The Big Picture: End Corporate Welfare

[Chris]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsqz0SqVKQQ

Reich is right, we need to end corporate welfare. As a liberal progressive social democrat he gets a few things wrong.

One is that tax breaks are not hand outs. The government is not giving corporations our wealth with tax cuts. It's simply leaving corporation wealth in the hands of corporations. This isn't to say government should award such political favors, it shouldn't. Just trying to clarify.

Two, to clarify further, and this Reich doesn't seem to touch on, where government does hand our wealth to corporations is in contracts it awards. Defense, er, offense, is a huge area here.

Three, he also misses various trade policies instituted to protect US corporations. Made in the USA is perhaps to populist for him to touch this one.

Finally, his message is that the corporations receiving welfare are evil, that it's their fault, their doing. But what else can he do, he can't point the finger at the true problem, the government, because then he couldn't rely on it to solve the problem.

The more powerful government is the more it will be a target of rent seeking welfare.

[Cigar]

I've been saying this since Mitt Romney's Makers vs Takers comment.

About time you see the truth.

[Chris]

I've been saying this since Mitt Romney's Makers vs Takers comment.

About time you see the truth.

So you agree government is the problem. Thanks.

[texan]

I've been saying this since Mitt Romney's Makers vs Takers comment.

About time you see the truth.


Oh really? So you were vehemently against Obama for Solyndra? Seems like you were with the crowd that said invest in teh future.

[Chris]

ACA is another form of corporate welfare. Insurance companies wrote it to their benefit.

[Captain Obvious]

ACA is another form of corporate welfare. Insurance companies wrote it to their benefit.

Probably not far from the truth.

[Chris]

Probably not far from the truth.

INSURANCE GIANTS THAT WROTE AND LOBBIED FOR HEALTHCARE LAW CASH IN (http://www.infowars.com/insurance-giants-that-wrote-and-lobbied-for-health-law-cash-in/)

http://i.snag.gy/kTHM5.jpg
http://i.snag.gy/TTTaq.jpg

Half a dozen more are listed.

[Captain Obvious]

INSURANCE GIANTS THAT WROTE AND LOBBIED FOR HEALTHCARE LAW CASH IN (http://www.infowars.com/insurance-giants-that-wrote-and-lobbied-for-health-law-cash-in/)

http://i.snag.gy/kTHM5.jpg
http://i.snag.gy/TTTaq.jpg

Half a dozen more are listed.

I agree with the data too, I've seen this before.

There are a number of political and economic agendas being pushed with the ACA however, the Patriot Act with respect to collection of metadata is definitely one of them. So is single-payer & coverage dependency.

[texan]

Probably not far from the truth.

And unions.

[Peter1469]

The ACA is only beneficial to the insurance industry short term. Once fully implemented, the ACA will end up destroying the insurance system (costs too high) and politicians will offer single payer as a replacement.

However, single pay also doesn't control costs - other than with rationing.

[Chris]

The ACA is only beneficial to the insurance industry short term. Once fully implemented, the ACA will end up destroying the insurance system (costs too high) and politicians will offer single payer as a replacement.

However, single pay also doesn't control costs - other than with rationing.


That's probably true. But they'll make out like bandits for a time. And I wouldn't be surprised they end up administering single payer as an outsource for the government.

[Rufus]

No other industrialized nation on this planet would have ever came up with something as dumb as the ACA. We need a single payer system like everyone else in the first world, NOT this crazy idea of the guns of the state forcing us to buy a product from a private company, it is corporate fascism at it's finest.

[texan]

Peter
as long as the slush fund exists the insurance industry will be fine, the tax payers may not be.

[Peter1469]

Peter
as long as the slush fund exists the insurance industry will be fine, the tax payers may not be.

I am not sure the people are going to accept more bail outs.

[donttread]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsqz0SqVKQQ

Reich is right, we need to end corporate welfare. As a liberal progressive social democrat he gets a few things wrong.

One is that tax breaks are not hand outs. The government is not giving corporations our wealth with tax cuts. It's simply leaving corporation wealth in the hands of corporations. This isn't to say government should award such political favors, it shouldn't. Just trying to clarify.

Two, to clarify further, and this Reich doesn't seem to touch on, where government does hand our wealth to corporations is in contracts it awards. Defense, er, offense, is a huge area here.

Three, he also misses various trade policies instituted to protect US corporations. Made in the USA is perhaps to populist for him to touch this one.

Finally, his message is that the corporations receiving welfare are evil, that it's their fault, their doing. But what else can he do, he can't point the finger at the true problem, the government, because then he couldn't rely on it to solve the problem.

The more powerful government is the more it will be a target of rent seeking welfare.

But since the megacorps own the government the only way we can do that is to kill the megacorps. Start with Monsanto and work our way down the list.

[donttread]

No other industrialized nation on this planet would have ever came up with something as dumb as the ACA. We need a single payer system like everyone else in the first world, NOT this crazy idea of the guns of the state forcing us to buy a product from a private company, it is corporate fascism at it's finest.

The problem there is the single payer system would be government run correct? And currently our government is not fit to run a flea circus nor has in been for many years

[zelmo1234]

But since the megacorps own the government the only way we can do that is to kill the megacorps. Start with Monsanto and work our way down the list.

Ok so you break up Monsanto? What effect do you think that will have on the public?

[Archer0915]

Though I agree in principle Chris, this welfare is simply an offset. We pretty much have the highest corporate tax rate in the world @ roughly 40%. You want to do away with the welfare? Cut the taxes! If you cut the welfare and do not kill the tax rate, business will move out of the US even faster.

[Chris]

But since the megacorps own the government the only way we can do that is to kill the megacorps. Start with Monsanto and work our way down the list.

If you take that solution, what will you do with the Monsanto2 that rises to replace Monsanto? Monsanto3....∞?

[Chris]

Though I agree in principle Chris, this welfare is simply an offset. We pretty much have the highest corporate tax rate in the world @ roughly 40%. You want to do away with the welfare? Cut the taxes! If you cut the welfare and do not kill the tax rate, business will move out of the US even faster.

As Friedman put it (http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB1042593796704188064): "I have long said, "I never met a tax cut I didn't like" -- though I would go on to say that I like some better than others. The reason for my flat unhedged statement is neither the Keynesian attribution of an economic stimulus to a tax cut, which I believe is generally wrong, nor the supply-side attribution of favorable incentive effects to a tax cut, which I believe is generally correct. It is, rather, the effect of tax cuts on government spending. I believe that government is too large and intrusive..."

[Archer0915]

As Friedman put it (http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB1042593796704188064): "I have long said, "I never met a tax cut I didn't like" -- though I would go on to say that I like some better than others. The reason for my flat unhedged statement is neither the Keynesian attribution of an economic stimulus to a tax cut, which I believe is generally wrong, nor the supply-side attribution of favorable incentive effects to a tax cut, which I believe is generally correct. It is, rather, the effect of tax cuts on government spending. I believe that government is too large and intrusive..."

Well tax cuts were direct economic stimulus to the US economy and so were tax credits. They helped domestic manufacturing of durable goods. Now? The money is stimulus to other economies and the lost tax revenues are offset by borrowing.

[Chris]

Well tax cuts were direct economic stimulus to the US economy and so were tax credits. They helped domestic manufacturing of durable goods. Now? The money is stimulus to other economies and the lost tax revenues are offset by borrowing.

According to the Laffer Curve, tax cuts and credits can have that effect. But the only reason I see politicians wanting to stimulate the economy is to increase revenues and grow government.

[Archer0915]

According to the Laffer Curve, tax cuts and credits can have that effect. But the only reason I see politicians wanting to stimulate the economy is to increase revenues and grow government.

Yup but it does not work like it used to because the almighty dollar does not get taxed and spent and taxed... as much as it did. With some of these changes (like increased automation) the government is going to be a big loser. Not only will tax revenues be reduced but expenditures on aid go up.

[Chris]

Yup but it does not work like it used to because the almighty dollar does not get taxed and spent and taxed... as much as it did. With some of these changes (like increased automation) the government is going to be a big loser. Not only will tax revenues be reduced but expenditures on aid go up.

Good, then the size of government will need to be reduced, which is where Friedman was going above.

[Archer0915]

Good, then the size of government will need to be reduced, which is where Friedman was going above.

Sadly it will not be reduced until many policies change. It will expand and they will borrow more and more.

[Chris]

Sadly it will not be reduced until many policies change. It will expand and they will borrow more and more.

And then it will collapse disastrously.

[Archer0915]

And then it will collapse disastrously.

As it needs to.