let loose political forces that President Obama can tap to set us on a path to a sustainable energy future with a simple proposal: eliminate all energy subsidies.

 Yes, eliminate them all -- for oil, coal, gas, nuclear, ethanol, even for wind and solar. It will be better for national security, the budget deficit, and, believe it or not, the environment. Green energy sources get only the tiniest sliver of the overall federal subsidy pie, so they'll have a competitive advantage in the long term if all subsidies, including the huge ones for fossil fuels, are eliminated. In addition, deep trends in America's energy supply, including discoveries of huge natural gas reserves, will over time create favorable terrain for wind, solar, and other energy sources that liberals love -- but only if our entrenched system of subsidies doesn't gum up the works. And while getting the energy sector off the dole may have once been politically impossible, with anti-pork Tea Partiers loose in Washington and deficit cutting in the air, the moment may finally be right.

From the original article Mr. Benen is referring to:

Energy subsidies are the sordid legacy of more than sixty years of politics as usual in Washington, and they cost us somewhere around $20 billion a year. To put that sum in perspective, that’s more than the State Department’s entire budget. It’s also enough to send half a million Americans to college each year with all expenses paid. Energy subsidies undermine the working of the free market, and they make rational approaches to long-term energy challenges and climate change impossible. They are not an aid to energy independence or environmental stewardship. They are an impediment.

 Doesn't this make sense? 

Why should we give tax breaks, for pity's sake, to the oil industry?  Does anyone think they won't make a profit?  Who could be for keeping things as they are, I mean, besides the industry itself? 

Libertarians, Conservatives, the Tea Party, Democrats, Consevatives, Liberals--everybody ought to be behind this.

And while we're at it, let me bring up here, yet again, why doesn't some Congressional representative bring up a bill to do away with tax deductions to any industry to take manufacturing offshore?

You know, sometimes things just aren't that difficult.

This is an example of two right here.

Link to original post:  http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2011_01/027369.php
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2011/1101.leonard-2.html