Surprisingly popular tweet I sent out on a whim this week: What if corporations were denied govt subsidies/tax breaks if more than 10% of their employees receive taxpayer-funded welfare programs? In second place: If you receive corporate welfare & tax breaks, you shouldnt dip from the trough twice & make taxpayers subsidize your underpaid employees. (In case it is unclear, I am promoting paying employees a living wage and taxing corporations fairly.) Have I accidentally hit upon something? I was just sitting around without pants eating ramen with a ferret in my lap, precisely what Nobel-Award-winning economists almost never do, and Im pretty sure that none of my three and 3/4 academic degrees would impress anyone who is actually, you know, an economist. I have to think for a minute when multiplying two four digit numbers in my head and then double-check the results to be sure. In other words, Im not claiming any authority whatsoever. At this point, Im nay-saying my own its 4 AM and I just had An Intriguing Thought tweets and assuming that this is unworkable, otherwise SURELY someone else would have already proposed it or something even better. So, whats wrong with it? When you apply for food stamps, there is a work requirement, and they already know who you work for. We know about Wal-Mart and McDonalds high percentage of employees receiving welfare/assistance (and that both companies train employees to apply for taxpayer-funded social safety net programs, too). Shoot some holes in it. Lets bash this one out, see if it is feasible. Corporations/Republicans will whine will not be considered a decent objection, by the way. (Actually some Republicans have retweeted this, which makes me nervous, but they say they like it, too.)
Posted on: Sat, 26 Oct 2013 14:30:08 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015