Video: Tax subsidy critic Michael Moore receives Michigan tax subsidy he criticized
posted at 12:02 pm on January 31, 2010 by Michelle
The Mackinac Center of Michigan exposes crockumentarian Michael Moore’s embrace of government tax subsidies for a deep-pocketed private business.
His business.
Moore applied for and will receive the tax goodies while sitting on Michigan’s Film Office Advisory Council:
The 2009 documentary “Capitalism: A Love Story,” produced by Michigan filmmaker Michael Moore, has been approved for a subsidy from the Michigan Film Office, according to a video released today by Kathy Hoekstra, communications specialist for the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. Moore is a member of the Film Office Advisory Council, which advises the state-run Michigan Film Office.
“While we don’t blame Mr. Moore and his production team for taking what is offered, it’s striking that a movie focused on the inequities of granting taxpayer dollars to private enterprise would apply for and receive taxpayer-funded incentives,” said Michael LaFaive, fiscal policy director at the Mackinac Center. “Government should not be bailing out or subsidizing Wall Street banks or main street filmmakers. As Moore knows, this marriage between government and business — in the name of creating and saving jobs — can facilitate every sort of mischief.”
At a forum in July 2008, Moore seemed critical of the program, which provides filmmakers with refundable tax credits worth as much as 42 percent of expenditures for movies made in the state.
“These are large multinational corporations — Viacom, GE, Rupert Murdoch — that own these studios,” said Moore at the Traverse City event. “Why do they need our money, from Michigan, from our taxpayers, when we’re already broke here? I mean, they play one state against another, and so they get all this free cash when they’re making billions already in profits. What’s the thinking behind that?”
Janet Lockwood, director of the Michigan Film Office, would not disclose how much the payment might be for “Capitalism: A Love Story.”
“Given the state’s precarious fiscal status, should struggling families and businesses continue subsidizing filmmakers?” asked LaFaive. “How can a state with the nation’s worst unemployment rate justify special tax favors to millionaire filmmakers? We already know the incentive fails as an economic development tool.”
More from Mackinac here.
Captain Do-As-I-Say-Not-As-I-Do strikes again.
Related Posts:









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3
Ed, the consensus of economists on Wall Street, long before the sequester became ‘permanent’, called for a .5 to 1 percent impact in GDP. And it took an expected hit on the unemployment rate.
http://www.businessinsider.com/us-gdp-impact-of-cuts-in-full-sequester-2013-1
You can’t have it both ways- a significant cut in government spending compressed into a shortened fiscal cycle- and continued growth in the labor market. If the economy had been growing at 3% to 4%, then trimming half a point from GDP would have far less impact on job growth. But when GDP was standing around 2.5%, the consequence of the sequester became far more dire.
bayam on April 5, 2013 at 1:12 PM
Yesterday’s Reuters headline “Jobs up, good sign for economy”.
Today’s, no kidding “Weak job gains cast shadow on U.S. economic outlook”
I hope they all spontaneously combust in the news, for dereliction of duty.
bayam, you are an eternall azz-kissing fool.
Schadenfreude on April 5, 2013 at 1:16 PM
How can the sequester take a hit on the March unemployment rate when it hasn’t even started yet?
sentinelrules on April 5, 2013 at 1:16 PM
Just for you, bayam.
Schadenfreude on April 5, 2013 at 1:17 PM
The sequester is not a cut in spending but a reduction in the increased spending for 2013.
bw222 on April 5, 2013 at 1:19 PM
You’re even dumber than most of us thought you were.
bw222 on April 5, 2013 at 1:20 PM
This from Richard Cohen, the otherwise Obama-azzlicker
Schadenfreude on April 5, 2013 at 1:21 PM
Relative to GDP? Not so impressive a comment from someone claiming their superior IQ.
bayam on April 5, 2013 at 1:23 PM
A shame that the Obama Campaign proposed it, pushed it, signed it into law and threatened to veto any efforts to undo it.
forest on April 5, 2013 at 1:23 PM
bayam will suffocate, in Obama’s azz.
Schadenfreude on April 5, 2013 at 1:24 PM
Obama owns the sequester.
Obama owns the Arab’spring’.
Obama owns the economy.
Obama owns the disaster which the land is under him.
Obama owns Obama’care’.
Own up, bayam, or combust, from hypocrisy alone.
Schadenfreude on April 5, 2013 at 1:26 PM
Do you honestly think that if the sequester didn’t affect hundreds of thousands of union jobs (and hence hundreds of millions of dollars worth of union dues), Obama would actually care?
sentinelrules on April 5, 2013 at 1:32 PM
Obama’s America
Schadenfreude on April 5, 2013 at 1:42 PM
…no brains…no ba11s…just babbling and braying again!
KOOLAID2 on April 5, 2013 at 1:43 PM
I don’t know. But what I can tell you is that White House economists accurately expressed the concerns of Wall Street when it came to the real impact of the sequester, while other said there’s nothing to worry about here.
From a historical perspective, attempts to balance the budget don’t turn out so well when you’re still on the precipice of a recovery. And of course the sequester was never a real answer to fixing the deficit. This country has known for 50 years that a graying population was going to present a unique set of financial challenges, and our leadership continues to look past real entitlement solutions, divided by ideology and political posturing.
bayam on April 5, 2013 at 1:43 PM
Our “leadership” is trying to get elected. The electorate will not stand for entitlement solutions. You’re not going to see any reform until after this whole thing crashes down around us.
But the Dems have figured out how to win over the electorate and they’ll be in charge from now on, so don’t worry too much.
happytobehere on April 5, 2013 at 1:54 PM
So bayam, you think it’s the sequester?
Sorry. not seeing it.
http://www.businessinsider.com/weak-jobs-report-not-about-the-sequester-2013-4
But that’s probably not a good enough source… lets find a better one.
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/05/sequestration-and-the-jobs-report/
Please explain to me why the NY Times is unfairly choosing to give the sequester a pass.
gekkobear on April 5, 2013 at 1:54 PM
Well, you see, here is where I stronglydisagree with you. We are not on a precipice of recovery. Not when the economy is being held afloat by wave after wave after wave of Quantitative easing.
sentinelrules on April 5, 2013 at 1:55 PM
And if you think the jobs report was a shock to the market today just wait until earnings reports start rolling. I suppose the dimwitted liberals will blame poor earnings and forecasts on the sequester. Let’s face it, companies are getting by on the mantra of doing more with less and Obamacare definitely is a game changer on doing more with less.
Businesses in the real world are doing everything they can right now to reduce costs. It’s unfortunate that real people working in the real world are going to continue to lose jobs as businesses continue to do what is necessary to improve their profit.
rsherwd65 on April 5, 2013 at 2:04 PM
Ah, there’s the bayam we’ve come to know.
Steve Eggleston on April 5, 2013 at 2:09 PM
A broken clock has the correct time twice a day; that doesn’t mean it works. If you say every day that the Republicans are causing the horrible economy, the fact that the economy is horrible still doesn’t make you right. I know this is hard stuff, but seriously, let’s make some attempt at real cause and effect here.
As an example, please point to any 1000 jobs that were lost due to the sequester. As far as we’ve seen, the two biggest effects of the sequester are that American citizens can’t visit the White House and
Sasha and Malia can’t go skiing… nevermind, make that the ONE big effect.AJsDaddie on April 5, 2013 at 2:10 PM
I don’t think word means what you think it means.
happytobehere on April 5, 2013 at 2:11 PM
No, but I think bayam may have inadvertently come up with the single best description of the entire Obama economic policy: we’re about to go over the edge of the precipice of a recovery!
Yay precipice! Yay recovery! Remember, it takes US to spell Cyprus!!!
:)
AJsDaddie on April 5, 2013 at 2:18 PM
You can stop right there.
voiceofreason on April 5, 2013 at 2:18 PM
Your propaganda machine will be on eternal “recovery” or faux crises. They make them up as they need them.
Schadenfreude on April 5, 2013 at 3:07 PM
…and always attempting to derail. Makes Axelturd proud.
Schadenfreude on April 5, 2013 at 3:08 PM
Oh look, his irrelevancy has made another appearance, after running away from RWM in another thread.
Such a lying little coward, Bayam.
ShadowsPawn on April 5, 2013 at 3:08 PM
The ABC radio news reader reported as bad news that there were only 88k jobs created, but as good news that the unemployment rate had dropped to 7.6%. Seriously. I guess the best way to get out of this mess if for everybody to stop working so we can get the unemployment rate to 0.
Rumpole of the Bailey on April 5, 2013 at 3:27 PM
Hehe. It’s fun to watch that tap dancing troll step in Obamas turds.
SparkPlug on April 5, 2013 at 3:35 PM
bayam tried posting the same link on one of the other threads here. My debunking of same:
Still waiting for an answer, BTW.
Del Dolemonte on April 5, 2013 at 4:54 PM
Why is this….
and this….
so difficult to understand? One would have to be ridiculously dishonest to not even acknowledge that….
Oh….never mind.
98ZJUSMC on April 5, 2013 at 5:08 PM
The truth, shall set you free.
98ZJUSMC on April 5, 2013 at 5:09 PM
Isn’t business insider’s founder a crook who is not allowed to trade?
tom daschle concerned on April 5, 2013 at 5:32 PM
Stop right there sunshine.
The sequester wasn’t a cut in spending, let alone a “significant” cut. It was a small cut in EXPECTED spending. Correct that first and we’ll consider and discuss the rest of your points…
dominigan on April 5, 2013 at 5:33 PM
There is no recovery. There is a precipice. Jump Lemming, Jump!
dominigan on April 5, 2013 at 5:35 PM
It’s obvious Bayam doesn’t quite know what that word means.
HumpBot Salvation on April 5, 2013 at 5:36 PM
Add it to the list:
http://hotair.com/archives/2013/03/27/sebelius-well-yeah-actually-obamacare-is-causing-insurance-premiums-to-rise/comment-page-2/#comment-6835759
OBAMA 2013!
rogerb on April 5, 2013 at 9:19 PM
“So you want a job that you expect us to train you to do, but, if we can’t pay you what you want you will stay on unemployment?” This was something one of my managers asked an applicant applying for an unskilled minimum wage job.
As a business owner most people have no idea how many people we’ve had to hire, then fire, just to get one that could perform the easiest tasks. People with a solid work ethic are getting harder and harder to find.
The nanny state, public school system and parents have done a pathetic job at preparing our children for adulthood. Too bad we didn’t create positions for couch potatoes.
kregg on April 6, 2013 at 7:48 AM
All of our best jobs are being offshored. Thanks to both the Republicans and Democrats. Entry level jobs are being swallowed up by illegals. Young people can’t get any work experience as a result. Thanks to both Republicans and Democrats.
Darvin Dowdy on April 7, 2013 at 8:19 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3