Republicans are ignorant about the most basic FACTS about welfare in this country

[Billy000]

I don't like corporate welfare, but I don't like it on both sides, Democrats seemed to be happy with TARP, happy with subsidizing GM, or giving tax breaks to GE. The throwing money at Solyndra.

The more I learn, I find out how hypocritical Democrats are. Sorry, but you are a hypocrite.

Yes democrats have supported corporate welfare but historically republicans have always supported it. Not only that, but democrats unlike republicans are honest about the facts on welfare for the poor. The rightwing is ignorant on the most basic facts. It's hypocrisy like none other.

You mind reposting this in any manner that would make actual sense? You are making us all dumber with your reply of jingoistic bullshit. The dems support corp welfare but the repubs supported as well and then you throw in the poor for some stupid ******* reason and that's repub hypocrisy.

Spend a few moments and get your head out of your ass.

It's not my fault you don't understand simple nuance. Republicans widely and historically have always supported it. Only some democrats have. Not only that, but democrats are honest about welfare for the poor. Republicans aren't.

You know I am right.

 

[Billy000]

The truth of the matter is that the wealthy receive enormous gov assistance through subsidies. The poor on the other hand get peanuts.

Let's start with the poor and SNAP (food stamps).

The average SNAP recipient receives $133 a month. The average SNAP recipient has a gross income of $744 a MONTH per household. 76% of households have at least one dependent living there. 83% of households receiving SNAP are below the poverty line. The other 17 are at the poverty line or make 130% of the poverty line. And despite what you cons like to believe, food stamps fraud is RARE.

All the sobering facts on food stamps are here.

SNAP (Food Stamps): Facts, Myths and Realities

Now the wealthy. Oh boy.

1) corporations receive $80 billion a year through state and local subsidies.

2) Federal subsidies for corporations cost TAX PAYERS 100 billion a year.

3) The official tax rate for corporations is 35%. However, because of tax breaks, corporations only pay 13% a year in taxes.

4) wealthy hedge fund managers cost tax payers 83 billion a year.

5) subsidies for fast food companies cost tax payers 243 billion a year.

6) deductions for mortgage cost tax payers 70 billion a year. 77% of this funding goes to income earners of 100,000 a year or more.

Top Ten Examples of Welfare for the Rich » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names

The more facts we learn, the more realize just how much bullshit republicanism really is.

3) The official tax rate for corporations is 35%. However, because of tax breaks, corporations only pay 13% a year in taxes.

Tax breaks? Like writing off business expenses? LOL!

4) wealthy hedge fund managers cost tax payers 83 billion a year.

Wealthy hedge fund managers pay billions in taxes each year.

5) subsidies for fast food companies cost tax payers 243 billion a year.

That's funny.

Research by the University of Illinois and UC Berkeley documents that taxpayers pay about $243 billion each year in indirect subsidies to the fast food industry because they pay wages so low that taxpayers must put up $243 billion to pay for public benefits for their workers.

So stop paying those "subsidies". That'll show those mean companies.

The more facts we learn,

The next fact you learn will be the first.

This is a pathetic attempt.

Tax breaks are tax breaks.

Show me the evidence that they pay billions in taxes. Either way, how does that justify tax payers coughing up 83 billion per year?

You have nothing to offer this thread obviously.

Um yes we very much are talking about subsidies.

 

[P@triot]

The truth of the matter is that the wealthy receive enormous gov assistance through subsidies. The poor on the other hand get peanuts.

Let's start with the poor and SNAP (food stamps).

The average SNAP recipient receives $133 a month. The average SNAP recipient has a gross income of $744 a MONTH per household. 76% of households have at least one dependent living there. 83% of households receiving SNAP are below the poverty line. The other 17 are at the poverty line or make 130% of the poverty line. And despite what you cons like to believe, food stamps fraud is RARE.

All the sobering facts on food stamps are here.

SNAP (Food Stamps): Facts, Myths and Realities

Now the wealthy. Oh boy.

1) corporations receive $80 billion a year through state and local subsidies.

2) Federal subsidies for corporations cost TAX PAYERS 100 billion a year.

3) The official tax rate for corporations is 35%. However, because of tax breaks, corporations only pay 13% a year in taxes.

4) wealthy hedge fund managers cost tax payers 83 billion a year.

5) subsidies for fast food companies cost tax payers 243 billion a year.

6) deductions for mortgage cost tax payers 70 billion a year. 77% of this funding goes to income earners of 100,000 a year or more.

Top Ten Examples of Welfare for the Rich » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names

The more facts we learn, the more realize just how much bullshit republicanism really is.

Sadly [MENTION=33739]Billy000[/MENTION] - it's people like you who are to blame for all of this. It is you greedy liberals who created the unconstitutional monstrosity that now invades every sector of the free market, every facet of our personal lives, and level of government.

Lets make a deal here and now. Lets return Constitutional government to the U.S. and elliminate both welfare and "corporate welfare". Deal? No? Yeah, didn't think so.

You have no interest in solving America's problems. You're interested in two things and two things only:

1. Ensuring the government gravy train keeps flowing in your direction
   
   
2. Blaming Republicans for Dumbocrat failed policy to ensure more government gravy train

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You're an idiot. It clearly states Bush spent more than Obama.

Here is everything it saays about Obama.

The second largest contributor to the debt dollar-wise was President Obama. He added $4.8 trillion, a 41% increase, in just one term. Obama's budgets included the economic stimulus package, which added $787 billion by cutting taxes, extending unemployment benefits, and funding job-creating public works projects. The Obama tax cuts added $858 billion to the debt over two years. Obama's budget included increased defense spending to around $800 billion a year. Federal income was down, thanks to lower tax receipts from the 2008 financial crisis. Both Presidents Bush and Obama had to contend with higher mandatory mandatory spending for Social Security and Medicare. He also sponsored the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which was designed to reduce the debt by $143 billion over 10 years. However, these savings didn't show up until the later years. For more, see National Debt Under Obama.

In other words, he added almost as much as Bush did in 8 years in just 3 years.

Did you notice how I didn't even half to dig into how Bush isn't actually responsible for Obama's first year? Or you I didn't mention the stimulus that worked so well that you are still blaming Bush for the economy? Would you like me to add in the debt since the end of Obama's first term to those numbers just to make you look even dumber than you already do?

How are you so dense to just ignore the first line of your quote? However I do realize that by the time Obama's term is over he would have spent more than Bush. Sure. However there is no spending growth under Obama. He is spending at the same rate Bush did at the end of his second term.

He spent almost as much in 3 years as Bush did in 8.

End of discussion.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Yes democrats have supported corporate welfare but historically republicans have always supported it. Not only that, but democrats unlike republicans are honest about the facts on welfare for the poor. The rightwing is ignorant on the most basic facts. It's hypocrisy like none other.

You mind reposting this in any manner that would make actual sense? You are making us all dumber with your reply of jingoistic bullshit. The dems support corp welfare but the repubs supported as well and then you throw in the poor for some stupid ******* reason and that's repub hypocrisy.

Spend a few moments and get your head out of your ass.

It's not my fault you don't understand simple nuance. Republicans widely and historically have always supported it. Only some democrats have. Not only that, but democrats are honest about welfare for the poor. Republicans aren't.

You know I am right.

I know you're an idiot. Beyond that I know you can't focus on a coherent point. Beyond that I know you can't defend a position without blaming others for a similar only different position, and be able to differentiate between the two. Beyond that I know you can't think on your own without talking points.

Step up little boy and post your nuance. Let the world see your devine intellectual prowess. I am anxiously awaiting your epic reply! It should prove to be mind altering.

 

[Billy000]

I don't like corporate welfare, but I don't like it on both sides, Democrats seemed to be happy with TARP, happy with subsidizing GM, or giving tax breaks to GE. The throwing money at Solyndra.

The more I learn, I find out how hypocritical Democrats are. Sorry, but you are a hypocrite.

Yes democrats have supported corporate welfare but historically republicans have always supported it. Not only that, but democrats unlike republicans are honest about the facts on welfare for the poor. The rightwing is ignorant on the most basic facts. It's hypocrisy like none other.

And Democrats haven't always supported it?

You are dishonest in your claim, the Democrats have supported and loved the rich, right after Reagan closed up a lot of deductions for the rich, both parties have created more and more deductions a loopholes, to where we have more than ever before.

Democrats and Republicans have supported the rich, they fed the banks, during health care , the Dem protect insurance companies.

NAFTA was a bipartisan attack of working people.

CFR was a bipartisan effort to keep incumbents in and others out.

So spare me your self righteous BS! Because that is all spew.

Try to not be a partisan lemming.

So you're not even going to discuss the hypocrisy in Republican's attempt to cut welfare for the poor? They would cut it off altogether if they had the power.

Democrats are corrupt, but republicans are selfish, corrupt and hypocritical.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The truth of the matter is that the wealthy receive enormous gov assistance through subsidies. The poor on the other hand get peanuts.

Let's start with the poor and SNAP (food stamps).

The average SNAP recipient receives $133 a month. The average SNAP recipient has a gross income of $744 a MONTH per household. 76% of households have at least one dependent living there. 83% of households receiving SNAP are below the poverty line. The other 17 are at the poverty line or make 130% of the poverty line. And despite what you cons like to believe, food stamps fraud is RARE.

All the sobering facts on food stamps are here.

SNAP (Food Stamps): Facts, Myths and Realities

Now the wealthy. Oh boy.

1) corporations receive $80 billion a year through state and local subsidies.

2) Federal subsidies for corporations cost TAX PAYERS 100 billion a year.

3) The official tax rate for corporations is 35%. However, because of tax breaks, corporations only pay 13% a year in taxes.

4) wealthy hedge fund managers cost tax payers 83 billion a year.

5) subsidies for fast food companies cost tax payers 243 billion a year.

6) deductions for mortgage cost tax payers 70 billion a year. 77% of this funding goes to income earners of 100,000 a year or more.

Top Ten Examples of Welfare for the Rich » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names

The more facts we learn, the more realize just how much bullshit republicanism really is.

3) The official tax rate for corporations is 35%. However, because of tax breaks, corporations only pay 13% a year in taxes.

Tax breaks? Like writing off business expenses? LOL!

4) wealthy hedge fund managers cost tax payers 83 billion a year.

Wealthy hedge fund managers pay billions in taxes each year.

5) subsidies for fast food companies cost tax payers 243 billion a year.

That's funny.

Research by the University of Illinois and UC Berkeley documents that taxpayers pay about $243 billion each year in indirect subsidies to the fast food industry because they pay wages so low that taxpayers must put up $243 billion to pay for public benefits for their workers.

So stop paying those "subsidies". That'll show those mean companies.

The more facts we learn,

The next fact you learn will be the first.

This is a pathetic attempt.

Tax breaks are tax breaks.

Show me the evidence that they pay billions in taxes. Either way, how does that justify tax payers coughing up 83 billion per year?

You have nothing to offer this thread obviously.

Um yes we very much are talking about subsidies.

Either way, how does that justify tax payers coughing up 83 billion per year?

Taxpayers don't cough up $83 billion to hedge fund managers.
Your poor reading skills make me sad.

 

[Billy000]

You mind reposting this in any manner that would make actual sense? You are making us all dumber with your reply of jingoistic bullshit. The dems support corp welfare but the repubs supported as well and then you throw in the poor for some stupid ******* reason and that's repub hypocrisy.

Spend a few moments and get your head out of your ass.

It's not my fault you don't understand simple nuance. Republicans widely and historically have always supported it. Only some democrats have. Not only that, but democrats are honest about welfare for the poor. Republicans aren't.

You know I am right.

I know you're an idiot. Beyond that I know you can't focus on a coherent point. Beyond that I know you can't defend a position without blaming others for a similar only different position, and be able to differentiate between the two. Beyond that I know you can't think on your own without talking points.

Step up little boy and post your nuance. Let the world see your devine intellectual prowess. I am anxiously awaiting your epic reply! It should prove to be mind altering.

You're full of shit. You lost the argument and you know it.

 

[Billy000]

3) The official tax rate for corporations is 35%. However, because of tax breaks, corporations only pay 13% a year in taxes.

Tax breaks? Like writing off business expenses? LOL!

4) wealthy hedge fund managers cost tax payers 83 billion a year.

Wealthy hedge fund managers pay billions in taxes each year.

5) subsidies for fast food companies cost tax payers 243 billion a year.

That's funny.

Research by the University of Illinois and UC Berkeley documents that taxpayers pay about $243 billion each year in indirect subsidies to the fast food industry because they pay wages so low that taxpayers must put up $243 billion to pay for public benefits for their workers.

So stop paying those "subsidies". That'll show those mean companies.

The more facts we learn,

The next fact you learn will be the first.

This is a pathetic attempt.

Tax breaks are tax breaks.

Show me the evidence that they pay billions in taxes. Either way, how does that justify tax payers coughing up 83 billion per year?

You have nothing to offer this thread obviously.

Um yes we very much are talking about subsidies.

Either way, how does that justify tax payers coughing up 83 billion per year?

Taxpayers don't cough up $83 billion to hedge fund managers.
Your poor reading skills make me sad.

You know I am right. Give it a rest. Negging me like a child just makes you look weak.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The truth of the matter is that the wealthy receive enormous gov assistance through subsidies. The poor on the other hand get peanuts.

Let's start with the poor and SNAP (food stamps).

The average SNAP recipient receives $133 a month. The average SNAP recipient has a gross income of $744 a MONTH per household. 76% of households have at least one dependent living there. 83% of households receiving SNAP are below the poverty line. The other 17 are at the poverty line or make 130% of the poverty line. And despite what you cons like to believe, food stamps fraud is RARE.

All the sobering facts on food stamps are here.

SNAP (Food Stamps): Facts, Myths and Realities

Now the wealthy. Oh boy.

1) corporations receive $80 billion a year through state and local subsidies.

2) Federal subsidies for corporations cost TAX PAYERS 100 billion a year.

3) The official tax rate for corporations is 35%. However, because of tax breaks, corporations only pay 13% a year in taxes.

4) wealthy hedge fund managers cost tax payers 83 billion a year.

5) subsidies for fast food companies cost tax payers 243 billion a year.

6) deductions for mortgage cost tax payers 70 billion a year. 77% of this funding goes to income earners of 100,000 a year or more.

Top Ten Examples of Welfare for the Rich » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names

The more facts we learn, the more realize just how much bullshit republicanism really is.

3) The official tax rate for corporations is 35%. However, because of tax breaks, corporations only pay 13% a year in taxes.

Tax breaks? Like writing off business expenses? LOL!

4) wealthy hedge fund managers cost tax payers 83 billion a year.

Wealthy hedge fund managers pay billions in taxes each year.

5) subsidies for fast food companies cost tax payers 243 billion a year.

That's funny.

Research by the University of Illinois and UC Berkeley documents that taxpayers pay about $243 billion each year in indirect subsidies to the fast food industry because they pay wages so low that taxpayers must put up $243 billion to pay for public benefits for their workers.

So stop paying those "subsidies". That'll show those mean companies.

The more facts we learn,

The next fact you learn will be the first.

This is a pathetic attempt.

Tax breaks are tax breaks.

Show me the evidence that they pay billions in taxes. Either way, how does that justify tax payers coughing up 83 billion per year?

You have nothing to offer this thread obviously.

Um yes we very much are talking about subsidies.

6) deductions for mortgage cost tax payers 70 billion a year.

Mortgage deductions save tax payers 70 billion a year.
They cost the government 70 billion a year.

Damn, liberals are stupid.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

It's not my fault you don't understand simple nuance. Republicans widely and historically have always supported it. Only some democrats have. Not only that, but democrats are honest about welfare for the poor. Republicans aren't.

You know I am right.

I know you're an idiot. Beyond that I know you can't focus on a coherent point. Beyond that I know you can't defend a position without blaming others for a similar only different position, and be able to differentiate between the two. Beyond that I know you can't think on your own without talking points.

Step up little boy and post your nuance. Let the world see your devine intellectual prowess. I am anxiously awaiting your epic reply! It should prove to be mind altering.

You're full of shit. You lost the argument and you know it.

THAT was your intellectual prowess? Really!?

What a pathetic human being.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

This is a pathetic attempt.

Tax breaks are tax breaks.

Show me the evidence that they pay billions in taxes. Either way, how does that justify tax payers coughing up 83 billion per year?

You have nothing to offer this thread obviously.

Um yes we very much are talking about subsidies.

Either way, how does that justify tax payers coughing up 83 billion per year?

Taxpayers don't cough up $83 billion to hedge fund managers.
Your poor reading skills make me sad.

You know I am right. Give it a rest. Negging me like a child just makes you look weak.

Show me that taxpayers "cough up $83 billion" to hedge fund managers.
Unless you're wrong. LOL!

 

[Billy000]

Either way, how does that justify tax payers coughing up 83 billion per year?

Taxpayers don't cough up $83 billion to hedge fund managers.
Your poor reading skills make me sad.

You know I am right. Give it a rest. Negging me like a child just makes you look weak.

Show me that taxpayers "cough up $83 billion" to hedge fund managers.
Unless you're wrong. LOL!

It says it here in black and white. Give it a rest.

Top Ten Examples of Welfare for the Rich » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names

 

[Missouri_Mike]

3) The official tax rate for corporations is 35%. However, because of tax breaks, corporations only pay 13% a year in taxes.

Tax breaks? Like writing off business expenses? LOL!

4) wealthy hedge fund managers cost tax payers 83 billion a year.

Wealthy hedge fund managers pay billions in taxes each year.

5) subsidies for fast food companies cost tax payers 243 billion a year.

That's funny.

Research by the University of Illinois and UC Berkeley documents that taxpayers pay about $243 billion each year in indirect subsidies to the fast food industry because they pay wages so low that taxpayers must put up $243 billion to pay for public benefits for their workers.

So stop paying those "subsidies". That'll show those mean companies.

The more facts we learn,

The next fact you learn will be the first.

This is a pathetic attempt.

Tax breaks are tax breaks.

Show me the evidence that they pay billions in taxes. Either way, how does that justify tax payers coughing up 83 billion per year?

You have nothing to offer this thread obviously.

Um yes we very much are talking about subsidies.

6) deductions for mortgage cost tax payers 70 billion a year.

Mortgage deductions save tax payers 70 billion a year.
They cost the government 70 billion a year.

Damn, liberals are stupid.

According to libs it ain't yours unless the government allows it. Your money is their money, you get to keep what they deem is your fair share.

By their logic the entire GDP is the governments to redistribute as needed. From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

 

[OKTexas]

Yes democrats have supported corporate welfare but historically republicans have always supported it. Not only that, but democrats unlike republicans are honest about the facts on welfare for the poor. The rightwing is ignorant on the most basic facts. It's hypocrisy like none other.

And Democrats haven't always supported it?

You are dishonest in your claim, the Democrats have supported and loved the rich, right after Reagan closed up a lot of deductions for the rich, both parties have created more and more deductions a loopholes, to where we have more than ever before.

Democrats and Republicans have supported the rich, they fed the banks, during health care , the Dem protect insurance companies.

NAFTA was a bipartisan attack of working people.

CFR was a bipartisan effort to keep incumbents in and others out.

So spare me your self righteous BS! Because that is all spew.

Try to not be a partisan lemming.

So you're not even going to discuss the hypocrisy in Republican's attempt to cut welfare for the poor? They would cut it off altogether if they had the power.

Democrats are corrupt, but republicans are selfish, corrupt and hypocritical.

Explain why they didn't when they had both houses of congress and the presidency. You said it now back it up or admit you are wrong.

 

[Londoner]

During the Postwar Years we had a high marginal tax rate on the wealthiest Americans. We used the revenue to subsidize middle class purchasing power through a variety of programs, including the delivery of affordable college education. We also supported strong unions, which ensured that our workers had high wages and benefits (so they could support their families and give their children the tools of upward mobility). Finally, we had trade policies that made it harder for our capitalists to shift production to places like Communist China. As a result of all these things, our middle class, between 1945-1975, had more disposable income than at any time before or since. This meant that average American families could flock into "Main Street" stores and buy things, the effect of which was the greatest economic growth in US History. Put simply, when consumers have spending money, the capitalist has an incentive to invest and innovate in order to capture those consumer-dollars. [Don't try explaining this to "Talk Radio Republicans" because they get their economics from Rush Limbaugh].

The Postwar Years also featured a welfare safety net for people out of work (like Reagan's father, who received help from FDR's government). But - and this is no secret - welfare disbursements did not hold a candle to the subsidies given to business. Indeed, not only did our corporations get the greatest subsidies ever awarded by any government, they also benefited from truly massive investments in industrial infrastructure. Research the technology that came out of the Cold War Pentagon and NASA budgets. (Do Republicans understand the technology needed to put a man on the moon? Do they know where our satellite system came from? Do they know how many industries profit from this government supplied infrastructure? Of course not. They are Republicans. We all have Republican friends who get all their information not from books or careful cross-disciplinary research, but from ******* radio and TV pundits. Do you think Rush Limbaugh has ever talked about where our satellite system comes from? No. His listeners only hear about what government does for the poor. His listeners literally have no idea what government gives to the wealthy. They are the useful idiots of the powers that fund elections and staff government)

 

[Andylusion]

You know I find it interesting none of you have the balls to even acknowledge the facts I presented about SNAP.

1) corporations receive $80 billion a year through state and local subsidies.

2) Federal subsidies for corporations cost TAX PAYERS 100 billion a year.

3) The official tax rate for corporations is 35%. However, because of tax breaks, corporations only pay 13% a year in taxes.

4) wealthy hedge fund managers cost tax payers 83 billion a year.

5) subsidies for fast food companies cost tax payers 243 billion a year.

6) deductions for mortgage cost tax payers 70 billion a year. 77% of this funding goes to income earners of 100,000 a year or more.

Top Ten Examples of Welfare for the Rich » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names

The more facts we learn, the more realize just how much bullshit republicanism really is.

1. Lie.

2. Somewhat true, but generally it's because of leftist causes. You scream and yell about corporations getting money, then turn around and support giving money to corporations. Blame yourself.

3. True, and good. Less money given to government, the better off all of us are.

4. Lie.

5. Lie.

6. True, and good. Less money given to government, the better off we all are.

First, the lies.... A tax deducation, is not a subsidy. Everyone, as in EVERYONE, in this country gets taxes deductions. If a tax deduction is a "subsidy", then absolutely every single freakin person in this entire country is being subsidized.

Which renders the term meaningless, since there is no one not subsidized.

Second, all those examples you list where corporations pay less tax, are good things. I *WANT* corporations to pay less tax. I want them buying stuff, investing stuff, and growing wealth.

I don't them paying that money to government, where it is given to political kick backs, and Wealthy CEOs of say Solyndra walk off with millions in tax money providing nothing.

Your system... bad. My system... good. Ford provided me a car. What did your tax payer funded Solyndra provide me? Nothing but a tax bill.

I would love proof as to what makes what I said "lies". Yet another feeble response and no mention of what I said about SNAP.

I believe I jumped on that too quickly. Typically when a people start screaming about subsidies, they end up talking about a tax break, which is *NOT* a subisidy.

In this particular case, your source may have actually been talking about real subsidies, where money is taxed away from one group, and given to another.

In which case, you are preaching to the choir. All of us on the right, are completely against subsidies..... ALL subsidies. I want them ALL gone.

The difference between us, and you.... is that we are ideologically consistent. We are against *ALL* subsides.... that means everything from giving millions to Solydra.... to giving a lazy bum a SNAP card.

See, we're not tied up by ratios, or percentages. This is why none of us bothered to talk about your little factoids about SNAP. It doesn't matter to us.

Let's say that I come to your home, and shove a gun in your face, and demand $100, and then as I leave, I give the $100 to a homeless guy.

Is that right or wrong? Of course it's wrong. Well what if I demand $1,000? Still wrong. Yeah but what if I only demand 10¢? That's a very small percentage. Nope, still wrong!

Now what if I find someone else, like say a politician in government, to do the same thing? That's all still wrong. All of it.

So how much more, or how much less, any particular group gets in Federal Funds, doesn't matter to me. Its all wrong.

Now back to the Corporate Welfare. Let's look at exactly what we're talking about.

http://thinkbynumbers.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/Corporate-Welfare-Programs-BY-Agency1.jpg
thinkbynumbers.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/Corporate-Welfare-Programs-BY-Agency-21.jpg

Department of Agriculture.

Agriculture Marketing Services, promotes "Organic Foods"
Resources Conservation Service, pays people to increase carbon absorption (I can't make this stuff up), and protect animals like the Gopher Tortoise.
Farm Security and Rural Investment, giving low interest government backed loans for among other things, green energy business.
Commodity Credit Corporation, which buys commodities for the purpose of stabilizing prices (created by FDR in 1933, by executive order. Sound familiar?)
Federal Crop Insurance Corporation, which originally was designed to cover major events like the dust bowl, but now covers pretty much everything, from 'too much rain', to frost bite.
Rural Business and Co-Operative Service, which promotes Co-Ops, and Biomass fuels. (yeah, I don't know how those two went together either.... but it's government)
Rural Electrification, which of course promotes getting electricity to all those completely un-powered rural towns and villages, which have no power at all....... since the 1930s when this program was created.....

Department of Commerce

Minority Business Development Agency.... any questions?
International Trade, subsidizing international trade, which is a form of protectionism, which I'm against. There are a few right-wingers who disagree, but mostly it's the left screaming about trade.
Fisheries, unfortunately are unavoidable. Until we privatize ocean into plots, as long as the Fisheries are a common ground, without regulation and control of the fishing industry, they will fish until the resource is used up. Tragedy of the Commons.
All the rest of are grants to business.... which I'm against.

Department of Energy

Energy Supply Subsidies.... I couldn't find out what that refers to. I assume it's the loan guarantee for energy producers, which includes everything from Nuclear power plants, to Wind Turbines and Solar Panels. I'm against all of those.
Fossil Energy Research and Dev, which is R&D on Carbon Capture, and CO2 reduction.
Coal Research, goes to the clean coal initiative, that Bush canceled because it had produced nothing, and Obama brought right back.
Hydrogen and the Clean Car.... more alternative green energy. Granted this one was Bush's idea, but it's still the same green energy crap.

Department of Housing and Urban Dev..... Do I even need to outline the leftist crap in this one?

Department of Transportation.

Grants in Aid to Airports.... Let them close if they are not profitable.
Commercial Space Transport.... why are we funding this? Maybe there is a reason.
Payments to Air Carriers to fly to places that are not profitable to fly to.
Amtrak, High Speed Rail, and R&D.... Need I say more?
Guaranteed Loan to Ship Builders.... completely against that.
Ocean Freight Differential... Not sure. Could not figure out what that was.

Corp Public Broadcasting... against.
International Development... against.
Small Business Admin.... against.
Overseas Private Investment... against.
National Institute of Health.... against.

So just the Department of Agriculture alone, was $43.7 Billion of that $91.9 Billion, and which group of people tried to eliminate Farm subsidies? Right-wing Republicans. It certainly wasn't the left trying to kill of Biomass Fuel Subsidies. And look at some of those programs..... Organic Food marketing, Co-Op Support, Biomass fuels, Green Energy grants, Paying people for Carbon Absorption? Do those sound like Right-Wing Free-Market Capitalist programs? Buying up commodities for price stability?

I can remember, back in the early 2000s, Rush Limbaugh screaming about the Farm Subsidies bill, and yelling about all the money that would be blown to wealthy rich corporations.

Fast Forward 10 years, and now here you are complaining about the subsidies given to Corporations, and nearly half of it, is all from that Farm Bill.

You people on the left, can't support a big government money give away, and then turn around and complain about government money being given away. That's called hypocrisy. "I support green energy grants!" tick tick tick.... "Look at all the subsidies to energy companies!"

Now, to be fair, there are a few things that Right-wingers would likely support. Like the R&D spending for the military, which does benefit private business, and possibly the Foreign Military Financing (which I'm largely against).

But all of the things Right-Wingers may support, combined, would only be about $16 Billion, of that $91 Billion. All the rest of it, is all left wing crap, and many were started by FDR.

 

[OKTexas]

During the Postwar Years we had a high marginal tax rate on the wealthiest Americans. We used the revenue to subsidize middle class purchasing power through a variety of programs, including the delivery of affordable college education. We also supported strong unions, which ensured that our workers had high wages and benefits (so they could support their families and give their children the tools of upward mobility). Finally, we had trade policies that made it harder for our capitalists to shift production to places like Communist China. As a result of all these things, our middle class, between 1945-1975, had more disposable income than at any time before or since. This meant that average American families could flock into "Main Street" stores and buy things, the effect of which was the greatest economic growth in US History. Put simply, when consumers have spending money, Capital flows into these markets in order to invest and innovate and capture those consumer-dollars. [Don't try explaining this to "Talk Radio Republicans" because they get their economics from Rush Limbaugh].

The Postwar Years also featured a welfare safety net for people out of work (like Reagan's father, who received help from FDR's government). But - and this is no secret - welfare disbursements did not hold a candle to the subsidies given to business. Indeed, not only did our corporations get the greatest subsidies ever awarded by any government, they also benefited from truly massive investments in industrial infrastructure. Research the technology that came out of the Cold War Pentagon and NASA budgets. (Do Republicans understand the technology needed to put a man on the moon? Do they know where our satellite system came from? Do they know how many industries profit from this government supplied infrastructure? Of course not. They are Republicans. We all have Republican friends who get all their information not from books or careful cross-disciplinary research, but from ******* radio and TV pundits. Do you think Rush Limbaugh has ever talked about where our satellite system comes from? No. His listeners only hear about what government does for the poor. His listeners literally have no idea what government gives to the wealthy. They are the useful idiots of the powers that fund elections and staff government)

Tell me smart ass, what did the government do to EARN the funds expended to develop and place those satellites in orbit. Oh that's right, they just confiscate from business and individuals, Government produces nothing they take, they destroy wealth and pathetic weasels like you try to tout their pseudo accomplishments like they are indispensable, when in fact with very few exceptions of the federal governments functions, we would be much better off without them.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You know I am right. Give it a rest. Negging me like a child just makes you look weak.

Show me that taxpayers "cough up $83 billion" to hedge fund managers.
Unless you're wrong. LOL!

It says it here in black and white. Give it a rest.

Top Ten Examples of Welfare for the Rich » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names

I know you're a poor reader, but that article did not say that taxpayers "cough up $83 billion" to hedge fund managers.
I hope you won't cry.

 

[Papageorgio]

Yes democrats have supported corporate welfare but historically republicans have always supported it. Not only that, but democrats unlike republicans are honest about the facts on welfare for the poor. The rightwing is ignorant on the most basic facts. It's hypocrisy like none other.

And Democrats haven't always supported it?

You are dishonest in your claim, the Democrats have supported and loved the rich, right after Reagan closed up a lot of deductions for the rich, both parties have created more and more deductions a loopholes, to where we have more than ever before.

Democrats and Republicans have supported the rich, they fed the banks, during health care , the Dem protect insurance companies.

NAFTA was a bipartisan attack of working people.

CFR was a bipartisan effort to keep incumbents in and others out.

So spare me your self righteous BS! Because that is all spew.

Try to not be a partisan lemming.

So you're not even going to discuss the hypocrisy in Republican's attempt to cut welfare for the poor? They would cut it off altogether if they had the power.

Democrats are corrupt, but republicans are selfish, corrupt and hypocritical.

Democrats are also selfish, look at they homage they pay to the rich. The only reason they pretend to look out for the poor is the power they can wield over the poor. The Democrats would lose huge support if the poor were given the opportunity to work and rise above the level the Democrats keep them at.

The Democrats don't fight for the poor, they tolerate the poor, because the poor can be so easily manipulated.