Why are we talking about social welfare when corporate welfare is by far our biggest cost?

[HIMBOB]

I'm quoting myself because this thread predictably devolved into a discussion about poor people with almost no analysis of the effects of corporate welfare, pro or con.

We don't talk about corporate welfare because most people don't understand it, don't research it, so they don't even know what to talk about. Poor people are just easier subjects.

Poor people don't have lobby groups that will get their cause into the spotlight

 

[panamaican]

Poor people don't have lobby groups that will get their cause into the spotlight

You mean poor people don't have lobby groups and PR firms to help keep them out of the spotlight.

 

[HIMBOB]

What are these loopholes exactly? If they are so significant how come the rich still pay all the taxes? Educate yourself rather than parroting liberal talking points

This explains it quite clearly

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...n-correct-buffett-claimed-pay-lower-tax-rate/

 

[HIMBOB]

You mean poor people don't have lobby groups and PR firms to help keep them out of the spotlight.

True too, but less effective imo.

Everyone knows Apple pays fuck all tax, but enough people think it's reasonable so stop any real action.

 

[panamaican]

True too, but less effective imo.

Everyone knows Apple pays fuck all tax, but enough people think it's reasonable so stop any real action.

Because most people have no idea how much Apple really makes, what Apple's real tax burden is or what it is they exactly pay and what they avoid. Because no one reports on it and even if they did report on it, mostly drift into a stupor when presented with large numbers and complex math.

 

[HIMBOB]

http://thefederalist.com/2013/09/30/calculating-the-real-cost-of-corporate-welfare/

Corporate welfare 280 billion


1.15 trillion in welfare roughly

So about 1/4 of the welfare and 1/9 of the revenue.


https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-tax/policy-basics-where-do-federal-tax-revenues-come-from

 

[HatchetHarry]

This explains it quite clearly

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...n-correct-buffett-claimed-pay-lower-tax-rate/

All it says is Buffet claimed his effective tax rate was lower than his secretary. These “breaks” are obviously not enough as tremendous tax inequality still exists.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cn...-pay-nearly-half-of-federal-income-taxes.html

Top 1% pay half of all income taxes. With our immoral and disgusting progressive tax system this is the result. This is inequality.

 

[HIMBOB]

All it says is Buffet claimed his effective tax rate was lower than his secretary. These “breaks” are obviously not enough as tremendous tax inequality still exists.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cn...-pay-nearly-half-of-federal-income-taxes.html

Top 1% pay half of all income taxes. With our immoral and disgusting progressive tax system this is the result. This is inequality.

So you want tax policy based on your concept of fairness. Well I have a different concept of fairness.

I want tax policy based on what's best for the nation not an arbitrary concept like fairness.

 

[hillelslovak87]

What are these loopholes exactly? If they are so significant how come the rich still pay all the taxes? Educate yourself rather than parroting liberal talking points

Many tools relating to the creation of foreign subsidaries to do business overseas in order to skirt US foreign business taxes

Tax havens, and the problems with foreign transfer pricing on corporations.

Deducting payouts from massive fines and lawsuits in a corporation's taxes.

Carried interest, and category changing of income to be non taxable.

LIFO, year to year

And on all of that, tax breaks for certain industries like oil and energy, and even billions upon billions in subsidy!

Talking points are fine, if they are based in reality. Talking points is the code word for political hacks in order to not have to deal with the arguments of the other side.

 

[hillelslovak87]

Seriously, what’s up with the homosexual fantasy stuff from the left here?


Keep you liberal degeneracy to yourself, thanks.

Hey hey hey. What do you take me for, a pastor or a Republican representative?

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Corporations benefit society, welfare leeches don’t.

Able bodied people don’t need welfare, they need a job.

Yes, and those lazy folks are taking advantage of the system, messing it up for those who genuinely need it.

 

[emax]

I have always thought that the American public, once they understood what corporate vs social welfare actually entail, would make demands for corporate welfare to be on the table first. Even Congressional leaders, activists, commentators and pundits who are against social welfare could in theory gain much more support by advocating for cutting corporate welfare first and doing it the most drastically.

 

[cincymma79]

I have always thought that the American public, once they understood what corporate vs social welfare actually entail, would make demands for corporate welfare to be on the table first. Even Congressional leaders, activists, commentators and pundits who are against social welfare could in theory gain much more support by advocating for cutting corporate welfare first and doing it the most drastically.

I gave the numbers already. If we took away all corporate welfare social welfare would still be about a trillion short