Claims that it used subsidies:
http://news.salon.com/2012/01/19/romney_corporate_welfare_king/singleton/
I didn’t read the entire thing, but is this article claiming that tax breaks are subsidies?
It’s a common political trick nowadays. But tax politics is just extortion dressed up in rhetorical clothing.
Well, I wouldn’t rule out the possibility of Bain getting actual subsidies…
Are you asking if Tax credits are subsidies for yourself or are you asking if that is what the writer implies.?
- Tax breaks are not subsidies in this way: If the class bully beats up every kid twice a day, but he only beats up his buddy once a week. He is not subsidising his buddy, he is just subjecting him to less pain for whatever personal reasons. If he was to give some of the lunches or lunch money (ill gotten gains) he stole from other kids to his buddy, that would be a subsidy.
2.Did the writer imply it was a subsidy? Yes as well as implying many other things wrong with capitalism. The catch 22 argument goes that if a capitalist makes a lot of money(makes a company successful), he could only have gotten it by exploiting the company/ the workers/ the shareholders - he is a bad guy and capitalism is evil..
If the capitalist buys a company and any of them ever fail, he stole the proceeds of the workers/shareholders/ customers- bad guy and that proves capitalism is evil.As if the definition of capitalism is that all companies you buy must succeed or otherwise “capitalism has failed”
Or that if you cannot turn a company into a mega billion dollar company and you close it down and liquidate your assets, you are the greedy bad guy. Do you think he would purposely sink a company that can make billions of dollars?
Or another catch 22; If a capitalist makes it big he is using the statist system- meaning that the only way for capitalists to prove their beliefs is to fail?