trickle down bullshit and corporate welfare while America is focused on the war

[strongchick]

I am so pissed...this corporate welfare nonsense should be stopped...it doesn't work. Whatever happened to laissez faire?



http://abc.go.com/primetime/politicallyincorrect/episodes/2001-02/1.html

Bill Maher transcript from last night's show, discussing trickle down crap...

__________________________________

Michael: Well, I gotta say, first of all, this is one of the most disgusting things I've ever seen.
And, I mean, I've seen these companies do a lot of things.
But $1.4 billion of that goes to IBM.
$800 million to General Motors, a billion to Ford.
And this is not a tax cut of taxes they're gonna pay.
They've already paid these taxes.
The treasury is going broke right now.
Bush has proposed that we give them back the taxes they've already paid over the last 15 years.
That money's already been, you know, given and spent.


Bill: And they did pretty well the last 15 years.


Michael: They did damn well.
And at the time, when our sons and daughters of this country are being asked to go there and risk their lives, that these companies would be taking advantage of the fact that, "A," everybody's in this incredible moment where, you know, very upset still and depressed about what's going on and not paying attention to all of the other issues.
They're taking advantage of the fact that we're not paying attention to scam billions of dollars for themselves.
I mean, this kind of war profiteering --
I gotta say, you know, if this had happened back in the middle ages, you know, if they'd tried to do that back then, the heads of these companies --
their heads would be on stakes in front of the castle.
You know, for doing this.

[ Applause ]

I mean, seriously, it's just the most appalling thing I've seen.
And I gotta believe when most Americans find out about this and realize what this is really about, they're gonna write their Senators.
They're gonna call their Senators.
'Cause they haven't passed the Senate yet, as you said.
And this can be stopped.
It can still be stopped.


Monica: But why do you think that the Congress is, by and large, behind this? What do you think the motive is?

Michael: In the spirit of nonpartisanship --
and we've been on shows before.
I mean, seriously, this is a time --
I gotta appeal, even to people who are conservative --
to say, "You know what? This isn't a conservative thing to do.
This is welfare.
This is welfare to rich people."




---

Monica: It's called an economic stimulus package.
So the logic behind it is that if we give tax credit --
we'll return back to businesses both large and small --
that they will turn around and take that money and reinvest it in the companies and reinvest it in their employees.
Michael: You know what we learned during the Reagan years?

Jeff: Trickle down thing --
it didn't work.


Michael: It didn't work.
You know what they did, Jeff? Well, they took that money in the '80s, General Motors, and they went and built factories in Mexico and Brazil with the money.
They didn't do anything.
They fired everybody in Flint and Detroit and St. Louis.
That hurt the working people of this country.
It didn't trickle down to them.


Monica: But did we not have a

 

[smallmovesal]

where is the rest of the conversation? nevermind.. there's a link

and damn... made my stomach turn to read that.

 

[strongchick]

yup. There are thousands of visa people here in the states, and I just read another article about it...corporations are bringing people in from other countries to take jobs (H1B visa program), as well as sending jobs overseas.

I understand companies need to make profits...so let them find a way to do it without government help!

Maybe we'd get screwed anyway, but at least they wouldn't spend government money doing it!

 

[OMEGA]

Still a live and kicking eh.


a least someone is continuing political discourse.

good or bad, liberal or conservative.........it's part of democracy.


shutting up is'nt

 

[Hangfire]

strongchick,
"Whatever happened to laissez faire?" is that is was established as a doctrine of foreign policy and has nothing to do with domestic economic policy.

Maher and Moore are two of the most politically ignorant assholes on the planet. Check some history once in a while. President Reagan's trickle-down economic policy DID work exactly as it was designed to work. Tax cuts promoted reinvestment; reinvestment created more jobs and increased GNP; more jobs meant more taxpayers. It is an indisputable matter of historical fact that during the Reagan administration, government tax income increased as a result of the income tax cut. Unfortunately, the deficit also increased, but not because of President Reagan---that was due solely to the liberal Democrat-controlled Congress' passion for spending every available cent, and then some.

Check it out. The truth is there for anyone that's interested.

 

[spentagn]

strongchick,
"Whatever happened to laissez faire?" is that is was established as a doctrine of foreign policy and has nothing to do with domestic economic policy.

Maher and Moore are two of the most politically ignorant assholes on the planet. Check some history once in a while. President Reagan's trickle-down economic policy DID work exactly as it was designed to work. Tax cuts promoted reinvestment; reinvestment created more jobs and increased GNP; more jobs meant more taxpayers. It is an indisputable matter of historical fact that during the Reagan administration, government tax income increased as a result of the income tax cut. Unfortunately, the deficit also increased, but not because of President Reagan---that was due solely to the liberal Democrat-controlled Congress' passion for spending every available cent, and then some.

Check it out. The truth is there for anyone that's interested.

I'm glad you decided to post here more often

 

[strongchick]

um, no. I disagree...

"The trouble is, it didn’t work the way they said it would. It was supposed to jump-start the economy by cutting taxes and increasing profits for the wealthy. That would entice big business to hire more employees and invest in more machinery for production, resulting in an economic boom.

Big business and the ruling class got their tax breaks while public programs were gutted. Meanwhile, CEO salaries, stock dividends, and corporate profits went through the roof. Military suppliers earned exponentially more.

The catch was, instead of reinvesting, hiring more employees, and raising the standard of living for the workers that created all the profit in the first place, CEOs and stockholders pocketed the money. So the rich got richer and the poor either stayed poor or got poorer. This includes all the middle class folks that got squeezed by spiraling health care costs and pinched by corporate cutbacks (remember the AT&T and IBM layoffs?), all in the name of “global competitiveness,” the latest catch phrase."

Yup. My dad _narrowly_ escaped being laid off from AT&T. I remember my mother fretting about it...

 

[strongchick]

and regarding 'laissez faire' ... this is a term that refers to LAY THE FUCK OFF, GOVERNMENT....a distinctly republican, rich man's philosophy....meaning don't meddle and let the INVISIBLE HAND run the economy.

Love when people preach one thing, then do another.

 

[spentagn]

and regarding 'laissez faire' ... this is a term that refers to LAY THE FUCK OFF, GOVERNMENT....a distinctly republican, rich man's philosophy....meaning don't meddle and let the INVISIBLE HAND run the economy.

Love when people preach one thing, then do another.

Laissez-faire capitalism was dropped at the beginning of the 20th century. Why then, are we discussing it here?

And in regards to AT&T, didn't the big business government actually dimantle MaBell? Hence the creation of AT&T. Funny that that happened under a Republican's watch, and under Clinton AT&T became more powerful than ever and several of the Baby Bells merged.

 

[strongchick]

True, we have a mixed economy now. But conservatives prefer a less hands on approach. I hardly think corporate welfare is consistent with hands off approach to government.

And getting back to the central issue: why on earth should we pay IBM et al money in the billions? They offer no guarantee of a return of this investment...not that they could...