Rigged: The Injustice of Corporate Welfare

[TheReal_ND]

Wait, I like Ron Paul. Nobody likes corporate welfare and this is socialism

[C-Mag]

I'm not at all certain about the moral parity between Lockheed and some pill-billy.

Besides, bailing out large concerns undermines the creative destruction that should be the engine for things like true growth and innovation in a free market. Keeping the indigent on some dole probably doesn't do quite the same thing... and there are surely reasons not to like the constant dole forever, but I think it is a mistake to convolve these two issues.

It is absolutely the same to me.y Neither pays taxes and both take from the pool. No moral difference. I might even argue that Google returns a tangible benefit, whereas the welfare Queen gives very little back to Society in general.

Really?

Are going to chastise those (often forced to be) on welfare because of the disappearing jobs, the poorly paid ones remaining ones, the underfunded public crappy schools, often unaffordable colleges (although the senior administration always gets raises and more staff),

And were there are jobs, insane housing, too expensive insurance giving often second rate healthcare, bad roads, and worse public transportation,

massive political and governmental corruption, The growing concentration of wealth (and power) into an ever fewer number of Americans? Which is greater than at any time in American history including just before the Great Depression.

And finally the gradual and growing dysfunction of public administration, law enforcement, military, news media, charities, corporations, and finance?

All of which is mainly the creation of corporations and the wealthy and not of pill poppers or the homeless.

People are responsible for their actions, but please fucking spare me this false equivalency of giving equality of vice between those who have everything they could need, but whose insatiable greed against those who either have lost all, or never had anything because of the former.

Really ? YES
I believe in equality across the board. Cheaters, Hucksters and Fraud Agents are the same be it they never pay taxes because they are Millionaires or if you never pay Taxes because you are on Welfare.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

Ah... well...

You are fraudulent cheat if you are on welfare since the very act of accepting welfare proves you are a fraud and a cheater... thus unworthy of our Christian charity.
QED, moral case vindicated.

[Speaker to Animals]

Ah... well...

You are fraudulent cheat if you are on welfare since the very act of accepting welfare proves you are a fraud and a cheater... thus unworthy of our Christian charity.
QED, moral case vindicated.

Dude, what?

You intentionally avoid the point, I think, because you know the welfare system we have today is indefensible. It's designed top-down to lock people into dependency and never allow them to escape poverty. That's the whole point of it. It's not designed to help people at all.

Calling this other garbage corporate welfare is just stupid and probably makes discussion about any of this shit impossible for as long as people continue to conflate the two things like this. Yes, corporations that do shit like Ikea does in that video are fucking reprehensible. No, just because an individual needs welfare does not make them reprehensible. Ikea doesn't need welfare to remain housed and fed. Actual need distinguishes these two things right off the bat.

Why not help people escape poverty instead?

[C-Mag]

Ah... well...

You are fraudulent cheat if you are on welfare since the very act of accepting welfare proves you are a fraud and a cheater... thus unworthy of our Christian charity.
QED, moral case vindicated.

Again, back to my original post, I'm talking about the Freeloaders. The people who make no effort, don't use their own abilities and talents to ever do anything else other than suck off the system.

We have people at the top, at the bottom and in the middle all using and abusing the system with no intention of ever doing anything else. What's the difference between 2 capable people, who both take 100% of what they have from a system and never contribute back ? These are the Freeloaders.

We all know there are people of every income bracket working the system, who are capable, and never intend to stop. But this is the example set for us by our leaders. It's natural the people will follow suit. It's the old thing about Democracies and people finding out they vote themselves money out of the coffers.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

Ah... well...

You are fraudulent cheat if you are on welfare since the very act of accepting welfare proves you are a fraud and a cheater... thus unworthy of our Christian charity.
QED, moral case vindicated.

Dude, what?

You intentionally avoid the point, I think, because you know the welfare system we have today is indefensible. It's designed top-down to lock people into dependency and never allow them to escape poverty. That's the whole point of it. It's not designed to help people at all.

Calling this other garbage corporate welfare is just stupid and probably makes discussion about any of this shit impossible for as long as people continue to conflate the two things like this. Yes, corporations that do shit like Ikea does in that video are fucking reprehensible. No, just because an individual needs welfare does not make them reprehensible. Ikea doesn't need welfare to remain housed and fed. Actual need distinguishes these two things right off the bat.

Why not help people escape poverty instead?

This is exactly the point I was trying to make. I think you and I agree that there is an important moral distinction between 'corporate welfare' and welfare for individuals... the problems our country has with individual welfare notwithstanding.

[Speaker to Animals]

Ah... well...

You are fraudulent cheat if you are on welfare since the very act of accepting welfare proves you are a fraud and a cheater... thus unworthy of our Christian charity.
QED, moral case vindicated.

Again, back to my original post, I'm talking about the Freeloaders. The people who make no effort, don't use their own abilities and talents to ever do anything else other than suck off the system.

We have people at the top, at the bottom and in the middle all using and abusing the system with no intention of ever doing anything else. What's the difference between 2 capable people, who both take 100% of what they have from a system and never contribute back ? These are the Freeloaders.

We all know there are people of every income bracket working the system, who are capable, and never intend to stop. But this is the example set for us by our leaders. It's natural the people will follow suit. It's the old thing about Democracies and people finding out they vote themselves money out of the coffers.

Most of them are trapped, Carlus.

[Fife]

Everybody is right; everybody is also wrong.

The kind of theft described in the movie in the OP is NOT the same thing as "It's free; swipe yo EBT."

Not equivalent; a false equivalence.



There is a common thread, of course. Whenever the state gets involved in "helping," the outcome is human misery and violence. At best it's done with a kind heart, at worst it's done with malice and evil intent. Either way, the same people get reamed out.

[Speaker to Animals]

Even the "Swipe yo EBT" single moms are trapped.

If you want to help them, then just give them day care for their many children and vocational training. Throwing cash at them is like throwing dynamite on a gasoline fire.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

Ah... well...

You are fraudulent cheat if you are on welfare since the very act of accepting welfare proves you are a fraud and a cheater... thus unworthy of our Christian charity.
QED, moral case vindicated.

Again, back to my original post, I'm talking about the Freeloaders. The people who make no effort, don't use their own abilities and talents to ever do anything else other than suck off the system.

We have people at the top, at the bottom and in the middle all using and abusing the system with no intention of ever doing anything else. What's the difference between 2 capable people, who both take 100% of what they have from a system and never contribute back ? These are the Freeloaders.

We all know there are people of every income bracket working the system, who are capable, and never intend to stop. But this is the example set for us by our leaders. It's natural the people will follow suit. It's the old thing about Democracies and people finding out they vote themselves money out of the coffers.

This is one of those cases where I agree with StA. We have a system that actively penalizes people for trying to move from state dependency to gainful employment. As such, I have a hard time attacking the people who have made a living from perpetuating their dependency since it is their only realistic option.

I do not extend the same courtesy to corporations that would fail were it not for the largess of our tax code or bail-out packages.