Corporate welfare in action ....

[danielpalos]

Apple to build Iowa data center, get $207.8 million in incentives

We've got to get a handle on this shit. Whatever happened to equal protection?

Could you explain why you oppose this creation of jobs.

It isn't about being able to "purchase" the finest privileges and immunities money can buy under our form of Capitalism; but, a lack of equal protection of the law regarding "welfare" for individuals.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I don't know about where you live, but in the USA, people have choices. You have the choice to make crap money, you have the choice to become middle-class, you have the choice to do better if you really desire.

As for business, many don't have the choice of paying a living wage. If they pay their employees a living wage, their competitors who don't pay a living wage will put them out of business.

You and I both own widget factories. In my factory, I pay my employees only what they are worth. In your factory, you pay your employees much more than they are worth. Because of my lower labor costs, I can sell more of my widgets than you. After a while, I start taking your customers away because my product costs less than yours. If you allow that to continue, I eventually put you out of business.That's the way it works.

As for the worker, we are only worth what an employer can find somebody else to do the exact same job for with the exact same quality. If you stock shelves for a living, anybody can do that job, so your worth to employer is very little since he (or she) can find anybody to do that job. If you want to make yourself worth more money, you need to be able to do a job that less people can do. The less people that can do a particular job, the more money you can make doing that job. That's why engineers, registered nurses, architects, computer IT people make much more than a living wage. They got training and experience to do jobs many others cannot do.

Ok Ray, lets just expand your analogy here. Rays Crazy Widgets are able to pay less because the government will subsidise their low wages through some form of welfare. The employee still gets x amount.

Because of this crafty Ray can undercut Tommys Top Widgets because Tommy is a good employer and pays a decent wage without government subsidies.

So Tommy can either go bust and Ray can pick up his business or he can follow Ray and pick up some corporate welfare.

The government has created a distorted market and penalised the good employer. If they refused to subsidise Ray then he would have to raise his wages as nobody would work for him.

And that's the way it should be. Government should only pass out social goodies to those who were responsible enough to not put themselves in a bad position in life, but somehow ended up there through no fault of their own.

I'm the employer. I have nothing to do with social programs. It's none of my business. Those programs are between my employee and the government--not between me and the government. I could care less if my employees are on social programs or not.

If we did get rid of social programs, then my employees would want to work more hours, and that's good for me since I would not have to hire more workers.

You would care if they bought a soda pop or stick off gum, you have said so! So you do care if they are on assistance.

As a taxpayer, yes, because I go to the store to buy my food and I have to buy theirs as well. But as a business owner, I could care less because it doesn't affect my business one way or the other.

Az a business owner and a citizen of the UNITED STATES it effects you.

No, only as a blue collar tax payer it does.

 

[danielpalos]

There's no such thing as corporate welfare.

Ever hear of the Farm Bill ?

Yep. Another abysmal example of corporatism.

The farm bill started in helping family farms, but thanks to Republicans it's morphed into a huge corporate loophole.

The right wing Only has a problem when real Persons get welfare, not when artificial Persons get welfare.

 

[Muhammed]

Apple to build Iowa data center, get $207.8 million in incentives

We've got to get a handle on this shit. Whatever happened to equal protection?

Could you explain why you oppose this creation of jobs.

It isn't about being able to "purchase" the finest privileges and immunities money can buy under our form of Capitalism; but, a lack of equal protection of the law regarding "welfare" for individuals.

What are you trying to say? They owe you sex? Or what?

 

[danielpalos]

There's no such thing as corporate welfare.

Ever hear of the Farm Bill ?

Yep. Another abysmal example of corporatism.

The farm bill started in helping family farms, but thanks to Republicans it's morphed into a huge corporate loophole.

The vast majority of farm bill spending goes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.

I believe it is fiscally irresponsible to not have war time tax rates whenever we allegedly have real times of war. Capitalism provides, market based metrics.

Our wars on crime, drugs, and terror should be listed under defense spending; let's audit that, instead of the Fed.

 

[danielpalos]

There's no such thing as corporate welfare.

Ever hear of the Farm Bill ?

Yep. Another abysmal example of corporatism.

The farm bill started in helping family farms, but thanks to Republicans it's morphed into a huge corporate loophole.

It's a common pattern. Democrats propose laws that expand government; and Republicans show us why it was a bad idea.

With nothing but repeal? The democrats already showed us, the right wing loves the rich at the expense of the poor.

 

[Billo_Really]

There's no such thing as corporate welfare.

Oh, yes there is. It's called tax breaks and subsidies.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

So I can pay you this amount which is a living wage or I can pay you this amount which is a lot lower because I know that the government will step in and not let you starve.

Hmmmmmm, tough decision.

So the government props up shit businesses which undercut legit businesses and its all a race to the bottom.And that is why the working man is screwed at every level.

If your business model doesnt allow you to pay a living wage then its not a business its a welfare dependent.

I don't know about where you live, but in the USA, people have choices. You have the choice to make crap money, you have the choice to become middle-class, you have the choice to do better if you really desire.

As for business, many don't have the choice of paying a living wage. If they pay their employees a living wage, their competitors who don't pay a living wage will put them out of business.

You and I both own widget factories. In my factory, I pay my employees only what they are worth. In your factory, you pay your employees much more than they are worth. Because of my lower labor costs, I can sell more of my widgets than you. After a while, I start taking your customers away because my product costs less than yours. If you allow that to continue, I eventually put you out of business.That's the way it works.

As for the worker, we are only worth what an employer can find somebody else to do the exact same job for with the exact same quality. If you stock shelves for a living, anybody can do that job, so your worth to employer is very little since he (or she) can find anybody to do that job. If you want to make yourself worth more money, you need to be able to do a job that less people can do. The less people that can do a particular job, the more money you can make doing that job. That's why engineers, registered nurses, architects, computer IT people make much more than a living wage. They got training and experience to do jobs many others cannot do.

Ok Ray, lets just expand your analogy here. Rays Crazy Widgets are able to pay less because the government will subsidise their low wages through some form of welfare. The employee still gets x amount.

Because of this crafty Ray can undercut Tommys Top Widgets because Tommy is a good employer and pays a decent wage without government subsidies.

So Tommy can either go bust and Ray can pick up his business or he can follow Ray and pick up some corporate welfare.

The government has created a distorted market and penalised the good employer. If they refused to subsidise Ray then he would have to raise his wages as nobody would work for him.

And that's the way it should be. Government should only pass out social goodies to those who were responsible enough to not put themselves in a bad position in life, but somehow ended up there through no fault of their own.

I'm the employer. I have nothing to do with social programs. It's none of my business. Those programs are between my employee and the government--not between me and the government. I could care less if my employees are on social programs or not.

If we did get rid of social programs, then my employees would want to work more hours, and that's good for me since I would not have to hire more workers.

You have no business now Ray. Your people all work for me rather than starve whilst working for you.

If that were the case all jobs would pay "living" wage, now wouldn't they?

But the truth is people do take lower paying jobs all the time. If your factory is 60 miles from mine, nobody is going to travel that far every morning to work at yours.

Why should my taxes enable you to play slave wages ?

 

[Muhammed]

There's no such thing as corporate welfare.

Ever hear of the Farm Bill ?

Yep. Another abysmal example of corporatism.

The farm bill started in helping family farms, but thanks to Republicans it's morphed into a huge corporate loophole.

The right wing Only has a problem when real Persons get welfare, not when artificial Persons get welfare.

And of course you are full of shit as usual. Only the most staunch and ardent laissez faire liberals are opposed to government welfare for people.

 

[danielpalos]

Welfare is when the government takes money from working people and hands it out to people who dont work. Its that simple. Now you can add all the adjectives you want..."corporate" or whatever. Different animal. But I dont think the confusion liberals try to sow with it work anymore. Since Obama came into office welfare spending (look up welfare at Wikipedia if you still dont know what it is) has risen 25% to over 900,000,000,000. LINK That is a lot of zeros. How to do it? Well for eight years you fund your pet liberals in corporations...then you whine that "corporate welfare" means you cant stop the welfare spending. neat trick!

Doesn't matter if liberal at Apple got some money, or Tunisia, or the National Weather Service. Welfare is breaking us. And there is no connection. If you want to cut welfare there is no tie to cutting off sewer funding to insurance agencies in Omaha. It is a liberal scam. "We cant cut welfare because "fill in the blank" welfare....
Bogus.

But more than that it ensures that Democrats can continue their handouts to corporations. it makes corporations complicit in the general theft. To lose that straw man "corporate welfare" would be catastrophic for corp[orate boards, democrat politicians and welfare vote farms.

Welfare is a necessity for when capitalism fails.

That won't work. 1 trillion dollars per year? That is hardly a safety net or backstop. That's full time careers for inner city slums who vote Democrat.

Just one trillion a year in underpayment to the labor force. Yet, the right wing prefers to be all political talk and no political action, regarding a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage.

 

[dblack]

There's no such thing as corporate welfare.

Ever hear of the Farm Bill ?

Yep. Another abysmal example of corporatism.

The farm bill started in helping family farms, but thanks to Republicans it's morphed into a huge corporate loophole.

It's a common pattern. Democrats propose laws that expand government; and Republicans show us why it was a bad idea.

With nothing but repeal? The democrats already showed us, the right wing loves the rich at the expense of the poor.

Then why do the democrats keep giving them so much power?

 

[danielpalos]

Welfare is when the government takes money from working people and hands it out to people who dont work. Its that simple. Now you can add all the adjectives you want..."corporate" or whatever. Different animal. But I dont think the confusion liberals try to sow with it work anymore. Since Obama came into office welfare spending (look up welfare at Wikipedia if you still dont know what it is) has risen 25% to over 900,000,000,000. LINK That is a lot of zeros. How to do it? Well for eight years you fund your pet liberals in corporations...then you whine that "corporate welfare" means you cant stop the welfare spending. neat trick!

Doesn't matter if liberal at Apple got some money, or Tunisia, or the National Weather Service. Welfare is breaking us. And there is no connection. If you want to cut welfare there is no tie to cutting off sewer funding to insurance agencies in Omaha. It is a liberal scam. "We cant cut welfare because "fill in the blank" welfare....
Bogus.

But more than that it ensures that Democrats can continue their handouts to corporations. it makes corporations complicit in the general theft. To lose that straw man "corporate welfare" would be catastrophic for corp[orate boards, democrat politicians and welfare vote farms.

Welfare is a necessity for when capitalism fails.

Welfare is a necessity when people fail--not capitalism.

Welfare is necessary when employers don't pay a living wage.

Now we are getting closer to the truth. Government handouts forever OR government control of businesses.
China, n Korea, Cuba and the Democrat Party...last communist holdouts.
Maybe if you import more Mexicans you can get wages down even more.

The right wing prefers to "hate on the poor" or "less fortunate illegals" for their illegalities. Importing management from the third world could save on management costs.

Since the 1990s, CEO compensation in the .U.S has outpaced corporate profits, economic growth and the average compensation of all workers. Between 1980 and 2004, Mutual Fund founder John Bogle estimates total CEO compensation grew 8.5 percent/year compared to corporate profit growth of 2.9 percent/year and per capita income growth of 3.1 percent.[26][27] By 2006 CEOs made 400 times more than average workers—a gap 20 times bigger than it was in 1965.[28] As a general rule, the larger the corporation the larger the CEO compensation package.--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_compensation_in_the_United_States#Levels_of_compensation

 

[danielpalos]

Apple to build Iowa data center, get $207.8 million in incentives

We've got to get a handle on this shit. Whatever happened to equal protection?

Could you explain why you oppose this creation of jobs.

It isn't about being able to "purchase" the finest privileges and immunities money can buy under our form of Capitalism; but, a lack of equal protection of the law regarding "welfare" for individuals.

What are you trying to say? They owe you sex? Or what?

Just clueless and Causeless? That really is worthless for pay purposes when no porn is involved.

 

[Timmy]

Building millionaire playgrounds is immoral, but pitting one group of citizens over the other is even more immoral. If you want a tax paid stadium and put it to a vote, fine with me, but let the taxation be on everybody--not just political enemies.

Agreed.

Of course, this contradicts your earlier posts in this thread, but hey - it's Hypocrisy Day on USMB! Let's all celebrate!

How did it contradict my earlier post?

I'm not going to chase you around the mulberry bush of equivocation and denial, but it seems you're fine with welfare as long as it's going to people you like.

Sorry, never collected welfare in my life.

Very nearby my home, Amazon is taking the land of one of our closed down malls and creating a state of the art distribution center. When it first opened in the 70's, it was the largest mall in the entire US.

I pay property taxes, and I'm probably paying a higher rate of tax than Amazon. I don't care because it doesn't affect me. I could care less if Amazon pays no property taxes. They are bringing technology and jobs to the area, so that's good for all of us. If they decide not to build there, I'm still paying the same rate of property taxes as if they would build there.

Amazon is not opening that place out of the goodness of their heart.

"They are providing jobs". No , we the consumers are providing jobs because amazon sells their crap to us .

But the cons never want to cut the working stiff consumers a break, those breaks go to the big corporation coming to town who IRONICALLY will be using up our roads and other public services .

 

[danielpalos]

Ever hear of the Farm Bill ?

Yep. Another abysmal example of corporatism.

The farm bill started in helping family farms, but thanks to Republicans it's morphed into a huge corporate loophole.

It's a common pattern. Democrats propose laws that expand government; and Republicans show us why it was a bad idea.

With nothing but repeal? The democrats already showed us, the right wing loves the rich at the expense of the poor.

Then why do the democrats keep giving them so much power?

How, by allegedly trying to "buy votes" with social benefits? To some on the left, it merely seems like some on the right, are merely clueless and Causeless, but still get to vote, anyway.

 

[dblack]

Yep. Another abysmal example of corporatism.

The farm bill started in helping family farms, but thanks to Republicans it's morphed into a huge corporate loophole.

It's a common pattern. Democrats propose laws that expand government; and Republicans show us why it was a bad idea.

With nothing but repeal? The democrats already showed us, the right wing loves the rich at the expense of the poor.

Then why do the democrats keep giving them so much power?

How, by allegedly trying to "buy votes" with social benefits? To some on the left, it merely seems like some on the right, are merely clueless and Causeless, but still get to vote, anyway.

By making more and more of our social decisions government concerns. If you want government in charge of taking care of the poor, 'creating' jobs, educating our children, and providing us with health care - well, eventually, that means someone like Donald Trump will be in charge of taking care of the poor, 'creating' jobs, educating our children, and providing us with health care. That doesn't seem like a good plan to me.

 

[Muhammed]

Apple to build Iowa data center, get $207.8 million in incentives

We've got to get a handle on this shit. Whatever happened to equal protection?

Could you explain why you oppose this creation of jobs.

It isn't about being able to "purchase" the finest privileges and immunities money can buy under our form of Capitalism; but, a lack of equal protection of the law regarding "welfare" for individuals.

What are you trying to say? They owe you sex? Or what?

Just clueless and Causeless? That really is worthless for pay purposes when no porn is involved.

Damn dude, it isn't even noon yet and you're already shitfaced, aren't you?

 

[danielpalos]

Apple to build Iowa data center, get $207.8 million in incentives

We've got to get a handle on this shit. Whatever happened to equal protection?

Could you explain why you oppose this creation of jobs.

It isn't about being able to "purchase" the finest privileges and immunities money can buy under our form of Capitalism; but, a lack of equal protection of the law regarding "welfare" for individuals.

What are you trying to say? They owe you sex? Or what?

Just clueless and Causeless? That really is worthless for pay purposes when no porn is involved.

Damn dude, it isn't even noon yet and you're already shitfaced, aren't you?

It isn't about being able to "purchase" the finest privileges and immunities money can buy under our form of Capitalism; but, a lack of equal protection of the law regarding "welfare" for individuals. The right wing only complains about welfare for the poor, not the rich.

 

[dblack]

Apple to build Iowa data center, get $207.8 million in incentives

We've got to get a handle on this shit. Whatever happened to equal protection?

Could you explain why you oppose this creation of jobs.

It isn't about being able to "purchase" the finest privileges and immunities money can buy under our form of Capitalism; but, a lack of equal protection of the law regarding "welfare" for individuals.

What are you trying to say? They owe you sex? Or what?

Just clueless and Causeless? That really is worthless for pay purposes when no porn is involved.

Damn dude, it isn't even noon yet and you're already shitfaced, aren't you?

Wake and bake for dp.

 

[Aldo Raine]

Ok Ray, lets just expand your analogy here. Rays Crazy Widgets are able to pay less because the government will subsidise their low wages through some form of welfare. The employee still gets x amount.

Because of this crafty Ray can undercut Tommys Top Widgets because Tommy is a good employer and pays a decent wage without government subsidies.

So Tommy can either go bust and Ray can pick up his business or he can follow Ray and pick up some corporate welfare.

The government has created a distorted market and penalised the good employer. If they refused to subsidise Ray then he would have to raise his wages as nobody would work for him.

And that's the way it should be. Government should only pass out social goodies to those who were responsible enough to not put themselves in a bad position in life, but somehow ended up there through no fault of their own.

I'm the employer. I have nothing to do with social programs. It's none of my business. Those programs are between my employee and the government--not between me and the government. I could care less if my employees are on social programs or not.

If we did get rid of social programs, then my employees would want to work more hours, and that's good for me since I would not have to hire more workers.

You would care if they bought a soda pop or stick off gum, you have said so! So you do care if they are on assistance.

As a taxpayer, yes, because I go to the store to buy my food and I have to buy theirs as well. But as a business owner, I could care less because it doesn't affect my business one way or the other.

Az a business owner and a citizen of the UNITED STATES it effects you.

No, only as a blue collar tax payer it does.

But as a business owner you would happily help to propagate one of the things you hate most. Government assistance for people while taking it for your business. What a blue collar patriot you are sir, thank you.