How do subsidy advocates justify...

EliManning

Diabloii.Net Member
How do subsidy advocates justify...

...everyone's hard-earned tax dollars going to save a billionaire who runs his multi-million dollar international steel company into the ground? The second time? Third?



Trickle down economics has always been a huge failure. Repackaging it and changing the name doesn't make the underlying system work any better. Discuss.
 

KillerAim

Diabloii.Net Member
Re: How do subsidy advocates justify...

I don't know anyone who is in favor of trickle-down economics, but I know many people, including myself, that support supply-side economics (which is a horse of a different color).

The concepts of bailouts or subsidies to businesses are NOT concepts supported under supply-side economics.
 

Stoutwood

Diabloii.Net Member
Re: How do subsidy advocates justify...

Are there any advocates for subsidies besides the lobbyists for the industries being subsidized?
 

BobCox2

Diabloii.Net Member
Re: How do subsidy advocates justify...

Taking my money ?

Not that if we privatized everything I would not kick in and buy some of a commodity's insurance pool for my community, but still the government is so inefficient.
 

Voorhees

Diabloii.Net Member
Re: How do subsidy advocates justify...

Whatever purpose these bail-outs are supposed to serve, the only thing I can see coming from them is a new corporate model for expanding beyond your means and have the government foot the bill.
 

Johnny

Banned
Re: How do subsidy advocates justify...

I'm for subsidies when it comes to giving national products a competetive edge over importing the same products.

If the state gives a farmer $50.000 then the farmer will have paid $25.000 tax on it by the time the money switches hand the first time and the next time you have another $12.000 paid in the tax before the end of the month.

If you import the same product then alot of money ends up going out of the country which is pure loss for the counry.
 

plasmo

Diabloii.Net Member
Re: How do subsidy advocates justify...

Basically, offsetting prohibitive costs of start up, especially in otherwise monopoly-controlled industries (ones which require obscenely-expensive infrastructures). It has nothing to do with trickle-down economics.

Most economists would probably support some start-up subsidies as weakly related to the "large public works" part of Adam Smith's original three reasons for government intervention in the marketplace (the other two being external protection of military and internal protection of police), although most would also agree that government has gone too far in providing subsidies.

If you want to educate yourself a little more, read any basic economics textbook. It will explain it a little more in-depth, along with a lot of other interesting things. I'd recommend Principles of Economics by Mankiw; you can get the older macro and micro parts separately for a few bucks plus shipping. His blog is generally highly-ranked in econ blog roundups, so that gives him a little credibility. Plus, when he was Bush's chairman of Economics Advisers, he would occasionally stand up for politically unpopular economic principles.
 

SaroDarksbane

Diabloii.Net Site Pal
Re: How do subsidy advocates justify...

I'm for subsidies when it comes to giving national products a competetive edge over importing the same products.

If the state gives a farmer $50.000 then the farmer will have paid $25.000 tax on it by the time the money switches hand the first time and the next time you have another $12.000 paid in the tax before the end of the month.

If you import the same product then alot of money ends up going out of the country which is pure loss for the counry.
So you want the government to:

1. Withdraw $5,000 from your bank account.
2. Tell you can get it back, but only if you put it towards a car, and only if that car is made in your country.

So, if you don't want a car made in your country, or you aren't even in the market for a new car in the first place, you forfeit the money they took from you, and instead someone else will get a chance to spend it against said car.

Personally, that would piss me off, but then, everyone is different . . .



 

Johnny

Banned
Re: How do subsidy advocates justify...

They are already withdrawing the money and there's nothing I can do about that. So if they want to give some of it back to me in exchange for me geting a car made here then great.

You make the misstake of thinking that we have a choice about paying tax and that having opinions on what the money should be spent on means that I have to pay tax where people with no opinion get to pay no tax.

But we live in reality. Not fantasy land so we pay tax. And I have opinions on what would be a good way to spend the taxes we pay anyway.
 

SaroDarksbane

Diabloii.Net Site Pal
Re: How do subsidy advocates justify...

They are already withdrawing the money and there's nothing I can do about that.
No one ever lowers taxes in your country? How depressing.
But we live in reality. Not fantasy land so we pay tax.
So "reality" dictates that you will always pay as much in tax as you currently are?



 

Johnny

Banned
Re: How do subsidy advocates justify...

No one ever lowers taxes in your country? How depressing.

So "reality" dictates that you will always pay as much in tax as you currently are?
Taxes come and taxes go but if you want to talk country we dont really have that many changes.

We have 2 parties that switch power every now and then. The liberal and the ultra liberal. In the US the outcome of an election could be 8 years of war but for us the outcome is wether or not you have to pay $200 more or less per year in fees. Rarely taxes.

Either way I dont see how any of this works as some counter argument for me having opinions on what said taxes should be spent on.

If we want to return to fantasy land again then I would not pay any taxes at all and everyone would pay 50% income tax that went straight into my pocket. The welfare system would be nonexistant until i feel like taking a break from work for a year or two then welfare would pay out better than the presidents sallary but only to me personaly. No one else.

But that's also pointless because we do pay taxes and taxes go towards paying for things. Helping factories and farmers inside the country compete against imported goods is one thing that is a good use of taxes. A bad use of taxes is some forms of foreign aid. Overspendings on the military (Who are they protecting when they bleed the country dry with spendings?)

A really good way is free education which benfits the country greatly by giving hard workers a chance to reach their goal and earn a living while contributing to society.



 

SaroDarksbane

Diabloii.Net Site Pal
Re: How do subsidy advocates justify...

Either way I dont see how any of this works as some counter argument for me having opinions on what said taxes should be spent on.
My argument is that they should not spend tax money on subsidies.
Your counter-argument is that if they don't spend it on subsidies, they will spend it on something else anyway.
My counter-counter-argument is that spending it on something else is okay, as long as it's a proper role of government.

I'm okay if they stop subsidizing local goods and spend more on the police instead, for instance.

EDIT:

And I don't know where you're going with these "fantasy land" comments. The entire point of this thread was to complain about something Eli disagrees with. Is describing the way things should be always "fantasy land" in your opinion?

"You know, the government should really stop dragging people off and murdering them without a trial."
"Well, if we come back out of 'fantasy land' for a moment, at least they are only murdering people I don't like . . ."



 
Last edited:

AeroJonesy

Diabloii.Net Member
Re: How do subsidy advocates justify...

"You know, the government should really stop dragging people off and murdering them without a trial."
"Well, if we come back out of 'fantasy land' for a moment, at least they are only murdering people I don't like . . ."
Well if that's what happening in reality, it's not a "fantasy land."



 

SaroDarksbane

Diabloii.Net Site Pal
Re: How do subsidy advocates justify...

Well if that's what happening in reality, it's not a "fantasy land."
I think you missed my point.

Johnny seems to be saying that giving your opinion about the way it should be is "living in fantasy land", and not reality as it is.



 

Johnny

Banned
Re: How do subsidy advocates justify...

Eh no.

I make suggestions on how existing taxes should be spent and you as a result start filling up the anarchist/libertarian enema bag then after finding no one to attach it to you just blow it up like a baloon and pop it on site in the form of the usualy rant about evil government taking our money yaddi yadda which no one is interested anyway because no matter how much you hate taxes we still have them and we allways will have them but the least we can hope for is that they are spent better and certain subsidies are a good way to spend some of it.


"waaa? You think more money should be spent on schools? lolz. Would you like it if the government came and burned down your house then enslaved you and killed your pets? No? Well Then you understand why schools should have no money"
 

Moosashi

Diabloii.Net Member
Re: How do subsidy advocates justify...

Trickle down economics has always been a huge failure. Repackaging it and changing the name doesn't make the underlying system work any better. Discuss.
Shall we discuss your misconception of the phrase?

Trickle down economics is just a 20th century term for the invisible hand: the idea that if individuals are allowed to earn wealth for themselves, society as a whole will be better off. To me, this makes perfect sense because the better off you can make society with whatever you're selling, the more society is willing to pay for it.

What you've described is not the invisible hand of rational self-interest, but the quite obvious and intrusive hand of the government. Maybe you should call it "trickle up economics". And yes, it sucks. But don't blame economists and libertarians. Blame politicians for dishing out pork to minority constituents and voters who think the government should blunder around trying to solve every little special interest group's problems.



 

SaroDarksbane

Diabloii.Net Site Pal
Re: How do subsidy advocates justify...

because no matter how much you hate taxes we still have them
I don't hate taxes. Taxes are needed.
and we allways will have
Agreed, but not necessarily at the same level as today.

And if you can't follow my analogies, just say so. I'll make them simpler for you.



 
Top