Posted on 07/31/2015 9:59:10 AM PDT by Isara
Congress must preserve today’s win for American taxpayers
WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) today issued the following statement regarding the Senate's final passage of a long-term highway reauthorization bill. Immediately following its passage, the Senate approved a three-month highway extension, which the House passed earlier in the week. This short-term extension did not include a provision to resurrect the Export-Import Bank and has been sent to the president for his signature.
"Today was a major win. Just one week ago, the Washington Cartel was certain that the Export-Import Bank -- a quintessential example of cronyism and corporate welfare -- would be reauthorized. The fix was in. And yet, after a long battle on the Senate floor, as Mark Twain might say, reports of Ex-Im's revival were greatly exaggerated.
"The House stood strong and refused to reauthorize the Export-Import Bank. And, today, the Senate was forced to relent and pass a three-month extension in the Highway bill, without reauthorizing the Export-Import Bank.
"I commend House conservatives for their strong leadership. This Fall, no doubt, the Washington Cartel will make yet another run at reviving Ex-Im. Lobbyists will descend on Congress, doling out checks and trying to extend hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer loan guarantees to a handful of giant corporations. But, if the House continues to demonstrate their courage of their convictions, together we will make permanent a major victory for hard-working taxpayers. No more cronyism; instead, opportunity for all, and favoritism towards none."
###
OK. Now let’s get rid of something important — like the Dept. of Agriculture or the Department of Education.
Great news!
That's how far we've fallen in 46 years.
Smart smart smart. All they did was stop giving money to private corporations. Being an exporter does not make it special.
They weren’t giving money. They were making loans, that they were charging interest on and they were making money on the loans.
Former Boeing CEO (and still a current chairman) Jim McNerney said that if Congress doesn’t resurrect the Ex-Im Bank, the company would move some of it’s factories overseas.
From an article on MyNorthwest.com, “I’m beginning to question the strategy of making and designing everything in the United States,” McNerney said. “I mean, if there is not an Export-Import Bank, we’re actively considering now moving key pieces of our company to other countries. And we never would have considered that before this craziness on Ex-Im.”
So...still think it’s a good idea?
Many companies manage it all not their own. Mine does. Why is Boeing special?
tour analysis was right on. Your conclusion was off the mark. Guaranteeing a loan against default is hard tangible cost. It is not indirect or unknowable or fuzzy. Try going to a bank, or just taking 4 minutes at Bankrate, and compare secured to unsecured loans. You will see lenders demand more money for unsecured. Have poor credit? Your loan costs more.
Are you a less credit worthy foreign corporation? Your loan costs more. Basically the gov insures the loan that Boeing makes when it sells a plane on credit. Boeing gets taxpayer paid free money b
Private free corporations do not conduct wars. How an company be in a war? Or is the cry “War” a way of justifying all sorts of government meddling, taxing, and usurpation of our rights?
Companies and individual private citizens trade. Governments do not trade. Can you name something that the U.S. government sells?
The last time I got a loan I was handed money. When I paid interest it as money I gave to the bank. The ExIm gives Boeing money by allowing them to lend at lower rates.
Private corporations are always at war aka competition.
Metaphors are always necessary to fleece the taxpayer. So how about this: ExIm is a bird feeder.
The US Gov’t is taking the risk to guarantee the loans.
If the borrowers fails to pay, guess who swallows the losses? That is right...the tax payers.
The government bailed out GM, and received GM stock in return. If I remember right, government sold those stocks at a loss.
Who gets the profits on the loan if the borrowers pay? The taxpayers. So far the bank’s loss ratio is 0.175% and they charge more than enough interest above the borrowing rate to cover that and more.
If they are making money on the loans, there is no real subsity.
If tax payers have to take on the burden of subsidizing Boeing’s financing, it is crony capitalism. Let them move and find other sucker governments to subsidize them. If Boeing can’t stand on their own 2 feet, may be McDonnell Douglas or some other outfit can take over the slack.
Correct, but I do not want the tax payers to be playing risky games, based on success or failures of a private corporation. Tax payers lost money on GM bailout, and made money on Chrysler bailout. It is not the governments job to run a casino.
You are right. I like the word Crony-corporatism much better. The whole idea is, the corporations make it easier for themselves by getting unfair advantage and the politicians receive campaign cash in return.
Scenario #1: I’d much rather see the government’s credit used to support an export loan which helps employee Americans and which gets paid back at a profit.
Scenario #2: The alternative is to use the government’s credit to borrow from China to pay for unemployed American’s. In that way, we are subsidizing imports from China. The price of those imports don’t reflect the cost of unemployed Americans, or the opportunity cost had those Americans been working and paying taxes, or even the taxes the domestic producer would have paid.
So in the first scenario, we make interest profits on the loan and we get taxes from working Americans and we get taxes when those salaries buy stuff in our economy. In the second scenario, we pay interest to China, we pay support to non-working Americans, and ultimately we see China buy up our firms, dismantle them and move them to China.
Why don't we, the taxpayers, who fund our government, pay shipping costs and financing costs for ALL EXPORTERS? That will help increase exports, right? Why subsidize just a few select private businesses? Heck subsidize them all! Taxpayers will love paying more taxes to cover the cost, because it will create more jobs! Do you realize how ridiculous the whole idea is? Government is the worst and most wasteful spender of money. But you like the idea, because it will create jobs for exporters but lose jobs for other private corporations even more. But hey, ignore the bad side, jusy look at the good side.
Where did I say I am in favor of borrowing from anyone?
I am a conservative on fiscal matters. I do not believe in borrowing for consumption.
Borrowing from China to pay welfare and entitlements at least has some humanitarian benefit. But we are also borrowing from China & Japan to protect oil flow from middle-east to China and Japan! We do not need oil from middle-east. Why we spend on military operations in middle-east instead of China and Japan? That is the REAL STUPIDITY.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.