Small Retailers Being Forced Out By Government Subsidies to Big Chains

[weswelker#83]

Municipalities are permitting “tax increment financing” that allow the big chains “to keep the sales taxes that you are forced to pay at the tax register,” Johnston said on the television interview program Books of Our Time, sponsored by the Massachusetts School of Law at Andover and broadcast by Comcast.

“Instead of that money going to the schools and the fire department and the police department and the library, it is funneled through a mechanism of local government, usually a special authority, to finance the purchase of municipal bonds so that means that the wealthy underwriters and the lawyers and auditors all get a piece of this money to buy the land and build the store,” Johnson told TV host Lawrence Velvel, dean of the law school.

http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/0...to-big-chains/


Corporate welfare sponsored by the guys who tell you that the reason why your taxes are high is because the "liberals" give the poor welfare. Give me a freaking break.

[Stokes]

Originally Posted by weswelker#83

http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/0...to-big-chains/


Corporate welfare sponsored by the guys who tell you that the reason why your taxes are high is because the "liberals" give the poor welfare. Give me a freaking break.

From reading the article it seems like this is happening at the LOCAL level, not federal or state. So the point you are trying to make (at least with this example) is off target, you can't compare welfare benefits and taxes by the federal government to shady dealings by local government! That would be like me saying I hold my alderman responsible for the decision to go to war in Iraq! Am I misreading this? I think its saying this is all at the local level.

[weswelker#83]

Originally Posted by Stokes

From reading the article it seems like this is happening at the LOCAL level, not federal or state. So the point you are trying to make (at least with this example) is off target, you can't compare welfare benefits and taxes by the federal government to shady dealings by local government! That would be like me saying I hold my alderman responsible for the decision to go to war in Iraq! Am I misreading this? I think its saying this is all at the local level.

Big chains are everywhere in every state . Do you know a chain today that exists only in Revere (MA) ?
Go back to that link ,please.

[weswelker#83]

"Subsidies do work when applied to research or infrastructure (according to the article). This means that if the government decides to say fund a DARPA project to connect computers together in some sort of network of networks, this subsidy results in a net benefit to the majority of people. Subsidising WalMart, on the other hand, does not benefit the majority of people but rather the Walton family."

What’s happening is wealthy families, the richest families in America, are getting welfare and they apparently have no shame about this.”

[patsfan13]

Originally Posted by weswelker#83

Big chains are everywhere in every state . Do you know a chain today that exists only in Revere (MA) ?
Go back to that link ,please.

This is why many of us want to limit the power of government.

[weswelker#83]

Originally Posted by patsfan13

This is why many of us want to limit the power of government.

The thing is like i said :
"Subsidies do work when applied to research or infrastructure (according to the article). This means that if the government decides to say fund a DARPA project to connect computers together in some sort of network of networks, this subsidy results in a net benefit to the majority of people. Subsidising WalMart, on the other hand, does not benefit the majority of people but rather the Walton family."

In Soviet America, big business taxes government.

[patsfan13]

Originally Posted by weswelker#83

The thing is like i said :
"Subsidies do work when applied to research or infrastructure (according to the article). This means that if the government decides to say fund a DARPA project to connect computers together in some sort of network of networks, this subsidy results in a net benefit to the majority of people. Subsidising WalMart, on the other hand, does not benefit the majority of people but rather the Walton family."

I don't disagree with that. Defense spending is one of the few thing specified in the constitution that government is supposed to spend money on. This another reason for getting the government out of the business of dispensing tax favors. This is why I favor a flat tax like the Forbes flat tax less political favors for pols to dispense.

Remember the Kehlo (sp?) decision and the city using eminient domain to take property from owners to give to a developer cause they think they can get more prop taxes?

[Stokes]

Originally Posted by weswelker#83

Big chains are everywhere in every state . Do you know a chain today that exists only in Revere (MA) ?
Go back to that link ,please.

I must be missing something, but isn't the decision to subsidize these big retailers made by local governments not the feds? If that's the case you can't blame the feds for what local pols decide to do. Sorry if I'm off base here, you just have to bear with me sometimes!

[weswelker#83]

Originally Posted by Stokes

I must be missing something, but isn't the decision to subsidize these big retailers made by local governments not the feds? If that's the case you can't blame the feds for what local pols decide to do. Sorry if I'm off base here, you just have to bear with me sometimes!

I 'm gonna quote this guy :

"This new book by the Pulitzer Prize winning author David Cay Johnston details the way that the wealthy of America use lobbyists and curry favors from our politicians in order to gain grants, giveaways, and tax breaks from our government. It's an excellent look at how government shifts resources away from the middle class and poor to the super rich - defined as the top 1% of Americans - and how those people offer little to nothing in return for your tax dollars. Well written and well documented, this book is a must read for those concerned about how government works, or doesn't work, allegedly in the name of those who elect our representatives."

[Stokes]

But in this particular example people need to blame their local pols, not the feds, right?