English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

huge sums of lost tax revenue due to "corporate welfare"?

Wouldn't reasonable corporate taxation policies cut personal income taxes across the board?

2006-12-16 13:31:42 · 20 answers · asked by Dastardly 6 in Politics & Government Politics

Oh, left wing rumor eh? Wow, do ou ever read anything? LOL.

http://www.progress.org/banneker/cw.html

2006-12-16 13:38:09 · update #1

And calling me uneducated just shows me that you don't have an answer.

2006-12-16 13:40:08 · update #2

20 answers

Corporate welfare is defined by the Cato Institute as "any government spending program that provides unique benefits or advantages to specific companies or industries." Although transfer payments in general (to the extent they redistribute the earned incomes of labor and capital) are morally wrong, corporate welfare is the worst transfer payment of all because it constitutes stealing from the poor in order to give to the rich. Examples of such giveaways can be found online at the Banneker Center's corporate welfare shame page.

The federal government currently spends roughly $93 billion a year on programs that provide subsidies to private businesses. Not only does this give big business an unfair advantage over smaller competitors, it gives politicians an excuse to deny much-needed tax relief to the bottom 75% of taxpayers -- those who, according to the Tax Foundation, make less than $55,226 a year.

Specifically, the bottom 75% (over 96 million people) pay approximately $156.8 billion a year in federal income taxes -- with those who make below $27,682 (the bottom 50%) paying a little over $38.3 billion, and those who make between $27,682 and $55,225 paying the rest.

Thus, if we eliminated corporate welfare, that alone would allow for the income tax to be reduced by nearly 1/2 for those making between $27,682 and $55,225, and abolished entirely for those making below $27,682. This would benefit wage-earners enormously by offsetting the regressive nature of the payroll tax, and would benefit small businesses by eliminating the anticompetitive nature of corporate welfare spending.

2006-12-16 13:35:17 · answer #1 · answered by dstr 6 · 6 4

you are going to get some bad responses because republicans who feel a need to protect their party are going to respond negatively, but to some degree you are right. it is the usual invest in the rich so the rich can get richer while the poor suffer.

Although corporations are taxed fairly heavily in some instances, like the traditional double taxation, and other taxes implicit in running any business; tax advantages are easily available to some, say when a corp goes into a poor area and gets tax breaks and closes down smaller businesses/stores while providing employment, really not adding much to the area while still bringing in a profit not really going back to the community.


but republicans just engage in more frivilous spending. I mean there was a surplus when bush took over from clinton, now the u.s. is far in debt. go blind supporters of republican policy. you've really shown us the way [to not do it].

2006-12-16 21:42:04 · answer #2 · answered by Smoove 4 · 2 1

Oh cry me a river. We had a surplus from Clinton's era cause he didn't have 9/11 nor a war to support or any other national catasrophy. This corporate welfare has been going on for years, yes even in Clintons era, and you can bet even with the demo's in the white house now it isn't going to change except all our taxes are going to be raised and where will all that extra money be going?

2006-12-16 22:11:26 · answer #3 · answered by Brianne 7 · 1 2

I have stated on here numerous times that I am not against giving a hand up, what I am against is to use it as life support. I have also stated on here that I am also against corporate welfare. The corporations though, know all they have to do is move out of the country to maintain and increase their profit margin. In the wake of this happening, people here lose their jobs!

2006-12-16 21:51:06 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

1. We do not like the idea of creating a slavery class by entitlements. The government never took anyone out of poverty.

2. The idea behind "corporate welfare," i.e.: tax cuts and incentives, is that jobs will be created and US goodwill is spread internationally (incentives for advertising abroad, etc.).

I am in favor of tying tax cuts with actual practice. If that answers your question.

2006-12-16 22:13:13 · answer #5 · answered by ? 7 · 3 1

Republicans and Democrats BOTH make lots and lots of money by supporting and subsidizing corporations.

And yes, progressive taxation (especially on corporations) would cut income taxes. But then politicians wouldn't make as much money from corporations.

2006-12-16 21:35:21 · answer #6 · answered by fourwhirledpeas 2 · 5 3

The facts of the increase of welfare percentages for the poor that occured each year that the Republicans held the Congress seem to have escaped your sharp notice!

Corporations do NOT 'pay' taxes, the costs of taxes are forwarded down to the poor people who buy the products, just as are all the costs incurred in the creation and marketing of all goods.

The real corporate owners, the shareholders, will not voluntarily donate their profits to you. Many of us poor folks own a few shares. Guess who we vote will pay all the expenses and costs of the goods our company markets? The consumer.

We also wouldn't mind the Fairtax! http://fairtax.org

and you could learn from http://www.cagw.org and http://lp.org

2006-12-16 21:47:42 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 4

it's all pretty common knowledge that this happens... didn't you hear Bush's state of the Union address where he was talking about all the huge tax cuts oil companies are getting and grants... at a time when they are making all-time record profits...

(is there one Republican that actually listens to Bush? that would explain why they still support him I guess?)

the answer to your question is two fold, either:

1. they don't know what is going on, which you can clearly see for some on here...

2. they are making money off of it, these are the people changind the subject (saying you don't know what you're talking about) or saying it creates jobs (which sometimes it does, but at a very high cost)

SIDE NOTE: alot of "you're uneducated"... not a lot of "this is why"... again it appears that Republicans have all the knowledge, yet are unwilling to share with anyone...

2006-12-16 21:37:30 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 5 4

Why would anyone want to turn the US into a welfare state ? All those fat women out there eating bon bons, getting that welfare check, popping out babies and letting the left exploit and throw money at them so the left is always reelected.

2006-12-16 21:57:11 · answer #9 · answered by Baghdad Pete ! 4 · 3 3

ok, where do i start? as an employer, every penny that comes out of your paycheck for state, federal and ss, i match. not just for you, for every employee that has tax deductions. do you understand how income tax works? in case you are wondering, i'm already paying my share of taxes. i will agree to let the government raise my taxes, will you.

2006-12-16 21:48:49 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3 3

fedest.com, questions and answers