We're going to start it with the government spending 3 million dollars to study why lesbians are overweight. http://reason.com/24-7/2014/09/02/nih-spends-millions-studying-lesbians
Jesus pay me $1,000 and I'll solve that one for you. . . lesbians don't care what their significant others look like.
http://www.taxpayer.net/media-center/article/4-examples-of-corporate-welfare-in-action Those listed are peanuts compared to corporate welfare.
the silliness implied here is that the subsidy didn't otherwise increase tax receipts and hiring. Corporate subsidies aren't the same as individual subsidies because they can never be amplified and aren't ever a spend for the future. The two have no business in the same discussion.
Dumbest article ever 1) Walmart - Ridiculous. Most of their employees don't make a lot of money. Welcome to every retail store. Shocking. As for tower, are you seriously telling me having walmart doesn't pay for that tower 20 times over? Give me a break. 2. Oil Companies - Among the lowest margin business in the world. Pays a factor of 10 times more in taxes than any subsidies. Gas price is flat for the past 5 years despite demand going up sharply. surely subsidies didn't help that right? 3. Haliburton - LOST MONEY ON THE DEAL. LOST MONEY ON THE DEAL. Does no one understand the difference between revenue and profit? 4. IBM etc - just listed 3 companies that pay tens of billons in corporate taxes. but yeah I'm sure the $70 mil they get back in subsidies is making all the difference.
And each one fallacious. The Haliburton one is just silly, as we already had a two page exchange on how they spun off a company that made billions at the same time as they "lost money."
The tax money was still given to Halliburton, profit or not. Which I'll never buy they didn't make out like a rapist in a nymphomaniac treatment center. Losing money would just makes it more of a waste. Same for the oil companies' smallest profit margin. Make it on your own or go bust and all that stuff, right? I thought gov't in the private sector was bad....
the other division that had absolutely nothing to do with iraq made billions. that division lost money. I really don't understand why this is so complicated for you. this would be like pointing to the iphone profits and declaring that apple tv was a huge success.
tax money is also given to boeing and hundreds of other contractors doing work for the government. are you getting a govt subsidy as a teacher because that would be the same dumb argument? the oil companies would just decide to take their business elsewhere when it came to drilling. this isn't overly complicated. we get back 100 times in benefit the paltry sums given to the oil companies. gov't creating jobs and increase tax revenues through growth, good. gov't reducing jobs and decreasing tax revenues because of stupid regulations, bad.
I bet those executives got paid a low base salary, since they were losing money. Oh wait, they got tens of millions each in bonuses. Weird!