And you can bet Hollywood gives plenty of money to Repubs too. They also go from state to state playing off one against the other for state tax breaks. I would bet the bill sponsors get a nice contribution for the next election.

CA has given more tax breaks for this year, but they still have to deal with the unions, so it won’t help the workers much. RTW states win again. Funny how liberals forget their principles when it comes to cash!

ABC conveniently overlooks the $12.1 billion Production Tax Credit extension for the wind industry, a classic case of “rent seeking” by a dead-ended industry seeking to maintain profits through crony capitalism and lavish tax subsidies.

Wind advocates often claim that recent gains in wind generation development will be compromised if the federal wind PTC is allowed to expire. The wind industry and its advocates cite thousands of jobs lost and paint a picture of permanently-shuttered green manufacturing in the wake of the tax subsidy’s sunset. What is not mentioned is that the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation has found that a simple one year extension of the federal wind PTC will cost all U.S. taxpayers an additional $12.1 billion, or an amount equal to $300,000 for each active wind energy job in the industry at the end of 2011. While everyone in this economy wants to promote job growth, subsidizing green jobs at a rate of $300,000 per job seems a bit excessive.

I guess I do not.
My house is subsidized by the interest deduction. I know that in advance and allocate my w-2 to insure that at the end of the year I owe only a tiny amount or am owed just a tiny amount.

I guess I do understand your argument though, the government is not handing money out, they are just making it less expensive for those companies to operate in comparison to others.

astonerii on January 2, 2013 at 1:15 PM

Only if you think of a tax as an absolute…

If they raised the taxes on all income to 85%, but all doctors pay only 75%, you would think that the doctors get a subsidy, and that is how the government gets the weak mind to think…by accepting what they do by providing worse alternatives.

The fact is, they are both over taxed, and “subsidies” is the smoke screen…

So not paying taxes on buying a house, is exactly what it should be, not paying taxes…it’s not a “subsidy” it’s a portion of income that is not taxed. Why should you be taxed on the interest you pay? The bank is taxed on that as profits…If they wanted a “sales tax” than add that to the cost of the home.

You are already taxed on that money, you are just receiving a rebate back on overpaying taxes.

The “subsidy” argument is designed to separate and divide people…and to garner votes. The fact is, it’s people overpaying and getting some relief…that’s not a subsidy, except to the people easily fooled by our tax system.

I guess it depends on your definition of subsidy – it seems to me that most people think of actual money transfers when the word subsidy is used.

gwelf on January 2, 2013 at 1:12 PM

I guess I do not.
My house is subsidized by the interest deduction. I know that in advance and allocate my w-2 to insure that at the end of the year I owe only a tiny amount or am owed just a tiny amount.

I guess I do understand your argument though, the government is not handing money out, they are just making it less expensive for those companies to operate in comparison to others.

…but we need to stop using the language of progressives. A tax break is not a hand out or a subsidy.
 
gwelf on January 2, 2013 at 1:03 PM

 
That reminds me. Option #3:
 

When somebody takes a deduction from their taxes, that revenue has to be made up from other sources — you and I. Reducing your taxes by $11k is, from budget point of view, exactly the same as getting an $11k subsidy.
 
urban elitist on July 28, 2012 at 8:17 PM

Actually it is, because it is targeted and specific. I cannot get any benefit from these special laws. Thus it is a tax break, just like the home owner’s interest tax deduction is.

astonerii on January 2, 2013 at 1:06 PM

I’m not saying it isn’t government favoritism (which it is and which I’m against) but it’s not doling out money. Enterprises are keeping more of their own money, they’re not receiving money from the government.

I guess it depends on your definition of subsidy – it seems to me that most people think of actual money transfers when the word subsidy is used.

A tax break is not a hand out or a subsidy.

gwelf on January 2, 2013 at 1:03 PM

Actually it is, because it is targeted and specific. I cannot get any benefit from these special laws. Thus it is a tax break, just like the home owner’s interest tax deduction is.

astonerii on January 2, 2013 at 1:06 PM

Oops, I meant it is a subsidy.

A tax break is not a hand out or a subsidy.

gwelf on January 2, 2013 at 1:03 PM

Actually it is, because it is targeted and specific. I cannot get any benefit from these special laws. Thus it is a tax break, just like the home owner’s interest tax deduction is.