Corporate Welfare Cheats
It is about time someone discussed the issue of corporate welfare and the oligarchs who crowd out the interests of the common man in the lobbies of Congress.
Stephanie Kraft (“Rising Margins, Falling Wages,” July 28, 2011) mentions American diplomacy and its mule work for international corporations headquartered in the U.S., which compete for the priorities of our tax dollars. I wish she had spoken to the issue of misplaced blame, which too many Americans are guilty of.
It is so easy, is it not, to complain about the welfare mother “sapping” the resources of “people who work”? Well, we never see or meet the millionaire investors who reap motherlodes from the dastardly work of the corporate welfare cheats. But we see the welfare mother every day and blame her for our high payroll taxes. I have no doubt that all the public assistance checks in the world would be but a drop in the bucket compared to what our rather unpatriotic corporations thieve in backroom deals on Capitol Hill.
When we complain about the high cost of government, let us not forget that it is Big Business, with its gargantuan tin cup, that begs a recalculation of priorities. By the way, should the hard-working patriot reading this letter ever find himself short of milk for his infant child, I would remind him not to call on Corporate America. It will answer, perhaps, for a fee.
Erik Johnson
Springfield
*
No Subsidies for Biomass
The biomass industry has been pressuring the Patrick/Murray administration to weaken already inadequate proposed biomass public subsidy regulations. Many scientists, medical groups and environmental organizations have brought to the public’s attention the shortcomings and problems with this means of producing power, not only in Massachusetts but in many states throughout our country.
The negative impacts that biomass power plants have on air, water, forests and climate should eliminate this industry from receiving taxpayer-funded subsidies. Biomass burning is not a clean, green form of energy of the future; it is a methodology of the past. From the recent Manomet Study, one can conclude that biomass incineration is not carbon-neutral. We should be using our limited financial resources to encourage technologies of the future that will not adversely affect public health and threaten our environment.
It is time that our political leaders give priority to the health and safety of the citizens and to protection of our environment and not be beholden to the special interests and profit motives of polluting corporations.
If you agree, please call Governor Patrick and Lt. Governor Murray at 888-870-7770 and tell them so. At the very least, if any subsidies are made available to the biomass industry, they should have to meet very high standards of efficiency and safety. Biomass plants should meet a minimum 60 percent level of efficiency, and forest harvests for biomass material should be limited to 15 percent. Also, greenhouse gas emissions should be counted correctly to avoid climate change impacts.
Realistically, the biomass industry will probably not be going away soon. However, if taxpayer-funded subsidies for these companies can be reduced or eliminated, perhaps focus can be redirected to ways of producing energy that is truly clean, green and affordably priced, while at the same time creating thousands of jobs in these economically difficult times.
Henry Euler
Montgomery
