Obama: Greatest example of crony capitalism in American history

[redrumloa]

Obama administration may have conducted "the greatest -- and most expensive -- example of crony capitalism in American history."

Whether or not you believe politics played a role in the Solyndra loans -- or whether you even care -- is probably a function of your political affiliation. But Hoover Institute fellow Peter Schweizer says Solyndra is just the "tip of the iceberg" of what he calls "very suspicious loans" made by President Obama's Energy Department.
Of the $20 billion of government grants and loan guarantees made to green-tech companies by the DOE since 2009, over $16 billion were allocated to "Obama-related companies," Schweizer tells me in the accompanying video. "By that I mean either the chief executive or leading investor was a member of his campaign finance committee or was a bundler for his campaign."
For example, 16 companies backed by venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins have received DOE green-tech loans, he notes. Kleiner Perkins founder John Doerr is a major Obama supporter and former Vice President Al Gore is a senior partner at the firm.
Other examples include BrightSource, which received a $1.4 billion loan and whose backers include Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergei Brinn.
A full list can be found here and the green-tech loans are detailed in Schweizer's new book, Throw Them All Out, where he claims the Obama administration may have conducted "the greatest -- and most expensive -- example of crony capitalism in American history."

 

[faethor]

The Energy Department's Loan Guarantee program was signed by Bush in 2005, prior to Obama. Solyndra was one of the 16 finalists in 2007. If you want to see the finalists here's a list from 2007. http://www.scribd.com/doc/65315496/DOE-Loan-Guarantee-Rules-Final-4Oct-2007-Companies-Can-Apply

Other examples include BrightSource, which received a $1.4 billion loan and whose backers include Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergei BrinnOther examples include BrightSource, which received a $1.4 billion loan and whose backers include Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergei Brinn

It's always interesting to see how far research doesn't go. Some other backers of BrightSource are Republicans - BP and Chevron. http://www.marketwatch.com/story/brightsource-gets-14-billion-loan-guarantee-2010-02-23 BP tried making donations prior to the mid-terms but these were sent back by candidates scared it was too early. So far it appears BP is strongly favoring Republicans in their donations for 2012. http://www.marketwatch.com/story/bp-corporate-pac-making-campaign-donations-2011-04-20

Here's the simple truth -- Corporations are too big. Too big to fail should mean too big to exist. The problem is it's always crony capitalism as long as we continue to allow corporations to spend money for elections. As long as this practice continues no matter Dem or Rep it will be crony capitalism. Rep. Ted Deutch (D-FL), a member of the House Judiciary Committee, introduced an amendment that would ban corporate money in politics and end corporate personhood. This is the answer if people truly want to eliminate crony capitalism is to support such an ammendment.

 

[redrumloa]

The Energy Department's Loan Guarantee program was signed by Bush in 2005, prior to Obama. Solyndra was one of the 16 finalists in 2007.

And it was denied. The DOE even recomended against Solyndra, but Obama forced it through,

 

[metalman]

Here's the simple truth -- Corporations are too big. Too big to fail should mean too big to exist.

If corporations are too big, the solution is to change the tax code.

Currently dividends paid to stock holders are taxed twice, once by the corporation, and once by the individual who receives the dividend. So companies that pay large dividends have their share price penalized in the stock market. Companies that instead use what they could have paid as dividends, and use the money to purchase other companies and go into debt to finance the deal, have a premium price, because the dividends are then not taxed but invested in assets, and all the interest to finance the deal is tax deductible.

and when it comes to crony capitalism, and exploiting the tax code, none does it better than GE
G.E.’s Tax Strategies Let It Avoid Taxes Altogether

Obama has designated G.E.’s chief executive, Jeffrey R. Immelt, as his liaison to the business community and as the chairman of the President’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness

 

[faethor]

To highlight take a look at what happened today -- Stocks plunged today after a Congressional supercommittee proved itself a turkey, unable agree on a package of cuts and taxes increases to trim the federal deficit --- Yup more disagreements and failure to move things forward are the problem here.

 

[robert l. bentham]

Halliburton (pronounced /ˈhælɨbɜrtən/; NYSE: HAL) is the world's second largest[6] oilfield services corporation with operations in more than 70 countries. It has hundreds of subsidiaries, affiliates, branches, brands and divisions worldwide and employs over 50,000 people.[5]
The company has dual headquarters located in Houston and in Dubai, where Chairman and CEO David Lesarworks and resides, "to focus [the] company’s Eastern Hemisphere Growth."[7] The company will remain incorporated in the United States.[8][9][10]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halliburton

as soon as obama uses the military to steal some nations oil for his buddies this claim will not have even a hint of truth....

 

[faethor]

If corporations are too big, the solution is to change the tax code.

I'd be one of the first to claim the Tax Code is certainly 1 factor.

Currently dividends paid to stock holders are taxed twice, once by the corporation, and once by the individual who receives the dividend

Corporate income is taxed once by the corporation and once again by paying the individual who works for the company to generate the dividend. The problem here is those who do the actual work are taxed at a higher rate than the stock holder. The Stock Holder is really a profit taker.

In 2002 we saw Bush argue that dumping profits at the Gov was a good thing for the nation. He wrongly decided the best way to do this was a tax cut on the wealthy. So the profit takers are getting their money cheaper than the person who did the actual work within the corporation.

Part of the answer is clearly to roll back the failed Bush tax policies. They're helping to increase the federal deficit and taking the focus off of the worker (aka 99%). Bush too greatly increased spending by getting us into 2 wars, which we're still in, and creating one of the largest bureacracy's and hiring at the Federal Gov ever, Homeland Security.

I go back to my statements I've made here before. I'm all for rolling back policy and anyone that is willing to undo the last decade and get us back to 1999 levels they have my vote. If someone wants to be bold and roll us to 1979 I'll be directly involved in their campaign. (I might add that Ron Paul's idea of rolling back all laws to 1779 levels is stupid and ill advised. So there is a too far.)

 

[metalman]

Corporate income is taxed once by the corporation and once again by paying the individual who works for the company to generate the dividend. The problem here is those who do the actual work are taxed at a higher rate than the stock holder. The Stock Holder is really a profit taker.

what?? wages paid to workers is an expense

In 2002 we saw Bush argue that dumping profits at the Gov was a good thing for the nation. He wrongly decided the best way to do this was a tax cut on the wealthy. So the profit takers are getting their money cheaper than the person who did the actual work within the corporation.

?? that makes no sense ?? you been hanging out at an #OWS camp?
dumping profits??
getting their money cheaper??
actual work??

I'm all for rolling back policy and anyone that is willing to undo the last decade and get us back to 1999 levels they have my vote. If someone wants to be bold and roll us to 1979 I'll be directly involved in their campaign.

Mister, we could use a man like Calvin Coolidge again

 

[faethor]

what?? wages paid to workers is an expense

In order to pay wages companies must sell their products. When they sell their products they collect money and must pay a tax. Once the money is collected, and taxed when it goes to employees it's taxed again. Companies pay part of the SS taxes. Employees pay part of the Taxes from what they earn. So if you're paid $10/hour you are really not. The employer pays you and expects to take taxes out of what they pay you. So indeed there's multiple taxations going on.

?? that makes no sense ?? you been hanging out at an #OWS camp?
dumping profits??
getting their money cheaper??
actual work??

Dumping profits? Profit is the money left over after paying all it's debts. Though note it often does not pay it's debts in full but pays the corresponding payment and interest for money it's borrowed. In the case of the government we call a similar arrangement a surplus. Bush inherited a surplus and sold 2 tax cuts claiming deficits were a good thing. Now many argue there wasn't a real surplus. And fine if they tax this stance though the story for Bush then is even worse.

Wealthy do get money cheaper than workers do. The average worker is around 40K/year. The wealthy make hundreds of thousands if not millions per year. When they earn more than ~$110K they don't have to pay the social security tax on the additional income. So that money is cheaper. In addition, earnings from capital is taxed at a 15% rate where a comperable expendture of labor (actually working not moving money) is closer to 30%. The present US tax rate ends up being far too flat. And state tax rates are noteably regressive. We've shifted the tax burden to the lower end. Wealthy make more and pay less to make more.

Mister, we could use a man like Calvin Coolidge again

The Roaring 20s lead to the great Depression. I argue we have tried it for the last 30 years as we continue to cut tax rates. Average salary for workers is flat, wealth is up for the fat cats. Little guy pays a greater % and the big guy pays a lower %. Sounds to me we reached the end of the roaring 20s and the 'coolidge' thought is giving us another depression.