# Corporate welfare ...... **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 30, 2010, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporate-welfare/562411 "2010-11-30T15:10:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2010, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporate-welfare/562411/21 "2010-12-02T14:21:11Z")
> [@What\_the](#): > > C’mon, it can’t be as simple as this… > > 1. Welfare is wonderful! > > 2. “Corporate welfare” is bad because corporations are evil… unless the welfare is so good that you can overlook that corporations are evil. > > 3. Tax rates have nothing to do with welfare of any kind except for corporate rates since corporations are evil. :dubious: And, you might want to revisit [this thread.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=497699) ---
**Author:** ![What\_the](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f4b2a3/32.png) [@What\_the](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_the)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2010, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporate-welfare/562411/22 "2010-12-02T17:24:14Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > :rolleyes: You might want to reconsider this statement. How come ? Cost-benefit is cost-benefit. The only thing I can figure is that individuals exist thru no fault of their own and therefor welfare to the unfortunate or the entitled is ok. But how else are big things (like building cars or bombs or tanks or green cars or windmills) going to get done except via corporations. Government agencies? Collectives? BTW, that pitting you linked to is one of my favorites… “sliming Obama”, “liberal media bias” oh, the intellctual dishonesty! My favorite part is the last sentence of post #32. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2010, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporate-welfare/562411/23 "2010-12-02T22:00:44Z")
> [@What\_the](#): > > How come ? Cost-benefit is cost-benefit. :dubious: Because the only thing personal welfare and corporate welfare have in common is that they cost money. Their purposes intersect nowhere. **As you know.** > [@What\_the](#): > > The only thing I can figure is that individuals exist thru no fault of their own and therefor welfare to the unfortunate or the entitled is ok. > > But how else are big things (like building cars or bombs or tanks or green cars or windmills) going to get done except via corporations. Government agencies? Collectives? In some cases, I suppose, agencies or collectives could do some things nearly as well as corporations, or better . . . But, stipulating to the value/necessity of corporations, what is your point here? Corporate welfare is justified because corporations can’t function without it, personal welfare is not justified because it goes to people society does not need? Either part of that would be preposterous. ---
**Author:** ![What\_the](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f4b2a3/32.png) [@What\_the](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_the)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2010, 12:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporate-welfare/562411/24 "2010-12-03T12:24:27Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > :dubious: Because the only thing personal welfare and corporate welfare have in common is that they cost money. Their purposes intersect nowhere. **As you know.** > > In some cases, I suppose, agencies or collectives could do some things nearly as well as corporations, or better . . . But, stipulating to the value/necessity of corporations, what is your point here? Corporate welfare is justified because corporations can’t function without it, personal welfare is not justified because it goes to people society does not need? Either part of that would be preposterous. There you go again… claiming to know what I know. I still don’t know exactly what passes for “corporate welfare” around here. And by “around here” I don’t mean the few Dopers who have posted. I started this thread after reading some moron claim repeatedly that reducing (or not increasing) taxes to the rich or corporations was welfare. Here’s something they have in common… affecting political power. Cozying up to corporations (or unions) can garner big contributions that translate into votes. Welfare to the lower class translates even more directly to votes. Welfare is not just about keeping people alive obviously. At some point it’s about increasing quality of life. What’s the standard for quality of life? Is there a benefit to society to exceed that? What’s the cost? Is it worth it? Some anecdotal evidence for you… I do taxes. I see alot of big refunds generated by earned income credits to the working poor. I like to join in their excitement and ask them if they have any big plans for the money. I’ve never heard one say they planned to put it in the bank and live off it for the next year. Some do talk about paying down credit cards… but knowing them I’ve got a pretty good idea the debt wasn’t primarily to feed and shelter the family. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2010, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporate-welfare/562411/25 "2010-12-03T14:34:22Z")
> [@What\_the](#): > > I started this thread after reading some moron claim repeatedly that reducing (or not increasing) taxes to the rich or corporations was welfare. You would have done better, then, to start a thread titled, “Are tax cuts for the rich/corporations ‘corporate welfare’?” and focus your OP on that question directly. > [@What\_the](#): > > Welfare to the lower class translates even more directly to votes. Doubtful. **Highly** doubtful. You’re talking about a group with the lowest voter turnout of any class. The political constituency for welfare is largely outside its direct recipients. (Unlike the political constituency for, say, Medicare or Social Security.) ---
**Author:** ![What\_the](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f4b2a3/32.png) [@What\_the](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_the)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2010, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporate-welfare/562411/26 "2010-12-03T16:48:18Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > You would have done better, then, to start a thread titled, “Are tax cuts for the rich/corporations ‘corporate welfare’?” and focus your OP on that question directly. Thanks for the advice:smack: ---
**Author:** ![What\_the](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f4b2a3/32.png) [@What\_the](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_the)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2010, 12:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporate-welfare/562411/27 "2010-12-06T12:49:17Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Doubtful. **Highly** doubtful. You’re talking about a group with the lowest voter turnout of any class. The political constituency for welfare is largely outside its direct recipients. (Unlike the political constituency for, say, Medicare or Social Security.) Can I have a cite for that? I’d like to see how it was calculated and the denominator especially. Could be that it is overstated with all the dead, duplicates and bogus voters that the “get out the registration” organizers can create. Are you also saying that the poor don’t vote predominantly Democrat? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2010, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporate-welfare/562411/28 "2010-12-06T14:51:29Z")
> [@What\_the](#): > > Can I have a cite for that? I’d like to see how it was calculated and the denominator especially. Could be that it is overstated with all the dead, duplicates and bogus voters that the “get out the registration” organizers can create. > > Are you also saying that the poor don’t vote predominantly Democrat? Probably, when they vote at all. See [here](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout#Socio-economic_factors) for socioeconomic-status differentials in U.S. voter turnout. See also the [Pew Political Typology.](http://people-press.org/report/?pageid=949) There are such things as the Disadvantaged Democrats, but, also, such things as the Bystanders. I’m pounding on this because there is a persistent RW myth-meme (based in part on a quote from Heinlein/Lazarus Long, I believe; but see also the [“Tytler Cycle”](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tytler_cycle#Misquotation_-_Tytler_Cycle)) that democracies self-destruct when “the plebs vote themselves bread and circuses.” That has **never** actually happened in any republic in human history, and it is not what has happened in America at any time since 1932. In particular, AFDC is not an instance of the poor voting **themselves** anything at all. Oh, and: > [@](#): > > Could be that it is overstated with all the dead, duplicates and bogus voters that the “get out the registration” organizers can create. **Your** job to bring a cite for **that.** [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/corporate-welfare/562411.md?page=1)