Is "corporate welfare" an inaccurate name?

Question

By and large, government payments (or any payments) encourage behavior, and taxes discourage it.

Some have said that social welfare programs - aid to families with dependent children, etc. - has the effect of "encouraging" lack of work and unwed parenthood. Even FDR said that welfare can have "narcotic effects." (Although I would hope that everyone would favor help for the "truly needy" - but how do we define that?) Therefore it's possible to say that welfare can encourage behvior that society disfavors.

So my question is, what behavior does "corporate welfare" (such as tax credits tied to oil companies' exploration efforts) encourage? And what behaviors would removing these credits discourage?

Is one system rewarding work and effort, and the other discouraging it?

Answer 1

It's only called corporate welfare when Republicans do it. When Democrats do it it's called protecting jobs, protecting the environment, etc.

Answer 2

Being poor is not bad. Actually, you have few worries except to provide the necessities of life. You aren't burdened by community service, insurance, keeping up with the Jonses etc. Unfortunately, when people are "GIVEN" welfare without a requirement to give something back, we are encouraging them to be lazy. The old cliche "Idle hands are the devil's workshop" certainly applies where we give handouts instead of hands up.

Truly needy people usually find a way to help themselves and are not usually happy to take handouts. The greedy, on the other hand, will take anything they can get and try to get more through sympathy. If they worked as hard at working as they do trying to get things through sympathy, we wouldn't need welfare and they wouldn't have time to do drugs and commit crimes.

We need a revamp of our social welfare laws and we need to have strict welfare to work programs. We need to attach a huge stigma to welfare programs that provide benefits to people who are able but unwilling to work.

The Bible dictates that farmers not glean their fields but are to allow the poor and needy to glean the fields. That means those people had to work to get food by picking crops and working to eat. Why don't we have some kind of program that requires that? Too unpopular and won't get votes?

Answer 3

If you had to work long & hard enough you would have a much better understanding. Tax B/S is not the same as seed or earmark money.