Corporate Welfare - New England Patriots Forums

***patsfan13*** · 04-06-2011, 10:24 AM

from the Obama administration for friendly news outlets (WaPo and CBS) Unions (Teamsters & UAW & others) and other favored companies (GE, At&T and Verizon)

Quote:

Almost $2 billion of the $5 billion fund, which was supposed to last until 2014, has already been distributed to corporations. New projections expect the funding to run out before the end of 2012, if not sooner.

In addition to CBS Corporation and the Washington Post Company, recipients of ERRP funding include the United Auto Workers union, which secured $206,798,086 in taxpayer money, AT&T, which took in $140,022,949, and General Electric (GE), which raked in $36,607,818. GE has made headlines recently for not paying any U.S. taxes last year. IBM got $12,989,690 in taxpayer money.

Verizon pulled $91,702,538 in taxpayer cash, too, and General Motors received $19,002,669. More than $6 million went to different Teamsters groups nationwide, and millions more went to the United Mine Workers, United Food and Commercial Workers, the AFL-CIO and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME).

Read more: Washington Post and CBS | Obamacare slush fund | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment

I suppose we should point out that the workers at Verizon and AT&T are CWA workers, slush funds for Unions.

chicowalker · 04-06-2011, 11:05 AM

I'd want to know how this money can be used (or misused) -- is it at companies' discretion or does it have to go to retirees?

Either way, I'd like to hear the justification for the spending.

An evenhanded article, though, would have looked at the remaining 75% of the $2B that has gone out, and also would have specifically looked at whether other news sources received any funding. Neither is addressed, though being able to address those issues would have made the story even stronger. So maybe the journalist is even-handed but not particularly competent, or maybe he's hiding other facts that don't fit the story.

***DarrylS*** · 04-06-2011, 11:19 AM

If you are interested in the whole report, here is it is.. a quick glance reveals no mention of CBS, WaPo.. but the condensed version in the Daily Caller is probably more reliable

http://www.healthcare.gov/center/rep...t03022011a.pdf

Quote:

The ERRP was designed to provide financial assistance for health plan sponsors – including for-profit companies, schools and other educational institutions, unions, State and local governments, religious organizations and other non-profits – to help early retirees and their families continue to have access to quality, affordable health coverage. People in the early retiree age group (i.e., ages 55 to 65) often face difficulties obtaining insurance in the individual market because of age or chronic conditions that make coverage unaffordable and inaccessible. The ERRP provides needed financial help to group health plans that provide health coverage to retirees and their families, who depend on this coverage for their health care needs. The ERRP reimburses participating plan sponsors for a portion of the costs of providing health coverage to early retirees and their spouses, surviving spouses, and dependents.

If you are not satisfied with the Daily Caller Condensed Biased view, you can right to the website..

http://www.errp.gov/

chicowalker · 04-06-2011, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrylS

If you are interested in the whole report, here is it is.. a quick glance reveals no mention of CBS, WaPo.. but the condensed version in the Daily Caller is probably more reliable

...

report doesn't break out corporations. That data probably is available somewhere, and I'd bet the Daily Caller info is accurate -- just incomplete.

I do see lots of money going to red states in this report, though. Weird that the article didn't offer any of those details...

State · 07-14-2011, 02:46 PM

I agree, this needs to be ended.

Cato has a good primer on how it screws taxpayers--and doesn't help the economy as advertised.

Cato Handbook for Congress: Corporate Welfare

I'd add subsidies to farmers. I have an acquaintance in Valdosta, Georgia, who rakes in a lot of corporate welfare growing tobacco. That's stupid.

And the ethanol subsidies are patently stupid. Anyone see the logic in burning our food in our cars?

Quote:

1. The federal government has a disappointing record of picking industrial winners and losers. The average delinquency rate for government loan programs (8 percent) is almost three times higher than that for commercial lenders (3 percent). The Small Business Administration delinquency rate reached over 20 percent in the 1980s, and the Farmers Home Administration delinquency rate has approached 50 percent.

2. Corporate welfare is a huge drain on the federal treasury. Every year $75 billion of taxpayer money is spent on programs that subsidize businesses. Meanwhile, politicians proclaim that we can't afford a tax cut.

3. Corporate welfare creates an uneven playing field. By giving selected businesses and industries special advantages, corporate subsidies put businesses and industries that are less politically well connected at a disadvantage.

4. Corporate welfare fosters an incestuous relationship between business and government. All too often, the firms and industries that contribute the most to political campaign coffers are the largest recipients of government handouts.

5. Corporate welfare programs are anti-consumer. For instance, the Commerce Department has estimated that the sugar subsidy program costs consumers several billion dollars a year in higher prices.

6. Corporate welfare is anti-capitalist. As Wall Street financier Theodore J. Forstmann has put it, corporate welfare has led to the creation in America of the ``statist businessman,'' who has been converted from a capitalist into a lobbyist.

7. Corporate welfare is unconstitutional. Corporate subsidy programs lie outside Congress's limited spending authority under the Constitution. Nowhere in the Constitution is Congress granted the authority to spend taxpayer dollars to subsidize the computer industry, or to enter into joint ventures with automobile companies, or to guarantee loans to favored business owners.