Export - Import Bank

cawacko

Well-known member
Candidate Obama called it corporate welfare. President Obama supports it. Bernie opposes it and is getting ripped by Hillary in this debate who supports it.

Bernie and Ted Cruz both against Ex-Im Bank.
 
Candidate Obama called it corporate welfare. President Obama supports it. Bernie opposes it and is getting ripped by Hillary in this debate who supports it.

Bernie and Ted Cruz both against Ex-Im Bank.
call a spade a spade. It largely is corporate welfare. 80% of its funds go to large corporations and, as the joke goes, it's nickname is the bank of Boeng.
 
I really need to read more about this. Economics and trade are my weak points.
and here I though it was your kind and warm hearted nature.

The Ex-Im Bank provides loans and insurance instruments for subsidizing and incentivizing the sale of American products overseas.

Ex-Im provides loans to commercial ventures that commercial institutions are risk averse to or which are politically unpopular.

The main argument for Ex-Im is that the ventures it supports are predominantly large numbers of small level transaction that primarily benefit small to medium size business and can act as an economic engine creating jobs.

The argument against it is that the law intends that 20% of the financial instruments are to be ear marked for small companies. In reality they often fall well short of that with over 75% of Ex-Im financing going to ten large corporations. Boeing be one of its largest benefactors.
 
Last edited:
Hillary ripping Sanders ?.....I don't think so my friend....looks to me like he is winning this debate hands down.....Even though I don't support either of them...

Loved it when he told her to STFU and wait her turn....of course not in those words.

Seems like the entire debate is about "what can you give me...."
Who will give the most goodies.....
Both are saying everything is falling apart in the first breath and Obama is doing a wonderful job with the second breath....
 
Hillary ripping Sanders ?.....I don't think so my friend....looks to me like he is winning this debate hands down.....Even though I don't support either of them...

Loved it when he told her to STFU and wait her turn....of course not in those words.

She ripped Sanders over not supporting the Import-Export Bank during that exchange. I wasn't talking about who was winning the debate.
 
She ripped Sanders over not supporting the Import-Export Bank during that exchange. I wasn't talking about who was winning the debate.

Well sorry, I haven't seen the entire debate and didn't see that particular exchange....
 
Well sorry, I haven't seen the entire debate and didn't see that particular exchange....

No worries, I was watching the debate and saw the exchange so that's why I started the thread.

I've seen elsewhere people post articles from liberal sites that were anti corporate welfare and had the Im-Ex Bank on the list. Politics always has strange bedfellows
 
and here I though it was your kind and warm hearted nature.

The Ex-Im Bank provides loans and insurance instruments for subsidizing and incentivizing the sale of American products overseas.

Ex-Im provides loans to commercial ventures that commercial institutions are risk averse to or which are politically unpopular.

The main argument for Ex-Im is that the ventures it supports are predominantly large numbers of small level transaction that primarily benefit small to medium size business and can act as an economic engine creating jobs.

The argument against it is that the law intends that 20% of the financial instruments are to be ear marked for small companies. In reality they often fall well short of that with over 75% of Ex-Im financing going to ten large corporations. Boeing be one of its largest benefactors.
Well that doesn't sound like something I'd support, especially the insurance bit.
 
Well that doesn't sound like something I'd support, especially the insurance bit.

Supporters of it claim other countries subsidize their companies better than we do so firms like Boeing are at a disadvantage. People in Congress claim we'll lose a bunch of jobs if we stop support.

Answering the second claim first, it's such a bullsh*t answer it's so frustrating! In theory yes they could be correct but the government shouldn't be subsidizing these jobs. What's the opportunity cost of these particular jobs? Very similar to trade because you can't easily show that more jobs on the whole can be created supporter of the Ex-Im harp on that b.s. argument.
 
Calling it the Bank of Boeing kind of makes me want to support it, but, it doesn't really seem like a proper function of government, either...
 
Back
Top