May 16, 201214 yr Let me use an example of what I do consider to be. The huge subsidy that the taxpayers give to oil companies falls into "corporate welfare" for me. Not sure what we as taxpayers really get in return. I KNOW what I get in return for taxpayers paying for the TSA. Sure, it could work better but I'm still getting a service. Although I may be completely ignorant on the specifics of what you speak, I don't think that a tax break and a subsidy are the same, not even close. The assumption that a tax break is equal to a subsidy is to assume that all money belongs to the govt. If you and most folks actually believe that all money belongs to the govt, then we are doomed as a free republic.
May 16, 201214 yr Although I may be completely ignorant on the specifics of what you speak, I don't think that a tax break and a subsidy are the same, not even close. The assumption that a tax break is equal to a subsidy is to assume that all money belongs to the govt. If you and most folks actually believe that all money belongs to the govt, then we are doomed as a free republic. The subsidy was fine in 1916. It helped them get started. Good move. It's a waste of money today. That's my argument as compared to the govt paying for TSA.
May 16, 201214 yr The subsidy was fine in 1916. It helped them get started. Good move. It's a waste of money today. That's my argument as compared to the govt paying for TSA. Are we talking about a tax break or an actual subsidy?
May 16, 201214 yr The subsidy was fine in 1916. It helped them get started. Good move. It's a waste of money today. That's my argument as compared to the govt paying for TSA. I have no problem with tax breaks, but not a fan of actual subsidies of any kind.
May 16, 201214 yr Are we talking about a tax break or an actual subsidy? The oil companies still receive subsidies. Not long ago a bill was proposed to end them but it was voted down.
May 16, 201214 yr Let me use an example of what I do consider to be. The huge subsidy that the taxpayers give to oil companies falls into "corporate welfare" for me. Not sure what we as taxpayers really get in return. I KNOW what I get in return for taxpayers paying for the TSA. Sure, it could work better but I'm still getting a service. I very rarely fly; yet my taxes are used to pay for security. Why doesn't the TSA assess part of those costs to those flying? Yeah, I get it that if a plane was hi jacked it could be flown into my office building, so I'm willing to pay some. But not requiring the airlines pay for any of the costs incurred by TSA is a subsidization of the airlines costs of flying in my opinion. When various other laws are enacted (for noble reasons such as clean water, protecting the environment from haz materials, etc), that protect and benefit you and I, do the costs of businesses complying with those laws get paid for by the federal govt? Usually not. Why the difference? As for the oil company "subsidies", here is a link to an article prepared by the American Petroleum Industry (so read it with that in mind. I have no idea whether it is an accurate portrayal or not):http://www.api.org/policy/tax/upload/Oil_Gas_Tax_Treatments_Not_Subsidies_April2011.pdf
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.