Corporate welfare…
- Thread starter poker
- Start date
Corporate welfare or Corporate stimulus. There is a place for it in society. There is give and take. The rich have to have incentive to create the jobs. People complain about Corporate welfare if they did not have that to complain about then they would complain about being U-men without jobs.
Can Billionaires not use there own Billions to create all these jobs?
And no…. The country would not fall off a Cliff if Corporate stimulus to profitable companies stopped. People would be investing their own money. That’s how business works. However… if we keep offering Billionaires our tax dollars, why wouldn’t they take it?
There is a very Narrow justification for Corporate welfare... National security issues. Cbc Needs to be incorporate because of this. Like china we should have our own google . The internet will not exist without corporate welfare.. 100 years ago for oil made sense. Now solar is where it should be. Oil can more than self finance now.
Corporate welfare = Jobs = Tax Revenue
All Corporate welfare/make work projects funded by the government pays for itself and makes jobs that boost the economy. Name one that did not.
Many. don't pay them for themselves. Giving Everyone $2,000 free for month that oays for itself since the majority of Canadians Spend everything they earn just to live. Stock back buybacks CEO Off shore same accounts do nothing for the Canadian economy.
Put on the top of my head several water companies Who are given local water Far below local cost. Are there existence causes Are you destroying an economy in the water and profits or sent to some other country.
Oil companies as a group... Majority of them poket the money and to exist after few years. Leaving behind millions of dollars of lawsuits etc
https://www.thestar.com/calgary/sup...le_104525df-2889-5365-ad1b-8299403cb844off.ml.
Nortel Once a global leader and technology And then nothing. In the case of nortel For it's early existence it was a net gain . It's hard to tell if it's later bloated Existence Cancel that the good or If you add the years go to bed That we came out of top. But you cannot argue that if we stop giving the money 10 years before they went bankrupt we would have been better off. The last 10 years was the giveaway to china and only china benefited from that money
Ps
- SNC-Lavalin Group Inc.: This engineering and construction company faced allegations of bribery and corruption, which led to a significant scandal and legal challenges.
- Barrick Gold Corporation: The mining company has been criticized for environmental issues and human rights concerns related to its global operations, including projects in Canada.
- Valeant Pharmaceuticals (now Bausch Health): This pharmaceutical company faced criticism for its aggressive pricing strategies and business practices, which led to public and legal scrutiny.
- Enbridge Inc.: The energy company has faced opposition and legal challenges regarding its oil pipeline projects, particularly the Northern Gateway and Line 9 projects.
Last edited:
Are you the ghost of Reagan?
Trickle down has never worked. It just puts more billions in the pockets of billionaires. Always has. Always will.
That being said…. I also agree there are some cases where public investment makes sense. (We probably need more financial oversight but eh…)
public investment makes sense. It’s when it’s given to the chosen donors … er, corporations…. Is where I take exception.
The problem with corporate welfare is “who gets to pick the companies” that receive it and those that don’t. Who gets to pick what jobs to save, which jobs not to. Who gets to pick where .
SNC is a good example. As is Bombardier, Air Canada, GM or Ford in the gta, amd many others……Anyone else too bad, so sad…you get to go on EI.
Who gets to pick which votes to buy.
If we want to entice companies to invest here, and we do need to. Many are leaving, or not investing and expanding ( Google capital bleed Canada). Tax cuts, some others that treat all companies the same, no matter where they are, no matter whose votes... Is the way to do it.
SNC is a good example. As is Bombardier, Air Canada, GM or Ford in the gta, amd many others……Anyone else too bad, so sad…you get to go on EI.
Who gets to pick which votes to buy.
If we want to entice companies to invest here, and we do need to. Many are leaving, or not investing and expanding ( Google capital bleed Canada). Tax cuts, some others that treat all companies the same, no matter where they are, no matter whose votes... Is the way to do it.
So would you agree that solar along with Tesla and other businesses for
the future like renewable energy should be financed like Standard Oil,
Ford and General Motors 100+ years ago? Or put it the other way they
must benefit from corporate welfare no more or less than John D Rockefeller
and Henry Ford.
I doubt any tax advantage offered to automobile buyers 100
years ago were as generous as tax incentives offered to buyers
of EVs today.
Unlike diesel, gasoline and petrochemical products in general
EVs and solar panels are for the affluent not commoners. More
government subsidies on these gadgets and toys is outrageous
wealth transfer from the poor to the rich.
The oil subsidies that I spoke of were for the set up of the infrastructure. Cool exploration used to be hard At the very beginning. There were no roads for cars mud Good for horses. There were no gas stations. Helping with setting up supply chains An early adaptation Of technology by government like buses.
Some of the currents subsides Make sense. What even I as a very Early adoptor Of new energy Think that the new system is crazy. There is no way to supply the power to all those cars. If you want to stop it You stop population growth. Which is happening naturally in Any rich country. Raise the living standard and lower the population growth. We should have an anti immigration Put pro helping developing nations policy.
Have a concept Of a car just for the city. Small electric. We don't even have a taxi service yet.
GM. Bombardier. Global Sticks. Is 3 enough?
"This became clear with General Motors, for instance, when a decade ago they received a massive bailout which ended up costing the taxpayers about $4-5 billion, and then not long ago they just announced they're closing a plant in Oshawa."
"Bombardier has been one of the largest benefactors of the more than $34 billion that Industry Canada has handed out since 1961, according to an analysis Milke did last year of the department’s grants and loans. The company has received $1.1 billion from the department over the years, not including funding from other federal programs or provincial goverments. The company said the money was vital to ensuring its long-term competitiveness. Last week, Bombardier announced it was laying off 1,700 workers, including 1,100 in Quebec."
"In 2011, Ontario gave $7 million to a new company called Global Sticks, run by a former restaurant-supply salesman from B.C., who promised to create 130 jobs in Thunder Bay by reshoring production of popsicle sticks and wooden tongue depressors from China. The factory operated for six months before running out of money. It declared bankruptcy, owing $15 million to creditors. The plant equipment is to be auctioned off next month"
Why corporate welfare doesn't boost employment - Macleans.ca
Politicians love giving money to companies to create jobs, but the benefits are fleeting, at best
Pretty much everyone who's looked into it agrees: corporate welfare is a sham.
"Clearly, business subsidies come with significant costs to Canadian taxpayers and government budgets. To the extent that these subsidies do not have broad economic benefits, as the literature suggests, this is a key area for spending reform."
"Corporate handouts don't help the economy; they drain financial and economic resources from productive sectors to reward wealthy and well-connected firms, sticking Canadians with the bill."
More Please! The ‘Corporate Welfare Bums’ Are Back in Business - Why Politicians Like Handing Out Your Money - Canadian Energy News, Top Headlines, Commentaries, Features & Events - EnergyNow
In 1972, David Lewis, leader of the federal NDP, invoked the term “corporate welfare bums” to describe big businesses that demanded—and received—millions of dollars in government subsidies on the taxpayer’s dime. Today, governments once again are dolling out taxpayer money to select businesses...
energynow.ca
"Federal subsidies to U.S. businesses now cost American taxpayers nearly $100 billion a year. If all corporate welfare programs were eliminated, Congress would have enough money to entirely eliminate the capital gains tax and the death tax. Alternatively, Congress could cut the personal and corporate income."
Welfare for the Well-Off: How Business Subsidies Fleece Taxpayers
Federal subsidies to U.S. businesses now cost American taxpayers nearly $100 billion a year. If all corporate welfare programs were eliminated, Congress would have enough money to entirely eliminate the capital gains tax and the death tax. Alternatively, Congress could cut the personal and...
"For example, every year, Americans spend an estimated $153 billion in taxes and on programs to subsidize McDonald’s and Walmart’s low-wage workers.
"Here's the bottom-line: When corporations get special handouts from the government, it costs the rest of us. We have to pay more in taxes to make up for these hidden tax breaks, subsidies, and loopholes. In turn, there's less money for good schools and roads, Medicare and national defense, and everything else we need."
How Corporate Welfare Hurts You
When corporations get special handouts from the government, we have to pay more in taxes to make up for these hidden tax breaks, subsidies, and loopholes.
prospect.org
"Yet research suggests the benefits of corporate welfare are, at best, fleeting and rarely successful in attracting high-skilled, high-paying jobs. Politicians may score points with voters when they cut the ribbon on a new plant, but many economists argue such incentives only serve to destroy competition, distort labour markets and inflict long-term damage on the economy."
Why corporate welfare doesn't boost employment - Macleans.ca
Politicians love giving money to companies to create jobs, but the benefits are fleeting, at best
“These subsidies for businesses — also known as corporate welfare — come with huge costs to government budgets and taxpayers while doing little if anything to stimulate economic growth,” said Tegan Hill, co-author of “The Cost of Business Subsidies in Canada,” released by the fiscally conservative think tank.
The high cost of corporate welfare paid by Canadian taxpayers
Corporate welfare cost Canadian taxpayers more than $350 billion from 2007 to 2019, says a Fraser Institute study.
torontosun.com
Liberal and Conservative think tanks all agree: corporate subsidies cost money and don't generate a return to justify them.
We pay businesses to generate jobs so we can collect taxes which we use to pay businesses. Meanwhile the businesses make record profits and give away a lot of what we give them to executives rather than investing or developing, and then complain about workers wanting wages that keep up with inflation.
