Yes, I’m Libertarian inclined. I don’t see anything objectionable about making the government as small and irrelevant as possible in people’s lives
How do you know that ‘corporate welfare’ came from the Left? I’d like to see evidence of that. Though regardless of who championed it first, there’s nothing objectionable about those on the Right being opposed to government picking winners and losers—i.e., backdoor socialism.
Further, whether that government skewing of the markets comes from the Federal, State, or Local levels, is only a difference of scale, not a fundamental difference of kind. That is, whether it’s the state government of CA meddling with and rigging the system, or the federal government in D.C. meddling with and rigging the system—both constitute interference with a free-market economy, and ought to be opposed.
Interesting thought, though I don't fully understand. In an earlier post you emphasized the following quote: "A new quarter-percent tax on DeKalb County residents financed infrastructure improvements such as roads and railroad exchanges that benefited Steel Dynamics, Bercaw said"
I don't know anything about this tax so am shooting from the hip here, but would think the citizens of that county would have had to vote to approve such a tax.
If they wanted to pay a higher tax rate to enhance critical infrastructure why is that government skewing markets? Infrastructure is a necessity in many instances of business location decisions. If a county government (via what I assume was a formal vote by the citizens) wants to pay to make their county look better to potential businesses - why is that a problem?
I would agree with you though, that if the feds hand over dollars from one area to another in order to enhance infrastructure to create an advantage over another that is patently unfair. To me, the more local the decisions - even of government, the better and more efficient our dollars are used...