Rahm Emanuel’s tribute to the world’s richest man is bad news for Chicago (Time: mortgage)

[Manterro]

This is from November of 2017 but still very relevant.

"Critics allege that raising billions of dollars on the backs of ordinary Chicagoans in order to give it away to a powerful tech company is just the kind of corporate-friendly scheme that has earned Emanuel the nickname “Mayor 1 Percent.”

"These taxpayer-funded subsidies for highly profitable corporations are known as “corporate welfare.” Studies show that state and local governments give away $80 billion to corporations every year, while federal subsidies cost taxpayers at least $100 billion annually. This comes on top of hundreds of billions of dollars in tax breaks, mortgage deductions and other handouts. It all adds up to a free market that costs the public a fortune."

Rahm Emanuel’s Tribute to the World’s Richest Man Is Bad News for Chicago - In These Times

[andrew61]

Originally Posted by Manterro

"These taxpayer-funded subsidies for highly profitable corporations are known as “corporate welfare.” Studies show that state and local governments give away $80 billion to corporations every year, while federal subsidies cost taxpayers at least $100 billion annually. This comes on top of hundreds of billions of dollars in tax breaks, mortgage deductions and other handouts. It all adds up to a free market that costs the public a fortune."

This is a contradiction. "Corporate welfare" is not a "free market".

[knitgirl]

Originally Posted by andrew61

This is a contradiction. "Corporate welfare" is not a "free market".

I think that was exactly the point. It's not a free market if there are all these giveaways to corporations.

[ebitdadada]

Not giving subsidies would be great... if all cities and states in the US stopped doing so as well.

That will not happen as long as cities and states continue to behave rationally given the actually existing legal and economic environment on the planet we currently inhabit.

If the author of the article wants this problem to stop (which I agree is egregious), they should criticize the federal government. They’re the only entity in a position to stop it (via legislation constraining state / local subsidies).

Game theory, specifically the classic “prisoner’s dilema” but with the various competing cities / states as the “prisoners” provides good insight into where the root of the problem lies. As the “game” is setup, states and cities are forced to hand out subsidies via a framework only the federal government can change. Right now,it seems to me that this article is blaming the unjustly treated prisoner (I.e. the City of Chicago) and not the evil prison warden that setup the game .