Friday, September 5, 2014

Socialism for the rich, free enterprise for the poor

I was reminded again today of this saying often used to describe the economic system in the U.S.

Page one of the Times business section featured an article about the tax breaks the state of Nevada gave to Tesla to open a battery plant near Reno.  The tax breaks amount to $1.25 billion over the next 20 years.  

Page two of the business section featured this headline:  “Least Affluent Familes’ Incomes Are Declining, Fed Survey Shows.”  The Fed Chairwoman, Janet Yellen, said that income inequality was “one of the most disturbing trends facing the nation.”  I’m sure the Republicans in Congress will take note.


Finally, page three of the business section had an article about the arrests of hundreds of fast food workers who were striking for higher pay.  The protests took place in six cities—Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit, and Seattle.  I haven’t heard anything about wages being raised.

3 comments:

  1. Although I agree with your premise, the is probably the worst company to use as an example. Tesla is an electric car manufacturer. If the world ever wants to get a grip on pollution, the electric car will need to come of age. Also, big oil gets about $9 Billion in tax credits ever year. To give Tesla $1.2 over 20 years is a pittance compared to big oil.

    Tesla also is allowing other car companies to use its patents free of charge to develop the electric car. That is massive good will.

    The CEO, Elon Musk, also owns SolarCity, a solar power company, and SpaceX, a rocket/space travel company. He has introduced the theoretical design of the Hyperloop which is a mass transit system powered by solar that can transport people at very high speeds.

    This maybe a good example of why gov't's SHOULD subsidize companies. The benefits to humanity could be great! Although peel back the tax breaks to big oil.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I actually think very highly of Tesla. My point is that we do not operate in a capitalist system when it comes to corporations. When we deal with individuals, then capitalism kicks in. You and I can't really move to Canada for tax breaks, but Burger King is able to do that. In the meantime, it pays its workers a pittance.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Heads you win, tails you lose. Taxes are a double sided tails coin. Much like Dr. Falken's conclusion, the only way to win is to not play.

    The term 'tax beak to support' when stated in reference for anyone, private individual or business, has three basic philosophical conclusions. 
    1) It infers that a tax break is a benefit, therefore it infers that taxes are not beneficial. 
    2) It infers the tax breaks support business development, therefore taxes on corporations deters business growth.
    3) An excess exists allowing for selective collection.

    Taxes or fees, collected AND USED for a purpose RELATED to the fund the service costs associated with an oversight is a government of the people, by the people, for the people.

    Taxes are collected from only one source - The consumer.  The government has established a war between workers and management.  A war where the government provides the weapons and the terms of engagement.  This war only exists in the minds of a individual educated by government funded institutions. To quibble over the scraps (1 billion here or there) shows the entrenched tax machine at work.

    The real question, like a cereal coupon, why is there a baseline elevated price?

    Negotiating with Elon, The state says "build here and we not loot your factory AS MUCH", is on par with Canada's open negotiations with the world.  Their pitch is move here and we won't loot your corporation as much as the USA.

    As for the BK workers, they are taxed the most as a percentage of income. Sales, fuel, road, permits, real estate, we have all seen the extensive list. Many are collected and shell game used for corporate and personal welfare, entrenching the class warfare.

    Selective enforcement on the tax side or arresting of demonstrators voicing their discontent is an abuse of power, entrenching the imaginary, self inflicted class war.

    It is easy to conclude that the selective use of tax incentives is a power wielded by politicians that they were not given.

    - David Bradley, American Patriot

    ReplyDelete