Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    alt.politics.economics    |    "Its the economy, stupid"    |    345,379 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 343,478 of 345,379    |
|    davidp to All    |
|    When Big Business Married Big Government    |
|    05 Apr 23 13:11:49    |
      From: lessgovt@gmail.com              When Big Business Married Big Government       By Allysia Finley, March 26, 2023, WSJ              When liberals look back on the Biden presidency, they may hail its greatest       accomplishment as ushering in a new era of corporate government dependency.       Without fail, and no matter the industry, the administration has hooked       businesses on Washington        handouts while attaching conditions that put taxpayers and consumers on the       hook for leftist policy preferences.              The latest example is the banking panic. The 2010 Dodd-Frank Act provided an       implicit taxpayer guarantee for the country’s largest banks. With Silicon       Valley Bank’s collapse, midsize banks are now arguing they’re also too big       to fail and lobbying        the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. to guarantee all uninsured deposits for       two years to prevent more bank failures. In other words, they want the       government to backstop poorly managed banks.              Sen. Elizabeth Warren has lent support to the idea but demands that a govt       guarantee be tied to increased regulation. And don’t think she has only       stronger capital and liquidity standards in mind. Like-minded officials will       surely demand a ban on stock        buybacks and dividends, executive compensation caps and perhaps even growth       restrictions.              Government help is never free, as semiconductor companies are learning. Chip       makers lobbied Congress for enormous subsidies to build plants in the U.S.,       which they claimed would shore up supply chains and protect national security.       Republicans joined        Democrats last year in approving some $39 billion in direct financial aid,       plus a 25% investment tax credit.              Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo then conditioned the grants on companies       implementing the admin’s social policy. According to new rules unveiled last       month, chip makers receiving more than $150 million in federal grants will       have to provide child care        for their employees and guarantee “family-sustaining benefits that promote       economic security and mobility,” including “paid leave and caregiving       supports.”              Chip makers will also have to pay construction workers union wages. Intel CEO       Patrick Gelsinger, meet your new boss: Ms. Raimondo. Mr. Gelsinger was the       Chips Act’s loudest business advocate, and little wonder why: Intel has been       losing ground to other        chip makers in recent years and recorded a $664 million loss in last year’s       fourth quarter. Fortunately for Intel, the Treasury Department last week       clarified that companies will be allowed to pocket the 25% tax c       edit—estimated taxpayer cost: $24        billion—even if they owe little or no income tax because they aren’t       profitable.              Broadband providers also volunteered to become charges of the govt when they       backed the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which included $42.5       billion in grants for states to build high-speed broadband plus $14.2 billion       in subsidies for low-       income Americans to purchase internet service plans.              Here, too, the Commerce Dept is imposing political conditions on the cash.       Broadband providers will have to pay union wages, commit to not opposing       unions, and use project-labor agreements between unions and contractors that       govern terms and conditions        of employment.              Commerce’s grant-funding guidelines also suggest that states require       broadband providers to open up their networks to competitors as a condition of       support. The administration is trying to socialize the internet through a       funding back door.              Democrats learned from ObamaCare that dangling subsidies can turn businesses       into permanent govt dependents and allies in their cause to expand the welfare       state. ObamaCare gave health insurers millions of new customers and increased       their profits by        heavily subsidizing premiums in return for regulations on prices and plan       designs.              The 2021 American Rescue Plan Act sweetened the insurance subsidies even more.       These enhanced subsidies were set to expire this year, but insurers lobbied       Congress for an extension—warning, as the America’s Health Insurance Plans       lobby did, that “       nearly 3 million Americans would become uninsured” if the subsidies lapsed       at the end of 2022.              The Biden admin is now trying to co-opt the pharma industry. In December the       admin solicited ideas from private industry on how to boost biotech       manufacturing in the U.S., including suggestions for financial incentives. The       administration has set a goal        of boosting the manufacturing speed of 10 common therapeutics tenfold in five       years.              In response, the Pharma Research and Manufacturers of America lobby suggested       strengthening intellectual-property protections and streamlining the permit       process, among other things. Biden officials are unlikely to do either, but       they may be more        supportive of PhRMA’s proposal for a 25% investment tax credit as well as       direct loans and loan guarantees for U.S. drug production. The administration       could then tie the subsidies to progressive policies, such as price       restrictions, exactly as it’s        doing with chip makers.              Perhaps no industry has become as dependent on govt in the Biden years as auto       makers. A Goldman Sachs report last week estimated that the Inflation       Reduction Act’s electric-vehicle consumer and battery-production tax credits       alone could cost taxpayers        $523 billion over 10 years—nearly seven times as much as the 2008-2009 auto       bailout.              Auto makers are losing billions of dollars on EV's, but the admin is making       the industry too big to fail. How long before they ask government to backstop       their losses?              https://www.wsj.com/articles/when-big-business-married-big-gover       ment-biden-handouts-subsidies-chips-banking-svb-bailout-social-policy-59096477              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca