Corporate Welfare
Just a few years ago, the U.S. actually was running a surplus. Nowadays, we've headed back in the opposite direction, thanks to the federal giveway to the rich and the ever ballooning cost of war in Iraq, just to name two factors. Cuts are being made to services across the board, especially for those programs and services aiding the poor. There are rumblings from Smirk, Scowl & Co. about private accounts and an overhaul of Social Security, Amtrak and PBS receive annual threats to their funding, and fees and costs for all kinds of things are going up.
Yet there's one sector of our society that doesn't seem to be having any problems, no need to do any belt-tightening: I speak of course of the myriad corporations, many of whom are transnational, global entities. A fair number of them stash their earnings and mailing addresses in Caribbean nations, or Swiss bank accounts. They loudly proclaim how the business of America is business, and gleefully assist our gummint in turning the clock back to the 1890s, to the Robber Baron era when American industrial greed ran amok, totally unfettered by regulations or restrictions.
A front-page article yesterday in the Washington Post (registration required) states that the GAO has announced that thousands of non-defense contractors owe Uncle Sam tons of cash in unpaid taxes. According to the article, more than $3 billion is outstanding on the books. It's a bit of chump change when you realize the outlays for the war so far are far more stratospheric than just $3 billion, but at the same time, it's nothing to sneeze at. This unpaid set of bills is just what non-defense contractors owe. That's nothing to say of the tens of dozens of corporations that pay little or no tax at all, or move their legal addresses and headquarters overseas so as to protect their precious cash, all the while outsourcing jobs to Second and Third World nations, never to return. Some of the contractors discussed in this article merely refused to pay their taxes, while others did quite a bit of creative accounting and used their monies to build luxury housing, buy fancy cars, and the like.
Corporate welfare isn't restricted to winking at unpaid taxes; it's also all about federal handouts, subsidies, and tax breaks given to companies that don't really need them. It creates an uneven playing field in a lot of ways. For one thing, it provides an unfair advantage to those companies that receive extra cash for expenses that they really should be paying themselves. For example, subsidies for advertising campaigns, or offsets granted as part of protectionist measures. Another disadvantage is that corporate handouts of all kinds leads to cozy relationships that really shouldn't exist between businesses and politicians, and leads to actual or perceived quid pro quo, which in the end is a disservice to the average citizen. Enhanced leverage granted to giant corporations also permits said companies to destroy their competition: small businesses, the vaunted small businesses of many a Republican stump speech. You may argue that the demise of said businesses is a natural outgrowth of capitalism and competition: survival of the fittest. That's fine when all the competitors are on roughly the same playing field, but not when one entity is receiving tons of extra cash in whatever form from the feds. A very obvious problem concerning corporate welfare is the drain on the federal treasury. Our tax money is going to all these companies that then turn around and screw us over by reducing pension funds, eliminating health care co-pays, and transferring jobs overseas. At the same time, because they're getting our money, there's that much less left to pay for the services that we all want and expect.
Some blatant examples of corporate welfare are the ongoing handouts to the airlines; the overpriced hammers, toilets, and other items procured by the Pentagon in years past; and the ongoing support for military hardware and weapons systems such as the B-2 bomber that even the Pentagon didn't ask for and doesn't want. It's a travesty when people like me get overcharged for energy costs because of artificial constraints created by companies like Enron (which didn't pay taxes and actually qualified for $382 million worth of refunds. Where's MY refund??), which then gets away with murder (that reminds me, where is Ken Lay these days? Certainly not in prison, where he belongs...).
Another great example is the nominal amount the television networks pay for use of the PUBLIC airwaves. You'd think in exchange for use of various frequencies, we'd get a better deal, like better coverage of the Olympics (I could do without the blathering "experts" and "patriotic" shots of the flag, and more of actual competition!), no more game day blackouts of sporting events, and improved coverage of important political events such as the conventions and the debates (less commentary, more live speeches and actual pronouncements from the politicians, hacks, and the rare occasional statesman lurking about rather than some "journalist" with poofy hair). If we charged the actual market value for use of the spectrum, we'd at least be getting a better rate of return for the vast wasteland known as television.
There are a lot of changes that could be made, and a lot of places to start. But I think if we just concentrated on one area, taxes, we'd get a head start. I think it's time to tackle the problem of corporate welfare, and ensure that the vast corporations that have enriched themselves thanks to our taxpayer monies and our consumer habits gave back to the nation that sustained and continues to sustain them. I hope someone in the gummint actually pays attention to the article I posted, reads it, and starts asking for that $3 billion plus back.
Yet there's one sector of our society that doesn't seem to be having any problems, no need to do any belt-tightening: I speak of course of the myriad corporations, many of whom are transnational, global entities. A fair number of them stash their earnings and mailing addresses in Caribbean nations, or Swiss bank accounts. They loudly proclaim how the business of America is business, and gleefully assist our gummint in turning the clock back to the 1890s, to the Robber Baron era when American industrial greed ran amok, totally unfettered by regulations or restrictions.
A front-page article yesterday in the Washington Post (registration required) states that the GAO has announced that thousands of non-defense contractors owe Uncle Sam tons of cash in unpaid taxes. According to the article, more than $3 billion is outstanding on the books. It's a bit of chump change when you realize the outlays for the war so far are far more stratospheric than just $3 billion, but at the same time, it's nothing to sneeze at. This unpaid set of bills is just what non-defense contractors owe. That's nothing to say of the tens of dozens of corporations that pay little or no tax at all, or move their legal addresses and headquarters overseas so as to protect their precious cash, all the while outsourcing jobs to Second and Third World nations, never to return. Some of the contractors discussed in this article merely refused to pay their taxes, while others did quite a bit of creative accounting and used their monies to build luxury housing, buy fancy cars, and the like.
Corporate welfare isn't restricted to winking at unpaid taxes; it's also all about federal handouts, subsidies, and tax breaks given to companies that don't really need them. It creates an uneven playing field in a lot of ways. For one thing, it provides an unfair advantage to those companies that receive extra cash for expenses that they really should be paying themselves. For example, subsidies for advertising campaigns, or offsets granted as part of protectionist measures. Another disadvantage is that corporate handouts of all kinds leads to cozy relationships that really shouldn't exist between businesses and politicians, and leads to actual or perceived quid pro quo, which in the end is a disservice to the average citizen. Enhanced leverage granted to giant corporations also permits said companies to destroy their competition: small businesses, the vaunted small businesses of many a Republican stump speech. You may argue that the demise of said businesses is a natural outgrowth of capitalism and competition: survival of the fittest. That's fine when all the competitors are on roughly the same playing field, but not when one entity is receiving tons of extra cash in whatever form from the feds. A very obvious problem concerning corporate welfare is the drain on the federal treasury. Our tax money is going to all these companies that then turn around and screw us over by reducing pension funds, eliminating health care co-pays, and transferring jobs overseas. At the same time, because they're getting our money, there's that much less left to pay for the services that we all want and expect.
Some blatant examples of corporate welfare are the ongoing handouts to the airlines; the overpriced hammers, toilets, and other items procured by the Pentagon in years past; and the ongoing support for military hardware and weapons systems such as the B-2 bomber that even the Pentagon didn't ask for and doesn't want. It's a travesty when people like me get overcharged for energy costs because of artificial constraints created by companies like Enron (which didn't pay taxes and actually qualified for $382 million worth of refunds. Where's MY refund??), which then gets away with murder (that reminds me, where is Ken Lay these days? Certainly not in prison, where he belongs...).
Another great example is the nominal amount the television networks pay for use of the PUBLIC airwaves. You'd think in exchange for use of various frequencies, we'd get a better deal, like better coverage of the Olympics (I could do without the blathering "experts" and "patriotic" shots of the flag, and more of actual competition!), no more game day blackouts of sporting events, and improved coverage of important political events such as the conventions and the debates (less commentary, more live speeches and actual pronouncements from the politicians, hacks, and the rare occasional statesman lurking about rather than some "journalist" with poofy hair). If we charged the actual market value for use of the spectrum, we'd at least be getting a better rate of return for the vast wasteland known as television.
There are a lot of changes that could be made, and a lot of places to start. But I think if we just concentrated on one area, taxes, we'd get a head start. I think it's time to tackle the problem of corporate welfare, and ensure that the vast corporations that have enriched themselves thanks to our taxpayer monies and our consumer habits gave back to the nation that sustained and continues to sustain them. I hope someone in the gummint actually pays attention to the article I posted, reads it, and starts asking for that $3 billion plus back.
posted by Mr. Sandman | 3:54 PM
<< Home