Corporate welfare in action ....

[OnePercenter]

They have a small fleet of trailers that are pulled by contract carriers.

Ignorant lie!

Prove it.

 

[OnePercenter]

View attachment 150396

I assume you are against corporate welfare then? Cause it certainly isn't capitalism.

What it being discussed isn't corporate welfare.

Clearly by the definition it is.

Corporate welfare is a term that analogizes corporate subsidies to welfare payments for the poor. The term is often used to describe a government's bestowal of money grants, tax breaks, or other special favorable treatment for corporations.

 

[Markle]

So they can dictate where a company goes, but you draw a line somewhere? Funny. Just a little socialism for you?

The government does not dictate where a company goes. They make an offer to the company and other locations make their best offer with the goal of luring the company to their location.

That has nothing whatsoever to do with Socialism.

 

[Markle]

They have a small fleet of trailers that are pulled by contract carriers.

Ignorant lie!

Prove it.

I did, they have thousands of their own tractor-trailer rigs.

 

[OnePercenter]

They have a small fleet of trailers that are pulled by contract carriers.

Ignorant lie!

Prove it.

I did, they have thousands of their own tractor-trailer rigs.

What is Amazons' ICC number?

 

[Brain357]

So they can dictate where a company goes, but you draw a line somewhere? Funny. Just a little socialism for you?

The government does not dictate where a company goes. They make an offer to the company and other locations make their best offer with the goal of luring the company to their location.

That has nothing whatsoever to do with Socialism.

Do you believe the company makes a decision based on government?

 

[Brain357]

To understand why corporatism violates the concepts of both capitalism and the free market, it might be helpful to define these two terms. Capitalism.org describes capitalism as a system in which property is privately owned and there is a separation of state and businesses similar to the separation of church and state. A free market is one in which businesses have an opportunity to compete without certain companies receiving an unfair advantage. InvestorWords.com defines a free market as a system in which businesses are not restrained by government subsidies, interference or regulation.

Corporate welfare violates the separation of business and state that is an important aspect of capitalism. It violates the principles of a free market by giving an uneven playing field, restraining certain industries through regulation or giving favored corporations a competitive advantage through subsidies. In short, corporate welfare is counterproductive to both capitalism and the free market.

Corporate Welfare Is Neither Free Market nor Capitalism - Personal Money Store

 

[OnePercenter]

To understand why corporatism violates the concepts of both capitalism and the free market, it might be helpful to define these two terms. Capitalism.org describes capitalism as a system in which property is privately owned and there is a separation of state and businesses similar to the separation of church and state. A free market is one in which businesses have an opportunity to compete without certain companies receiving an unfair advantage. InvestorWords.com defines a free market as a system in which businesses are not restrained by government subsidies, interference or regulation.

Corporate welfare violates the separation of business and state that is an important aspect of capitalism. It violates the principles of a free market by giving an uneven playing field, restraining certain industries through regulation or giving favored corporations a competitive advantage through subsidies. In short, corporate welfare is counterproductive to both capitalism and the free market.

Corporate Welfare Is Neither Free Market nor Capitalism - Personal Money Store

Don't negate the fact the we have corporate hucksterism.

 

[danielpalos]

So they can dictate where a company goes, but you draw a line somewhere? Funny. Just a little socialism for you?

The government does not dictate where a company goes. They make an offer to the company and other locations make their best offer with the goal of luring the company to their location.

That has nothing whatsoever to do with Socialism.

Make the CEO "dig ditches" with a work ethic from the Age of Iron, if he wants to keep his bonus.

 

[Markle]

So they can dictate where a company goes, but you draw a line somewhere? Funny. Just a little socialism for you?

The government does not dictate where a company goes. They make an offer to the company and other locations make their best offer with the goal of luring the company to their location.

That has nothing whatsoever to do with Socialism.

Make the CEO "dig ditches" with a work ethic from the Age of Iron, if he wants to keep his bonus.

 

[Andylusion]

Good thing companies don't

See if you can start a company and have 3 bil thrown at you.

Under the bill, the company would have 15 years to access the maximum $2.85 billion in cash payments tied to meeting the investment and hiring numbers. They can also receive $150 million in sales tax exemptions on construction equipment.

Wisconsin Legislature approves $3 billion incentive for Foxconn

like Illinois/ Chicago is going after Amazon for 50K jobs? those mean old politicians trying to bring jobs to their constituents rather than having them dependent on them. you're really not a very bright light.

So government is dictating where business goes and picking winners and losers. That is against capitalism and free market. And really bad use of tax dollars, anti conservative. But you support that?

how do you figure that? government has an offer, the business accepts or declines the offer. you're in error.

Accepting the offer is dictating where the business goes. Quite simple and obvious really. Not sure why you don't get it. Or
if you believe they are not dictating where the business goes, it is a complete waste of taxpayer money.

Oh good night....

Oh no! I accepted an offer of buy one get one free for a Big Mac at McDonalds! THEY ARE DICTATING MY ENTIRE LIFE!
.....

 

[danielpalos]

So they can dictate where a company goes, but you draw a line somewhere? Funny. Just a little socialism for you?

The government does not dictate where a company goes. They make an offer to the company and other locations make their best offer with the goal of luring the company to their location.

That has nothing whatsoever to do with Socialism.

Make the CEO "dig ditches" with a work ethic from the Age of Iron, if he wants to keep his bonus.

An alleged work ethic from the Age of Iron, only being required of the poor, not the rich.

 

[dblack]

See if you can start a company and have 3 bil thrown at you.

Under the bill, the company would have 15 years to access the maximum $2.85 billion in cash payments tied to meeting the investment and hiring numbers. They can also receive $150 million in sales tax exemptions on construction equipment.

Wisconsin Legislature approves $3 billion incentive for Foxconn

like Illinois/ Chicago is going after Amazon for 50K jobs? those mean old politicians trying to bring jobs to their constituents rather than having them dependent on them. you're really not a very bright light.

So government is dictating where business goes and picking winners and losers. That is against capitalism and free market. And really bad use of tax dollars, anti conservative. But you support that?

how do you figure that? government has an offer, the business accepts or declines the offer. you're in error.

Accepting the offer is dictating where the business goes. Quite simple and obvious really. Not sure why you don't get it. Or
if you believe they are not dictating where the business goes, it is a complete waste of taxpayer money.

Oh good night....

Oh no! I accepted an offer of buy one get one free for a Big Mac at McDonalds! THEY ARE DICTATING MY ENTIRE LIFE!
.....

You're missing the key point here. We're talking about taxes - not voluntary transactions. That's why it's hard to accept the characterization of these deals as "offers".

If a mobster is running a protection racket and "offers" to let you skip your payment if you do a little job for him, would you consider that coercion? Because that's what tax incentives are doing. They're coercing behavior. They're using the power of taxation as an all-purpose tool to manipulate society.

 

[Brain357]

See if you can start a company and have 3 bil thrown at you.

Under the bill, the company would have 15 years to access the maximum $2.85 billion in cash payments tied to meeting the investment and hiring numbers. They can also receive $150 million in sales tax exemptions on construction equipment.

Wisconsin Legislature approves $3 billion incentive for Foxconn

like Illinois/ Chicago is going after Amazon for 50K jobs? those mean old politicians trying to bring jobs to their constituents rather than having them dependent on them. you're really not a very bright light.

So government is dictating where business goes and picking winners and losers. That is against capitalism and free market. And really bad use of tax dollars, anti conservative. But you support that?

how do you figure that? government has an offer, the business accepts or declines the offer. you're in error.

Accepting the offer is dictating where the business goes. Quite simple and obvious really. Not sure why you don't get it. Or
if you believe they are not dictating where the business goes, it is a complete waste of taxpayer money.

Oh good night....

Oh no! I accepted an offer of buy one get one free for a Big Mac at McDonalds! THEY ARE DICTATING MY ENTIRE LIFE!
.....

That's gonna go right to your hips.

So you think government dictating to business makes for strong companies? Politicians can't run the country, why do you want them in business?

 

[Andylusion]

View attachment 150396

I assume you are against corporate welfare then? Cause it certainly isn't capitalism.

What it being discussed isn't corporate welfare.

Clearly by the definition it is.

Corporate welfare is a term that analogizes corporate subsidies to welfare payments for the poor. The term is often used to describe a government's bestowal of money grants, tax breaks, or other special favorable treatment for corporations.

The term has been used.... That isn't a definition... that is a one person saying "everything I determine to be corporate welfare, is".

A tax break is not corporate welfare. Because the money being taken in taxes, is not yours to begin with. Letting people keep their own money, that they rightfully earned, is not welfare.

If that is corporate welfare, then by that logic, every single person in the entire country is a welfare recipient.

Did you take a tax dedication last year? Yes you did. So if you, and absolutely everyone in the country is on welfare, then you have no right to complain, or grounds to whine about corporations getting welfare.

First live without welfare yourself, then you can complain about others.

 

[Andylusion]

like Illinois/ Chicago is going after Amazon for 50K jobs? those mean old politicians trying to bring jobs to their constituents rather than having them dependent on them. you're really not a very bright light.

So government is dictating where business goes and picking winners and losers. That is against capitalism and free market. And really bad use of tax dollars, anti conservative. But you support that?

how do you figure that? government has an offer, the business accepts or declines the offer. you're in error.

Accepting the offer is dictating where the business goes. Quite simple and obvious really. Not sure why you don't get it. Or
if you believe they are not dictating where the business goes, it is a complete waste of taxpayer money.

Oh good night....

Oh no! I accepted an offer of buy one get one free for a Big Mac at McDonalds! THEY ARE DICTATING MY ENTIRE LIFE!
.....

You're missing the key point here. We're talking about taxes - not voluntary transactions. That's why it's hard to accept the characterization of these deals as "offers".

If a mobster is running a protection racket and "offers" to let you skip your payment if you do a little job for him, would you consider that coercion? Because that's what tax incentives are doing. They're coercing behavior. They're using the power of taxation as an all-purpose tool to manipulate society.

Ok, that's good. I like that. If taxation is a mafia tool of coercion, then let's end the income tax and property tax.

Problem solved on all sides.

Again, I don't see this as a manipulation on society. Due tell, how has "society" been manipulated because one single company decided to move to Ohio over Florida?

How has my life changed either way? If you are claiming that society as a whole, has been changed because of one company getting a tax abatement.... then I need some evidence proving that.

I need to know how one company saving some tax money on property, has magically changed my life, or affected me in any way at all.

And you can't say that my taxes have to go up, to off set the loss of tax revenue, because they are paying zero tax now. And when they do come, they will be paying taxes. Not the full amount, but millions more than zero they are paying now.

So give me your explanation.

 

[Papageorgio]

View attachment 150396

I assume you are against corporate welfare then? Cause it certainly isn't capitalism.

What it being discussed isn't corporate welfare.

Clearly by the definition it is.

Corporate welfare is a term that analogizes corporate subsidies to welfare payments for the poor. The term is often used to describe a government's bestowal of money grants, tax breaks, or other special favorable treatment for corporations.

The term has been used.... That isn't a definition... that is a one person saying "everything I determine to be corporate welfare, is".

A tax break is not corporate welfare. Because the money being taken in taxes, is not yours to begin with. Letting people keep their own money, that they rightfully earned, is not welfare.

If that is corporate welfare, then by that logic, every single person in the entire country is a welfare recipient.

Did you take a tax dedication last year? Yes you did. So if you, and absolutely everyone in the country is on welfare, then you have no right to complain, or grounds to whine about corporations getting welfare.

First live without welfare yourself, then you can complain about others.

That is a good definition of what is corporate welfare and what is it corporate welfare.

 

[dblack]

You're missing the key point here. We're talking about taxes - not voluntary transactions. That's why it's hard to accept the characterization of these deals as "offers".

If a mobster is running a protection racket and "offers" to let you skip your payment if you do a little job for him, would you consider that coercion? Because that's what tax incentives are doing. They're coercing behavior. They're using the power of taxation as an all-purpose tool to manipulate society.

Ok, that's good. I like that. If taxation is a mafia tool of coercion, then let's end the income tax and property tax.

Problem solved on all sides.

That's a worthy goal. Taxation is a crude and coercive means of financing government. I think we can do better. But it will take time to get there. Until then, we can at least put strict limits on government's ability to abuse the taxation power that we've granted it.

Again, I don't see this as a manipulation on society. Due tell, how has "society" been manipulated because one single company decided to move to Ohio over Florida?

It's true that manipulating one single company manipulates only a small part of society. And if we were discussing one case in isolation, and if we ignored all the other ways tax incentives are used to manipulate society, you might be able to convince me to dismiss my concerns. But, in point of fact, many business decisions are being manipulated in this way - it's becoming a standard practice of cities and states fixated on economic growth. And government routinely uses tax incentives to manipulate individual behavior as well. So, "move along, nothing to see here" just doesn't cut it.

 

[Andylusion]

how do you figure that? government has an offer, the business accepts or declines the offer. you're in error.

Accepting the offer is dictating where the business goes. Quite simple and obvious really. Not sure why you don't get it. Or
if you believe they are not dictating where the business goes, it is a complete waste of taxpayer money.

Oh good night....

Oh no! I accepted an offer of buy one get one free for a Big Mac at McDonalds! THEY ARE DICTATING MY ENTIRE LIFE!
.....

You're missing the key point here. We're talking about taxes - not voluntary transactions. That's why it's hard to accept the characterization of these deals as "offers".

If a mobster is running a protection racket and "offers" to let you skip your payment if you do a little job for him, would you consider that coercion? Because that's what tax incentives are doing. They're coercing behavior. They're using the power of taxation as an all-purpose tool to manipulate society.

Ok, that's good. I like that. If taxation is a mafia tool of coercion, then let's end the income tax and property tax.

Problem solved on all sides.

That's a worthy goal. Taxation is a crude and coercive means of financing government. I think we can do better. But it will take time to get there. Until then, we can at least put strict limits on government's ability to abuse the taxation power that we've granted it.

Again, I don't see this as a manipulation on society. Due tell, how has "society" been manipulated because one single company decided to move to Ohio over Florida?

It's true that manipulating one single company manipulates only a small part of society. And if we were discussing one case in isolation, and if we ignored all the other ways tax incentives are used to manipulate society, you might be able to convince me to dismiss my concerns. But, in point of fact, many business decisions are being manipulated in this way - it's becoming a standard practice of cities and states fixated on economic growth. And government routinely uses tax incentives to manipulate individual behavior as well. So, "move along, nothing to see here" just doesn't cut it.

Again, prove it. Make the case. You can say something is so, until the end of time. But until you can actually back that claim with real empirical evidence, it remains hearsay.

Can you at least provide me one single example? Just one? An example where government is directly affecting my life, through the use of a tax abatement?

Again, government grants and subsidies I'm already against, and I oppose them in every single form.

But we're talking about a tax abatement. Can you provide an example where my life is different than it would be, if there had been no tax abatement?

 

[dblack]

Accepting the offer is dictating where the business goes. Quite simple and obvious really. Not sure why you don't get it. Or
if you believe they are not dictating where the business goes, it is a complete waste of taxpayer money.

Oh good night....

Oh no! I accepted an offer of buy one get one free for a Big Mac at McDonalds! THEY ARE DICTATING MY ENTIRE LIFE!
.....

You're missing the key point here. We're talking about taxes - not voluntary transactions. That's why it's hard to accept the characterization of these deals as "offers".

If a mobster is running a protection racket and "offers" to let you skip your payment if you do a little job for him, would you consider that coercion? Because that's what tax incentives are doing. They're coercing behavior. They're using the power of taxation as an all-purpose tool to manipulate society.

Ok, that's good. I like that. If taxation is a mafia tool of coercion, then let's end the income tax and property tax.

Problem solved on all sides.

That's a worthy goal. Taxation is a crude and coercive means of financing government. I think we can do better. But it will take time to get there. Until then, we can at least put strict limits on government's ability to abuse the taxation power that we've granted it.

Again, I don't see this as a manipulation on society. Due tell, how has "society" been manipulated because one single company decided to move to Ohio over Florida?

It's true that manipulating one single company manipulates only a small part of society. And if we were discussing one case in isolation, and if we ignored all the other ways tax incentives are used to manipulate society, you might be able to convince me to dismiss my concerns. But, in point of fact, many business decisions are being manipulated in this way - it's becoming a standard practice of cities and states fixated on economic growth. And government routinely uses tax incentives to manipulate individual behavior as well. So, "move along, nothing to see here" just doesn't cut it.

Again, prove it. Make the case. You can say something is so, until the end of time. But until you can actually back that claim with real empirical evidence, it remains hearsay.

Can you at least provide me one single example? Just one? An example where government is directly affecting my life, through the use of a tax abatement?

I, and others, have done that repeatedly in this thread, and you just ostrich up. I don't know what else to tell you. If you want to deny it, you will.

Again, government grants and subsidies I'm already against, and I oppose them in every single form.

Why are you against grants and subsidies? Can you provide an example where my life is different than it would be, if there had been no grants or subsidies?

But we're talking about a tax abatement. Can you provide an example where my life is different than it would be, if there had been no tax abatement?

I don't know anything about your life. Plenty of other people have been impacted by these policies though. This was all detailed in the articles linked in the thread. Clearly, you either haven't read, or don't believe the facts they describe. If that's your position - that it's all just "fake news" - then there really isn't much point in trying to persuade you of anything.