• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Voters See These ‘Corporate Welfare’ Programs As A Good Place To Cut Government Spend

Re: Voters See These ‘Corporate Welfare’ Programs As A Good Place To Cut Government S

sangha said:
For one thing, there is nothing "redundant" about it. Studies show that even kids whose families receive food stamps do go hungry if not provided with a free lunch
Click to expand...

Then instead of another food program, that does nothing to treat the ****ty parent, what about a visit from a social worker?

sangha said:
For another, why don't you use the "they don't need the welfare" argument when it comes to the oil depletion allowance, which is given to corps that are making record profits? It is hypocritical

It is hypocritical to selectively use and drop "principles" when making arguments depending on who is being discussed. If you're going to say that the kids don't need free lunches because they get food stamps, then why is it OK to give welfare to profit making corps since their profits show that they don't need the money?
Click to expand...

It's already apparent that they don't need the depletion allowance.
I'm not being selective with my principles, it's all time, place and situation.

I never said it was ok to give a business more tax write offs, which isn't the same as welfare because welfare is giving someone money, while tax incentives allow them to keep more of their own money.
 
Re: Voters See These ‘Corporate Welfare’ Programs As A Good Place To Cut Government S

Harry Guerrilla said:
Those aren't "big oil subsidies."
They are tax credits that all businesses get to take.

Why target one industry for the elimination?
Click to expand...

You don't have to, end all the subsidies. That includes the ones for big oil which was defeated. There's lots of specific subsidies out there, not only would you end all the big oil ones but farm subsidies and land subsidies and all of it. It may have to be voted on individually, but ending all subsidies of this manner is a step in the right direction.
 
Re: Voters See These ‘Corporate Welfare’ Programs As A Good Place To Cut Government S

Harry Guerrilla said:
Then instead of another food program, that does nothing to treat the ****ty parent, what about a visit from a social worker?
Click to expand...

Once again you argue that "they don't need more help" to oppose welfare for individuals, but don't apply that to the oil corps. Hypocrisy in action

It's already apparent that they don't need the depletion allowance.
I'm not being selective with my principles, it's all time, place and situation.
Click to expand...

Again, hypocrisy in action. You're just offering excuses when you should be offering reasons. Once again, you abandon your principles, which seems to be a requirement for rightwing libertarians.

I never said it was ok to give a business more tax write offs, which isn't the same as welfare because welfare is giving someone money, while tax incentives allow them to keep more of their own money.
Click to expand...

More hypocrisy. "It's not OK, but I won't oppose it." :cuckoo:
 
Re: Voters See These ‘Corporate Welfare’ Programs As A Good Place To Cut Government S

tessaesque said:
People aren't buying stock in pear and spinach futures, artificially fixing the price. But that happens with oil. It isn't as cut and dry as "competition".
Click to expand...

It's not so cut and dry, no. But there is relatively no competition in oil, the 3 refining companies which supply America are essentially an oligopoly. And oil futures kinda piss me off. If oil futures go up, so does the price of gas; pretty much immediately. But that wasn't from oil they bought at the high futures market price; it was oil they had already bought and refined. But there is most certainly lag if the opposite happens. It seems all so artificial. There are lots of places from corporate to Wallstreet that need to see an end to government handouts and have proper regulation installed.
 
Re: Voters See These ‘Corporate Welfare’ Programs As A Good Place To Cut Government S

sangha said:
Once again you argue that "they don't need more help" to oppose welfare for individuals, but don't apply that to the oil corps. Hypocrisy in action



Again, hypocrisy in action. You're just offering excuses when you should be offering reasons. Once again, you abandon your principles, which seems to be a requirement for rightwing libertarians.



More hypocrisy. "It's not OK, but I won't oppose it." :cuckoo:
Click to expand...

Again we're back to "sanga's improper understanding of hypocracy and his use as a means of character assassination."
 
Re: Voters See These ‘Corporate Welfare’ Programs As A Good Place To Cut Government S

Harry Guerrilla said:
Again we're back to "sanga's improper understanding of hypocracy and his use as a means of character assassination."
Click to expand...

No, I have proven that hypocrisy does not require knowing dishonesty, though at this point, I don't see where you have room to even deny that.

Again, look at the last definition, and you'll see no mention of dishonesty

Pretense | Define Pretense at Dictionary.com
pre·tense
   [pri-tens, pree-tens] Show IPA

noun
1. pretending or feigning; make-believe: My sleepiness was all pretense.

2. a false show of something: a pretense of friendship.

3. a piece of make-believe.

4. the act of pretending or alleging falsely.

5. a false allegation or justification: He excused himself from the lunch on a pretense of urgent business.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Voters See These ‘Corporate Welfare’ Programs As A Good Place To Cut Government S

sangha said:
No, I have proven that hypocrisy does not require knowing dishonesty, though at this point, I don't see where you have room to even deny that.

Again, look at the last definition, and you'll see no mention of dishonesty

Pretense | Define Pretense at Dictionary.com
Click to expand...

Yes it does, when someone "pretends" they are intentionally putting on a false front.

Wiki said:
Hypocrisy is the state of pretending to have beliefs, opinions, virtues, ideals, thoughts, feelings, qualities, or standards that one does not actually have.[1] Hypocrisy involves the deception of others and is thus a kind of lie[1].

Hypocrisy is not simply failing to practice those virtues that one preaches. Samuel Johnson made this point when he wrote about the misuse of the charge of "hypocrisy" in Rambler No. 14:

Nothing is more unjust, however common, than to charge with hypocrisy him that expresses zeal for those virtues which he neglects to practice; since he may be sincerely convinced of the advantages of conquering his passions, without having yet obtained the victory, as a man may be confident of the advantages of a voyage, or a journey, without having courage or industry to undertake it, and may honestly recommend to others, those attempts which he neglects himself.[2]

Thus, an alcoholic's advocating temperance, for example, would not be considered an act of hypocrisy as long as the alcoholic made no pretense of constant sobriety.
Click to expand...

Hypocrisy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Further your understanding and interpretation of my stance is false because of the incongruousness of the situations you are comparing.
A subsidy for people with low income ≠ tax reduction for a profitable business
 
Re: Voters See These ‘Corporate Welfare’ Programs As A Good Place To Cut Government S

OMB watch is progressive spin, particularly on climate data, taxing policy and environmental policy. They went and put out a race demographic about the so called super committee thats going to decide how to handle budget cuts. They dont follow the progressive meme, they create it :roll:

Go reasearch what the writers pet causes are and you will see what I mean.
 
Re: Voters See These ‘Corporate Welfare’ Programs As A Good Place To Cut Government S

OpportunityCost said:
OMB watch is progressive spin, particularly on climate data, taxing policy and environmental policy. They went and put out a race demographic about the so called super committee thats going to decide how to handle budget cuts. They dont follow the progressive meme, they create it :roll:

Go reasearch what the writers pet causes are and you will see what I mean.
Click to expand...

Oddly, they had the low numbers.They say 3 times more. Others say ten times more. As I said, it depends on how you measure it. I merely went with the lower numbers to avoid silly fights over the numbers. ;)

BTW, pet causes or leaning a certain direction isn't what makes something unreliable. Being factually inaccurate is what does that. The American non-Thinker isn't useless because it is conservative, it's useless because it is silly and inaccurate.
 
Re: Voters See These ‘Corporate Welfare’ Programs As A Good Place To Cut Government S

Yeah but the source youre using is using numbers and statistics to support certain memes. Its not inaccurate but the conclusions its drawing and its presentation are shaded to present a certain picture. They present themselves as an unbiased source but they are unmistakeably progressive in outlook and conclusions.
 
Re: Voters See These ‘Corporate Welfare’ Programs As A Good Place To Cut Government S

Harry Guerrilla said:
Yes it does, when someone "pretends" they are intentionally putting on a false front.
Click to expand...

I see you're still ignoring the last defintion. That is a dishonest argument.


Further your understanding and interpretation of my stance is false because of the incongruousness of the situations you are comparing.
A subsidy for people with low income ≠ tax reduction for a profitable business
Click to expand...

Actually, it is the same. Money is fungible.
 
Re: Voters See These ‘Corporate Welfare’ Programs As A Good Place To Cut Government S

OpportunityCost said:
Yeah but the source youre using is using numbers and statistics to support certain memes. Its not inaccurate but the conclusions its drawing and its presentation are shaded to present a certain picture. They present themselves as an unbiased source but they are unmistakeably progressive in outlook and conclusions.
Click to expand...

IOW, "facts have a liberal bias" and it can be proven by the arguments the facts support :cuckoo:
 
Re: Voters See These ‘Corporate Welfare’ Programs As A Good Place To Cut Government S

lpast said:
Perry dont play games with me...with the conspiracy theory crap...no where did I mention conspiracies...

Now explain it to me....aside from the arabs and the dirtbag traders gouging...
Click to expand...

You changed the arguement.

Here is your original arguement.

when big oil drives the prices sky high at the pump
Click to expand...

Now you are argueing that Arabs and Dirt bag traders are behind it. This isn't some minor difference.

how does big oil break all profit records at the pump when usage is down if they arent GOUGING us and raising the price at the pump far above what a barrel and traders do....look perry ive been around too long to get bull****ted....every year in the spring most of my life big oil stuck it to us...and of course they blamed everyone else while breaking profit records...and for their gouging I get the privledge as a taxpayer to give them free tax money....No conspiracy...just the greed driven screwing of anyone and anyone for a buck
Click to expand...

And now you switch your arguement back to "big oil". There is no way to adequately address such a schizophrenic position. The oil companies will raise the price at the pumps quicker when oil goes up than they will lower it when it goes down, but it's not totally displaced from what the markets are doing.
 
Re: Voters See These ‘Corporate Welfare’ Programs As A Good Place To Cut Government S

OpportunityCost said:
Yeah but the source youre using is using numbers and statistics to support certain memes. Its not inaccurate but the conclusions its drawing and its presentation are shaded to present a certain picture. They present themselves as an unbiased source but they are unmistakeably progressive in outlook and conclusions.
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter at all. What matters is that the numbers are accurate. The poitn of contention here is what do we spend more money on. We spend more on corporate welfare, and many sources confirm that. Bias is largely irrelevent. Accuracy is almost always more important. And let's not tforget, it is even possible they are drawing proper conclusions. It is just as biased to ignore it out of hand because you hold a certain bias. ;)
 
Re: Voters See These ‘Corporate Welfare’ Programs As A Good Place To Cut Government S

1Perry said:
You changed the arguement.

Here is your original arguement.



Now you are argueing that Arabs and Dirt bag traders are behind it. This isn't some minor difference.



And now you switch your arguement back to "big oil". There is no way to adequately address such a schizophrenic position. The oil companies will raise the price at the pumps quicker when oil goes up than they will lower it when it goes down, but it's not totally displaced from what the markets are doing.
Click to expand...

Your argument is dishonest because there was no mention of a conspiracy. You just made it up.
 
Re: Voters See These ‘Corporate Welfare’ Programs As A Good Place To Cut Government S

.Fact: Spending for corporate welfare programs outweighs spending for low-income programs by more than three to one: $167 billion to $51.7 billion (source: Aid for Dependent Corporations, from the Corporate Welfare Project and How Much Do We Spend on Welfare?, from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, FY 95 figures)
Click to expand...

LOL FY 1995. Yeah, the facts are what they are, no agenda. Does that match with current budget numbers? Im betting it doesn't.
 
Re: Voters See These ‘Corporate Welfare’ Programs As A Good Place To Cut Government S

-epic-fail-1307073072.jpg

Down with the man, man.
 
Re: Voters See These ‘Corporate Welfare’ Programs As A Good Place To Cut Government S

1Perry said:
I've posted the links for you that shows the Tea Party is against corporate welfare. You aren't one to allow your bigotry to get in the way of facts are you?.
Click to expand...

Which major tea party elected officials - or even those who failed to get elected but were candidates - ran on a platform of ending corporate welfare?
 
Re: Voters See These ‘Corporate Welfare’ Programs As A Good Place To Cut Government S

Ikari said:
I don't own an iPad. **** Apple.
Click to expand...

Oh! Then thank goodness the computer you ARE using isnt loaded full of software from some pig corporation! ;)
 
Re: Voters See These ‘Corporate Welfare’ Programs As A Good Place To Cut Government S

sangha said:
No it doesn't. All it requires is a little cognitive dissonance. Your positions reek of that.
Click to expand...

Harry Guerrilla said:
I guess we just make up definitions for words now.

Accusations of hypocrisy, is one of those little rhetorical attack methods, typically used as a means of character assassination.
It's used instead of actually debating a person over subject matter.
Click to expand...

Ever heard of groupthink? It's the mien of far left radicals. Character assassination is a mantra for them. It's Hitleresque; they have made themselves the chosen ones.
 
Re: Voters See These ‘Corporate Welfare’ Programs As A Good Place To Cut Government S

I asked this question

Which major tea party elected officials - or even those who failed to get elected but were candidates - ran on a platform of ending corporate welfare?
Click to expand...

all I got in return was this link

Tea Party Coalition of WNY endorses Dr. Ron Paul for President
1Perry said:
Tea Party Coalition of WNY endorses Dr. Ron Paul for President

Again I ask, which tea party candidates campaigned on a platform of ending corporate welfare? Are you claiming that it was Ron Paul? Are you claiming that the views of one lone person are those of the entire tea party?

Please provide verifiable objective evidence for both because the article does neither other than make a partisan allegation about Paul and the tea party without substantiation.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Re: Voters See These ‘Corporate Welfare’ Programs As A Good Place To Cut Government S

OpportunityCost said:
LOL FY 1995. Yeah, the facts are what they are, no agenda. Does that match with current budget numbers? Im betting it doesn't.
Click to expand...

After we add tarp and other bailouts, I'd take that bet.
 
Re: Voters See These ‘Corporate Welfare’ Programs As A Good Place To Cut Government S

VanceMack said:
Oh! Then thank goodness the computer you ARE using isnt loaded full of software from some pig corporation! ;)
Click to expand...

Conservative classwarfare is incredible. No one called corporations pigs. Only pointing out a fact, we spend more of our tax dollars on corporations. You are not anti business to honestly think they need less of our money than single mothers do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom