Oh those poor rich people. Don’t they need a little more help from the government? Now, don’t get me wrong. If somebody has more money than me and they’ve earned their money fair and square, that’s fine with me. Let them buy all the Lexuses they want. It’s their money, let them keep it and enjoy it. And while you’re at it, let me keep my money, too.
But welfare for the well-to-do is a completely different thing. Almost everyone, except for career politicians, would agree that’s just not right. Still, the new edition of the Cato Institute’s Handbook for Congress has a long list of examples of corporate welfare in the federal budget. There’s the sugar price supports. You pay more at the grocery store so $1.4 billion in propped up profits can benefit the 33 largest sugar cane plantations. There’s a “wool and mohair” subsidy that’s supposed to benefit people with small herds of sheep, but last we looked ABC television journalist Sam Donaldson collects almost $100,000 in subsidies every year.
And how about this for corporate welfare: every year the Agriculture Department splurges $80 million to subsidize the overseas advertising of food exporters, little guys like McDonald’s and Coca-Cola. There’s an amendment proposed every session of Congress to kill this beauty, but somehow it always survives. So why does this nonsense happen? Oh, politics as usual, brought to you by career politicians.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.