Corporate Welfare versus Invidual Welfare. Which Costs Taxpayers the Most?

[bripat9643]

in the whining that the corporate welfare is the reason of our debt.

the social welfare is the reason.
not the corporate one.

Corporate welfare doesnt contribute to the debt?

It keeps the prices of your groceries down so you can afford to eat. So I guess corporate welfare is CC welfare.

How does corporate welfare keep the price of groceries down?

 

[bripat9643]

The majority of welfare benefits goes to RED states.

Not true. Top five States for TANF Welfare Payments (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families). Sources HHS


1. California $7,238,867,000


2. New York $5,346,657,000


3. Michigan $1, 703,006,000


4. Washington $1,494,308,308


5. New Jersey $1,445,745,000



The whole liberal Red State meme is another myth. I'll blow that up some other day. Those numbers included all Federal money that goes to States. My State, Virginia, gets an enormous amount of Federal dollars. Why? The largest navy base in the world is here. The Pentagon. Langley AFB. The CIA. Quantico. Yorktown NWS. I could go on.

Red States have the the bulk on the military and Federal facilities in the U.S. That is where the bulk of those dollars are coming from. Been to many Federal facilities in Vermont or Maine? See the difference?

Not really.

The military doesn't make anything to actually "sell". Putting those bases in Red States is simply another kind of welfare.

That would only be true if we didn't need military bases. Since that obviously isn't true, then they aren't welfare. They're part of the cost of having a military.

And you can bet the arms and other goods going to those military bases are made in Blue States.

There are some large defense contractors in Texas and some other red states. However, we don't know if the numbers were concocted using money spent on weapons programs. I suspect they simply ignored any spending category that favored the blue states.

Worse, I'm sure Hurricane Sandy had nothing to do with "temporary assistance" in a couple of those states.

And Hurricane Katrina had plenty to do with "temporary assistance" in a couple of red states.

 

[bripat9643]

it is a miniscule amount compared to the social welfare.

and the fairy tale is leftard whining and lying that it is the main problem.

it is not.

I assume that you agree with the rest of my post, since you ever objected to anything else

No it's not.

You ever step on a plane?

When you walk by first class, you ever wonder how so many people can afford it?

Oh yeah..it's you that's paying for it.

And me.

OMG, so thats what its all about with you, you are jealous that some people can afford first class and you can't.

A lot of people in first class rode a lot of miles in coach in order to get enough points for an upgrade. Some pay for it, what they pay makes your ticket cheaper, how awful

I'm one of those people. I travel almost every week. I have preferred status an three different airlines. One of the percs of being preferred is getting a free upgrade to first class if there are any seats available.

 

[DiamondDave]

The majority of welfare benefits goes to RED states.

Not true. Top five States for TANF Welfare Payments (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families). Sources HHS


1. California $7,238,867,000


2. New York $5,346,657,000


3. Michigan $1, 703,006,000


4. Washington $1,494,308,308


5. New Jersey $1,445,745,000



The whole liberal Red State meme is another myth. I'll blow that up some other day. Those numbers included all Federal money that goes to States. My State, Virginia, gets an enormous amount of Federal dollars. Why? The largest navy base in the world is here. The Pentagon. Langley AFB. The CIA. Quantico. Yorktown NWS. I could go on.

Red States have the the bulk on the military and Federal facilities in the U.S. That is where the bulk of those dollars are coming from. Been to many Federal facilities in Vermont or Maine? See the difference?

Not really.

The military doesn't make anything to actually "sell". Putting those bases in Red States is simply another kind of welfare. And you can bet the arms and other goods going to those military bases are made in Blue States.

Worse, I'm sure Hurricane Sandy had nothing to do with "temporary assistance" in a couple of those states.

Spin and twist when your lies are exposed...

'another type of welfare'... ******* laughable

 

[bripat9643]

corporate welfare also provides, jobs, services, research and development for improved products and services. public welfare provides a drain. there is nothing provided as a return. we don't even get a trained and ready workforce out of the deal.

Disagree with that. We are going to pay for it up front or the back end in rehabilitation and or incarceration costs.

Let's get those on public assistance they help they need to make them productive taxpayers.

Since almost 4 of 5 are children, I would suggest that this should be the priority.

So on the average one welfare mom has 4 bastard children? Don't you see a problem here?

 

[dblack]

No, the military budget is not "corporate welfare," as much as libturds try to define it that way. We buy fighter planes, bombers and aircraft carriers because we need to have those things to have an effective military. Who do you propose we buy them from if not American defense contractors? And the wars in Iraq were not for the purpose of defending "oil interests." American oil companies didn't make a dime off of either war.

All you're doing is throwing out the usual libturd red herrings in a failed effort to defend our vast welfare budget.

So, Eisenhower was just a whack job then?

I'm not sure what the Eisenhower reference is to. But you did say military pork, not all military spending, so I'm not sure what bripat is objecting to.

It's pathetic when Congress forces bases to remain open and weapons systems to be funded that the military doesn't want because it's not the most efficient use of the money they get, but the plants or bases are in some big congressman or Senators district. That is clearly welfare.

Exactly.

I was referring to Eisenhower's warnings about the "military industrial complex", and its power and propensity to manipulate US foreign policy for its own gain.

 

[Redfish]

Corporate welfare doesnt contribute to the debt?

It keeps the prices of your groceries down so you can afford to eat. So I guess corporate welfare is CC welfare.

How does corporate welfare keep the price of groceries down?

I was talking specifically about farm subsidies.

 

[Redfish]

Is that a yes or no?

if you consider farm subsidies corporate welfare, then yes. I am for stopping them, are you?

Ok so if it contributes to the debt then why are the righties here calling them fairy tales liberals tell? Is "fairy tales" the new word for "fact"?

The fairy tale is that "corporate subsidies" are in the same magnitude as welfare payments.

I would eliminate all tax breaks and subsidies for corporations of all kinds, including NRP, PP, NEA, etc.

Be aware that when we eliminate tax write offs for energy exploration, that the price of a gallon of gas will go up.

You can't have it both ways.

 

[Vox]

So where is the fairy tale?

in the whining that the corporate welfare is the reason of our debt.

the social welfare is the reason.
not the corporate one.

Corporate welfare doesnt contribute to the debt?

no, it does not.

 

[Vox]

Corporate Welfare doesnt exist?

it is a miniscule amount compared to the social welfare.

and the fairy tale is leftard whining and lying that it is the main problem.

it is not.

I assume that you agree with the rest of my post, since you ever objected to anything else

No it's not.

You ever step on a plane?

When you walk by first class, you ever wonder how so many people can afford it?

Oh yeah..it's you that's paying for it.

And me.

what doe this blabber has to do with social welfare comprising the lion share of our debt?

p.s. I can afford first class and I use it sometimes.

 

[Vox]

it is a miniscule amount compared to the social welfare.

and the fairy tale is leftard whining and lying that it is the main problem.

it is not.

I assume that you agree with the rest of my post, since you ever objected to anything else

No it's not.

You ever step on a plane?

When you walk by first class, you ever wonder how so many people can afford it?

Oh yeah..it's you that's paying for it.

And me.

OMG, so thats what its all about with you, you are jealous that some people can afford first class and you can't.

A lot of people in first class rode a lot of miles in coach in order to get enough points for an upgrade. Some pay for it, what they pay makes your ticket cheaper, how awful

some simply work flying constantly, so them flying the first class is just part of the job.

what does it has to do with "corporate welfare" except being a perfect example of "class envy" I can't fathom.
Plus, I think, some fairy tales told here by Salow about him working on the Wall street are just that - fairy tales.

 

[Vox]

if you consider farm subsidies corporate welfare, then yes. I am for stopping them, are you?

Ok so if it contributes to the debt then why are the righties here calling them fairy tales liberals tell? Is "fairy tales" the new word for "fact"?

The fairy tale is that "corporate subsidies" are in the same magnitude as welfare payments.

I would eliminate all tax breaks and subsidies for corporations of all kinds, including NRP, PP, NEA, etc.

Be aware that when we eliminate tax write offs for energy exploration, that the price of a gallon of gas will go up.

You can't have it both ways.

the main fairy tale is in leftard math by itself - a tax break is considered to equal a cash handout.

 

[ClosedCaption]

if you consider farm subsidies corporate welfare, then yes. I am for stopping them, are you?

Ok so if it contributes to the debt then why are the righties here calling them fairy tales liberals tell? Is "fairy tales" the new word for "fact"?

The fairy tale is that "corporate subsidies" are in the same magnitude as welfare payments.

Oh you shouldve said they were strawman fairy tales because you couldnt find anyone who says that

Now I understand...sorry about that

 

[gallantwarrior]

Is a no bid contract to a favored corporation qualify as welfare? No, but it should.

And do you have any idea why corporations (that have been making billions of dollars) why do we spend a dime on a corporation that is doing very well? do you know?

And did you know that those hated welfare funds going to individuals and families are.....wait for it......
among the poorest people in the country.

See the difference? Corporations are very rich and the bottom third of our population is very poor.

Who you think should get the welfare? I know. You want the corporations to have your money.

Welfare should be abolished. Period. Big or small, whatever entity you wish to point to, if they cannot make it on their own, they should be allowed to fail. The taxpayer should not be dunned to subsidize any entity, individual or corporate, that is not self-sustaining.

 

[bripat9643]

It keeps the prices of your groceries down so you can afford to eat. So I guess corporate welfare is CC welfare.

How does corporate welfare keep the price of groceries down?

I was talking specifically about farm subsidies.

They don't keep the price of groceries down. They increase the price of groceries. How would paying farmers not to grow food keep food prices down?

 

[bripat9643]

So, Eisenhower was just a whack job then?

I'm not sure what the Eisenhower reference is to. But you did say military pork, not all military spending, so I'm not sure what bripat is objecting to.

It's pathetic when Congress forces bases to remain open and weapons systems to be funded that the military doesn't want because it's not the most efficient use of the money they get, but the plants or bases are in some big congressman or Senators district. That is clearly welfare.

Exactly.

I was referring to Eisenhower's warnings about the "military industrial complex", and its power and propensity to manipulate US foreign policy for its own gain.

How does that make defense spending a form of welfare? Congress has been steadily reducing the size of the defense budget since the 1960s. The idea that defense contractors have any kind of undue influence is laughable given the massive growth in other areas of the government. The NEA has more influence that the defense industry.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Not true. Top five States for TANF Welfare Payments (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families). Sources HHS


1. California $7,238,867,000


2. New York $5,346,657,000


3. Michigan $1, 703,006,000


4. Washington $1,494,308,308


5. New Jersey $1,445,745,000



The whole liberal Red State meme is another myth. I'll blow that up some other day. Those numbers included all Federal money that goes to States. My State, Virginia, gets an enormous amount of Federal dollars. Why? The largest navy base in the world is here. The Pentagon. Langley AFB. The CIA. Quantico. Yorktown NWS. I could go on.

Red States have the the bulk on the military and Federal facilities in the U.S. That is where the bulk of those dollars are coming from. Been to many Federal facilities in Vermont or Maine? See the difference?

Not really.

The military doesn't make anything to actually "sell". Putting those bases in Red States is simply another kind of welfare.

That would only be true if we didn't need military bases. Since that obviously isn't true, then they aren't welfare. They're part of the cost of having a military.

And you can bet the arms and other goods going to those military bases are made in Blue States.

There are some large defense contractors in Texas and some other red states. However, we don't know if the numbers were concocted using money spent on weapons programs. I suspect they simply ignored any spending category that favored the blue states.

Worse, I'm sure Hurricane Sandy had nothing to do with "temporary assistance" in a couple of those states.

And Hurricane Katrina had plenty to do with "temporary assistance" in a couple of red states.

Libs who want to cut military spending should examine the Constitution. Maintaining a military force for the common defense is one of the few enumerated tasks of the Fed. Providing a free ride via welfare is most definitely not a Constitutionally mandated duty of the Fed.

 

[kaz]

I'm not sure what the Eisenhower reference is to. But you did say military pork, not all military spending, so I'm not sure what bripat is objecting to.

It's pathetic when Congress forces bases to remain open and weapons systems to be funded that the military doesn't want because it's not the most efficient use of the money they get, but the plants or bases are in some big congressman or Senators district. That is clearly welfare.

Exactly.

I was referring to Eisenhower's warnings about the "military industrial complex", and its power and propensity to manipulate US foreign policy for its own gain.

How does that make defense spending a form of welfare? Congress has been steadily reducing the size of the defense budget since the 1960s. The idea that defense contractors have any kind of undue influence is laughable given the massive growth in other areas of the government. The NEA has more influence that the defense industry.

See red

 

[kaz]

Libs who want to cut military spending should examine the Constitution. Maintaining a military force for the common defense is one of the few enumerated tasks of the Fed. Providing a free ride via welfare is most definitely not a Constitutionally mandated duty of the Fed.

I'm a Lib(ertarian), fundamentally different, but the key word is "cut" not "eliminate." The only Constitutionally authorized role of the military is for defense of the US. It's not to manipulate governments in the Middle East or go nations building. If we stopped doing those things, we could defend the US more cheaply than what we are doing now.

 

[Vox]

Exactly.

I was referring to Eisenhower's warnings about the "military industrial complex", and its power and propensity to manipulate US foreign policy for its own gain.

How does that make defense spending a form of welfare? Congress has been steadily reducing the size of the defense budget since the 1960s. The idea that defense contractors have any kind of undue influence is laughable given the massive growth in other areas of the government. The NEA has more influence that the defense industry.

See red

it is still not equal CASH HANDOUTS.

preference in work assignment or decreased taxes paid ARE NOT equal the taxpayer's money handed out for NOTHING.

Guys, stop repeating the leftard's lying propaganda shit.