I think corporate welfare is the worst of the two. I listened to a business associate try to explain that corporate welfare is a natural extension of
Reagan's voodoo economics trickle-down theory. When you have to pay for corporate welfare, there is no trickle-down effect. The money leaves your
wallet and goes upstream to big business. In theory, it's supposed to be the other way around!
REPLY: Lowering the tax rate is not a political tool, it's an economic tool, and it's worked every single time it has been used; when Queen
Elizabeth the 1st used it, also when John Kennedy, Reagan and now with Bush. Your description on "how it works," and the results, is not correct.
Social welfare is unconstitutional, and does the most to damage both the economy, and personal liberty and freedom.
Corporate welfare serves a vicious double-whammy. They either receive a large tax-incentive and remain in the US or they threaten to consider
alternative options, such as outsourcing jobs overseas.
REPLY: This is true, as high corporate taxes, both state and local, keeps wages down and makes it more difficult to compete. Part of the outsourcing
is a direct result of the failing government school system. Reagan warned us long ago the they were "dumbing down" our kids. How correct he
The best soulution all the way around is to get rid of the broken (and illegal) 9 million word tax code, and incorporate the Fair tax.
Mostly incentives to lure businesses turn out to be a good thing for the cities & towns that do the luring.
REPLY: If the taxes weren't so high, localities wouldn't have
to "lure" companies.
[edit on 24-7-2006 by zappafan1]