Welfare For The Rich Needs To End
No, that wasn't the word from Bernie Sanders.
It was Charles Koch talking, while surrounded by some of the wealthiest men and women in the nation, reports Eliana Johnson at NRO.
And, by the way, I sure do agree.
Koch condemned big bank bailouts and government handouts for the rich.
Doing away with crony capitalism might hurt some of the individuals in attendance, Koch said, and it would certainly hurt Koch Industries, but over the long term, it would revitalize the economy and benefit all parties. Bailing out the big banks, he said, had not only created a culture of dependency at the top, but crushed small community banks at the bottom."We need to start by eliminating welfare for the rich," he said. "Physician, heal thyself."
An example of welfare to the biggest and richest is the Ex-Im bank (aka "Boeing's Bank"), which Veronique de Rugy has been covering for Mercatus and reason. An excerpt from de Rugy's June 18 piece in reason:
Ex-Im is the epitome of that cronyism and has a charter that is set to expire, which is why it became such a great target. For instance, in recent years, some 60 percent of the bank's activities have benefited 10 giant U.S. corporations, with 40 percent benefiting one company alone: Boeing. On the foreign side, the cheap loans are extended to giant state-owned companies such as Mexico's petroleum company, Pemex, and the United Arab Emirates' airline, Emirates. When the Ex-Im financing isn't benefiting a state-owned firm, it is often flowing to very successful private firms with plenty of access to capital, such as the loan extended to the richest woman in Australia to finance her iron ore project at the expense of its U.S competitors.These Ex-Im companies may enjoy the perks of cheap financing and artificially inflated profits, but it's not fair for the 98 percent of U.S. exports generated without special treatment from the federal government. That's especially outrageous when the program has taxpayers on the hook for $140 billion.
via @instapundit
Spoken by an individual who basically seeks to buy our democratic process.
It's like finding commonsense advice given by Polonius to Laertes in Shakespeare's "Hamlet." It sounds like sage advice but it's spoken by an idiot.
Patrick at August 3, 2015 5:46 AM
It sounds like sage advice but it's spoken by an idiot.
I wish I was as much of an idiot as the Koch brothers.
So...what's your solution? higher taxes? more crony capitalism at our expense? should I mention that the current occupant of the White House made sure he had plenty of cash to throw around to his campaign donors? to the tune of trillions?
Remind me again, who is trying to buy our process?
I R A Darth Aggie at August 3, 2015 6:03 AM
Spoken by an individual who basically seeks to buy our democratic process.
It's like finding commonsense advice given by Polonius to Laertes in Shakespeare's "Hamlet." It sounds like sage advice but it's spoken by an idiot.
Posted by: Patrick at August 3, 2015 5:46 AM
I was on the fence about the Ex-Im bank. I can see some of the economic arguments both ways, and I like riding on Boeing planes, especially the ones flown by non Muslim pilots.
But now that I know Patrick is for it, (with a bonus specious attack on the Koch brothers) , I am definitely against it.
Isab at August 3, 2015 6:09 AM
Sigh. There is a reason why the Ex-Im bank exists, and why Boeing is its biggest user. To put it bluntly, the market for airliners is not a free market anywhere but the U.S. Europe favors and subsidizes Airbus; South American favors and subsidizes Embraer, and Canada favors and subsidizes Bombardier. And when China finally gets their airliner manufacturing going, guess what's going to happen there.
That doesn't mean the Ex-Im bank is the right solution. It's probably the wrong solution; it amounts to throwing yet another gallon of gasoline on the subsidies fire. But if it is going to be eliminated, then the federal government must start making a concerted effort to open other markets to free and fair competition. This will have to include making some politically unpalatable threats. The airliner parts supplier business is very interconnected, and you can't just say, "okay, we'll ban Airbus planes from the U.S." without having a negative impact on U.S. suppliers. It would have to be something more targeted and cross-domain, and it will risk setting off a trade war.
But most of the other countries involved have more to lose than we do. We're in a strong negotiating position. The problem is that the current Administration doesn't have the guts to negotiate forcefully and stand up for America's interests.
Cousin Dave at August 3, 2015 7:12 AM
"Spoken by an individual who basically seeks to buy our democratic process."
Read about Koch and his brother. That's not true.
Amy Alkon at August 3, 2015 7:15 AM
"That doesn't mean the Ex-Im bank is the right solution."
Correct, and a direct subsidy to Boeing especially when they are competing against other subsidized plane builders, might be a better solution.
There are other ways to make a countries products more successful. The Chinese and other Asian countries do it through currency manipulation.
It is my opinion, if a country is going to subsidize anything, the transportation industry which is essentially the engine of economic growth, is not a bad choice. Just like the interstate highway system, it fulfills a real economic need.
Still scratching my head as to why a round trip from Tokyo to Denver on United, is half the price of doing the same trip on the same planes from Denver to Tokyo.
Isab at August 3, 2015 8:08 AM
Patrick, your leftism is showing ... again.
The Koch brothers are not anti-democracy. And they are not trying "to buy our democratic process." Funding foundations and think tanks with which you politically disagree is not subverting the democratic process.
Leftists love to scream about billionaires like the Koch brothers funding Republican-affiliated causes while ignoring the beneficial-to-them funding activities of billionaires like George Soros, Fred Eychaner, Tom Steyer, and even Michael Bloomberg - although the true-believer socialists hate Soros because of his support for free markets and Bloomberg did run twice for mayor as a Republican (an affiliation he later disavowed).
Donating large amounts of your own money to candidates is not "buying elections." The other side is still free to take millions from their own coterie of tame billionaires.
And, yes, the Kochs have promised to donate a huge amount to Republicans in the 2016 elections. However, if the latest polls are any indication, this won't make a difference. The Democrats are still in the lead with Hillary dodging scandal after scandal. And the current leading Republican candidate, Donald Trump, has no need of the Kochs' money.
Granted, too many billionaires donating large amounts of money to candidates and causes on either side is not necessarily good for democracy in the long run (creates the impression of bought candidates). The solution, however, is not public funding of elections (the billionaire money will simply be covertly donated), the solution is public disclosure of all donors and amounts.
And skepticism about climate change is not evil, nor is it equivalent to Holocaust denial. Until climate change advocates are willing to release the raw data used in their studies, skepticism is the proper response of anyone concerned about the integrity of the scientific process. Until the climate change advocates are willing to stop bullying critics, skepticism is the only proper response. Environmentalism is the new opiate of the masses, even if those masses have a college education.
Conan the Grammarian at August 3, 2015 9:19 AM
I agree with Koch on this. Too often government subsidies are skewing the free market in favor of an oligarchy of corporations and rich individuals, raising artificial barriers to entry when the government should instead be working to eliminate those barriers, to encourage free enterprise and newcomers to the market.
Conan the Grammarian at August 3, 2015 9:31 AM
I'll stand by my statements, thanks. By the way, I wasn't calling Koch an idiot. I was pointing out that a billionaire who seeks to subvert the democratic process telling us that welfare for the rich needs to end is as ironic as sage advice delivered by an idiot, like Polonius to Laertes in "Hamlet."
Patrick at August 3, 2015 9:53 AM
To put it bluntly, the market for airliners is not a free market anywhere but the U.S.
Really? They have to build in certain systems and security measures, whether they want to or not.
The government limits flight paths and times, controls the mount of airport built and how many gates, which limit the amount of planes any company can buy.
Its hardy a free market
lujlp at August 3, 2015 10:41 AM
Patrick, this was not "a billionaire who seeks to subvert the democratic process" telling us anything.
This was a billionaire who is active in the political process (as are many others) averring that corporate subsidies are not good for the country, nor for the economy. And admitting that while eliminating them would hurt his own company, it would be good for the country and the economy and, therefore, should be done. Would that Warren Buffett were as honest and forthright about his own financial interests.
Conan the Grammarian at August 3, 2015 10:42 AM
"Really? They have to build in certain systems and security measures, whether they want to or not."
Well, relatively speaking. You would be horrified at the level of corruption involved in operating most of the world's airlines. It's positively Third World. Delta, American, and United have a pretty free hand in deciding which planes to buy. Saudi, erm, not so much. And airline manufacturers line up to offer the sheiks bribes and kickbacks if their national airline will buy their planes. Except Boeing, which is constrained by the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
In general, outside of North America and certain sectors in Europe, free markets are a rarity in the world. In most of the world, business is still done pretty much the same way it was in Europe in the Middle Ages.
"Still scratching my head as to why a round trip from Tokyo to Denver on United, is half the price of doing the same trip on the same planes from Denver to Tokyo."
Airline pricing is inscrutable. But one factor is probably the fuel cost. Headwinds going west.
Cousin Dave at August 3, 2015 12:07 PM
Airline pricing is inscrutable. But one factor is probably the fuel cost. Headwinds going west.
Posted by: Cousin Dave at August 3, 2015 12:07
Let's stick with your first thought . A round trip is a round trip.
Isab at August 3, 2015 12:57 PM
I don't know much about Koch's relationship with government handouts. But whether in pretense or in truth, his message is correct. Welfare to the rich needs to end.
Ken R at August 3, 2015 3:35 PM
Democrat "The Kochs are evil for using taxpayer money to subsidies their company"
Koch "The government needs to stop subsidizing business with taxpayer money"
Democrat "The Kochs are evil for saying they shouldnt be given taxpayer money to subsidies their company"
lujlp at August 3, 2015 4:22 PM
Funneling money to politicians is an excellent practice that guarantees quality candidates can compete, like Hillary Clinton.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at August 3, 2015 7:30 PM
Isab: not so fast. Compare the fuel cost.
Radwaste at August 4, 2015 4:41 AM
"Let's stick with your first thought . A round trip is a round trip."
Oh, I thought you were talking about one way. Yeah, inscrutable. Different days of the week? That's the only thing that makes even a little sense.
Cousin Dave at August 4, 2015 6:36 AM
Isab: and I like riding on Boeing planes, especially the ones flown by non Muslim pilots.
Al Qaeda Airlines: Choose us when booking your next flight. No other airline flies into buildings in all major cities like we do.
JD at August 4, 2015 9:07 AM
No need to get a taxi, we'll fly you directly to downtown.
Conan the Grammarian at August 4, 2015 11:48 AM
Leave a comment