10-07-2010, 08:47 PM
To simplify, I'll point out that the article is about farm subsidies, and the fact that TEA party politicians are tarred with the same subsidy brush that politicians from both major political parties are tarred with.
The relative merit or lack of merit for farm subsidies (or any targeted subsidy or tax break) is not discussed in the article. So it's a simple political attack 'article' that fails to note that suckling at the farm subsidy teat is common to all of 'em, not just a few TEA party activists.
NOW... if you want to talk about subsidies in general, it's important to note that tax breaks, subsidies, and other forms of what are referred to as 'corporate welfare' or 'entitlement programs' are nothing more than social engineering by the government. And such activity is endemic to all governments. And also argued about when fair trade agreements between nations are negotiated.
"You're undervaluing your yuan !"
"You're undervaluing your corn !"
and so forth.
Farm subsidies are a political third rail... politicians that touch them... do not get re-elected.
The relative merit or lack of merit for farm subsidies (or any targeted subsidy or tax break) is not discussed in the article. So it's a simple political attack 'article' that fails to note that suckling at the farm subsidy teat is common to all of 'em, not just a few TEA party activists.
NOW... if you want to talk about subsidies in general, it's important to note that tax breaks, subsidies, and other forms of what are referred to as 'corporate welfare' or 'entitlement programs' are nothing more than social engineering by the government. And such activity is endemic to all governments. And also argued about when fair trade agreements between nations are negotiated.
"You're undervaluing your yuan !"
"You're undervaluing your corn !"
and so forth.
Farm subsidies are a political third rail... politicians that touch them... do not get re-elected.