Amazon.com Widgets
  • Yes they should

    There is no real reason to give corporate welfare. Why are we giving tax breaks and other subsidies to companies that are making millions upon millions of dollars. We should be using that money to take care of the poor in our country, not to benefit the people who don't need help.

  • The United States should eliminate corporate welfare.

    The United States should eliminate corporate welfare. Many Americans tout to others that they live in a capitalist society. Unfortunately, the United States economy is becoming more socialist than capitalist, because of the large amount of money being pumped into businesses with corporate welfare programs. The corporate welfare needs to stop because it is endangering our economy.

  • Yes, corporate welfare is corruption.

    Corporations are receiving as much of government money as welfare recipients are because they are getting tax breaks and using loop holes that would not be allowable to any except those who have the money and the clout to lobby. Treating a corporation as a person in terms of this kind of activity is corrupt.

  • Not Agaist Subsidies.

    Just against subsidies to rich corporations who do not need them. People will go on for days about how small business are drowning with regulation, health care costs, minimum wage costs. Yet, no one looks at the reason why small businesses are having such a hard time other than those talking points. It is because most of the money is going to corporations who do not need it. Instead of investing in these new small businesses. Let's end this top heavy corruption.

  • Yes, we should.

    We have tried giving money to the rich people for decades. The poor of this country have yet to reap the benefits of that "trickle down" hypothesis. The rich in this country are only getting richer and richer while the poor get poorer and the middle class is shrinking. The money would be better spent on the majority of Americans who have trouble making ends meet.

  • Yes

    If they can't make it on their own, then so be it. People feel that social welfare is wrong for those who can't do it on their own, therefore these businesses should learn to fend for themselves for a change, rather than using taxpayers to pay their way.

    I am often amused at how people will come down on the poor for needing a hand out, but not corporate welfare.

  • Yes. Corporations should play by fair rules.

    As it stands now, corporations have perfected the use of loopholes, special deals, and other breaks to take advantage of taxpayers and consumers. The only goal of a corporation is to make money, so there is no reason to believe that they will not exploit regulations and rules in order to gain a margin. The US government should help regular individual people and not faceless entities whose profits only help the rich.

  • Yes, the US should eliminate corporate welfare

    America is a capitalist country. Capitalism is a system based on allowing failing corporations to fail. Corporations should not be given special tax breaks and grants; if they are a successful corporation they should not even need that extra money. Also instead of wasting money corporations, the government could spend more money on actual welfare and try to address the poverty issue in this country.

  • No, the U.S. should not eliminate corporate welfare.

    No, I do not believe that the U.S. should eliminate corporate welfare. Although there is a push for the government to stay out of small businesses, ever since the economic meltdown of 2007, the sad truth is that without corporate welfare, many small business would be doing even worse than they were at that time, which in turn increase our unemployment rate even further.

  • Unfortunately this needs to be a case by case basis.

    The damage to the economy far out weighs the "evils" of a bail out. However, in most cases a bail out should not be "free" money. It should have strings in the form of repayment with interest, independent over-site that evaluates business "viability" and ensures that the least amount of money required to bail out a business is provided and spent the best way possible to once again make a business self supporting.

    If a business cannot be made self supporting then we are better off using/investing the money in those that become unemployed and new businesses that would be self supporting and employ workers.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.