Most of these tax breaks are property tax breaks granted at the State and local level and, yes, it shifts the tax burden to individuals and small businesses. Alabama gave Mercedes 253 million in tax breaks or $169,000. per job. I have made no judgment on the wisdom of the decision. It can only be judged on a case by case investigation.
Only, if he needs a new employee! In a stagnant economy such as we have, business may not add staff with or w/o tax breaks, least of all an inexperienced teen with a newborn at home.
I agree that there are too many government headaches to hiring employees, that is why my husband and I don't have any.
Are you under the misapprehension that a person working full-time for say $8. an hour can afford health insurance? What does responsibility have to do with it? Through the miracle of cost shifting you DO pay for the uninsured one way or another.
Which is what they try to do.
Probably, it amounts to far far less than the mortgage interest deduction that prosperous people receive.

these people really have it tough , now if your able get off your ass and work
Russian Aid:Serbs get expired can food.

__________________
Aint but three things in this world thats worth a solitary dime,
But old dogs and children and watermelon wine.
Tom T. Hall
http://www.politicalforum.com/group.php?groupid=43

Poverty: the state of one who lacks a usual or socially acceptable amount of money or material possessions

A fair bit of the rest of the world is destitute, which is something else.

Again most of the people on poverty are $*&@ing employed. They work. It's just with minimum wage jobs and kids you can't clear the poverty threshold.

Now Libertarianism basically advocates economic feudalism, so it probably doesn't bother you having some serfs.

The poor in our society are unfairly demonized and the implication is that they are pathologically pre-disposed to their situation. Whilst it is undeniable that a minority of poor people abuse the welfare system, the focus of attention ought to be on how to tighten the existing system up as a preventative method rather than head for a race to the bottom in terms of cutting welfare further for the rest of the law abiding citizens, who often, through unforseen circumstances, may become unemployed and/or homeless etc. So instead of picking on the poor, governments' would be more productive in focusing their attention on the real blood suckers in society - the super rich - who cream off what they can from the system.

They are able to do this by exploiting all the tax loopholes as a result of their non-dom status, offshore accounts and creative accounting etc; by paying proportionately less in taxes than a student who has joined the labour market with a hefty student loan and by paying corporation tax at record low levels. In short, a disproportionate emphasis is placed on the poor in society to clean up their act, when the real criminals are the super rich who cost society far more in potential lost tax revenue than the poor but whose services they nevertheless are only to happy to use along with the rest of us.

Poverty.....really?



The following are facts about persons defined as "poor" by the Census Bureau, taken from various government reports:

Forty-six percent of all poor households actually own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.

Seventy-six percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, 30 years ago, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.

Only 6 percent of poor households are overcrowded. More than two-thirds have more than two rooms per person.

The average poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens, and other cities throughout Europe. (These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.)

Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 30 percent own two or more cars.

Ninety-seven percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions.

Seventy-eight percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception.

Seventy-three percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and a third have an automatic dishwasher.

As a group, America's poor are far from being chronically undernourished. The average consumption of protein, vitamins, and minerals is virtually the same for poor and middle-class children and, in most cases, is well above recommended norms. Poor children actually consume more meat than do higher-income children and have average protein intakes 100 percent above recommended levels. Most poor children today are, in fact, supernourished and grow up to be, on average, one inch taller and 10 pounds heavier that the GIs who stormed the beaches of Normandy in World War II.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/bg1713.cfm

The only able bodied adult US citizens living in 'poverty' do so by choice.

What you fail to grasp is the fact that RELATIVE poverty is increasing. It is widely accepted that RELATIVE POVERTY is the true measurement of poverty in society. In other words, it is the widening gap between rich and poor that is the key indicator of of how socially cohesive and therefore happy we are, NOT whether we have the latest I Pod or flat screen TV.

The poor pay practically no taxes, sometimes none at all, while the "super rich" carry the bulk of the burdon for everyone.

You sound like someone who has not spent much time around poor people. I do. There are expensive cars and people wearing pricey jewelry who are on welfare and food stamps. They have plasma tv's and cash in their pockets. Some though are poor but choose to sleep in till noon and drink beer on a porch rather than finding one of the many jobs available. Sure, many of these jobs are low paying and dirty, but in this country you work your up the ladder. A person with no HS diploma, a criminal record, and a spotty resume can not expect to land their dream job right from the start.

Relative poverty is a not a useful indicator - It is absolute poverty that matters if you starve or not.

Relative poverty is NOT "widely accepted" as the "true measurement" of poverty - it is merely an indicator of inequality across a scocety.

Inequality that comes about by the market that puts a higher value on some skills above others. Ie non-manual workers earn more than manual-workers.

There is a need for a range of wealth across society - it encourages people to improve themselves and aspire to earn more.

__________________
Russian Imperialism is a greater danger to the World today than AlQueda terrorism

Your depiction of the working class is a crass cariacture and stereotype. It's so far removed from reality as to be offensive to somebody like me who has been fighting the cause of the underdog in society for most of my life. I don't know what planet you are on but it ain't earth.