A Quote by Valerie Jarrett

When you compare the relatively modest tax that will ensue from prohibiting companies from receiving a subsidy and deducting that subsidy, the benefits dramatically outweigh the costs.
There are five different ways you can do it. You can do it through not giving them the subsidy that we pay them. You know, we pay Mexico a subsidy. I don't know if you know. But the whole thing is ridiculous. We're paying everybody subsidy. We actually have a small portion of China where they get a subsidy from us because they haven't ended it for years.
I have written favourably in support of subsidy for the arts since the 1960s, and I continue to believe absolutely in subsidy, as I do in the BBC licence fee.
Not too far away from now - in the next 6-7 years - 75 million Americans will be retail buyers of healthcare. And they'll come to the marketplace with their own money and either a subsidy from their employer or a subsidy from their government. And it doesn't much matter - they'll be spending their money.
When we give a subsidy, the benefits to the public ought to exceed the benefits to the company. When it doesn't, that's our definition of corporate welfare.
We want to reach free energy markets, but with subsidy programmes for those with low income, and not to have the subsidy in the form of lowering the energy prices, but through other programmes.
The commercial and subsidised theatre are intrinsically linked. I wouldn't have had the career I have had without the opportunities I had through the subsidised sector. However, I do think, in any walk of life, subsidy for the sake of subsidy is not always healthy.
People run away from the name subsidy. It is a subsidy. I am not afraid to call it so. It is paid for the purpose of giving a merchant marine to the whole country so that the trade of the whole country will be benefitted thereby, and the men running the ships will of course make a reasonable profit.... Unless we have a merchant marine, our navy if called upon for offensive or defensive work is going to be most defective.
The precise point at which a tax deduction becomes a 'loophole' or a tax incentive becomes a 'subsidy for special interests' is one of the great mysteries of politics.
The benefits of a modest warming would outweigh the costs - by $8.4 billion a year in 1990 dollars by the year 2060, according to Robert Mendelsohn at Yale University - thanks to longer growing seasons, more wood fiber production, lower construction costs, lower mortality rates, and lower rates of morbidity (illness).
Gradual and moderate warming brings benefits as well as incurring costs. These benefits and costs will not, of course, be felt uniformly throughout the world; the colder regions of the world will be more affected by the benefits, and the hotter regions by the costs.
I don't think most Americans understand that, for certain very wealthy people, our federal income tax system is a subsidy system that makes them richer.
PCs will go the cell-phone subsidy route.
You show me a polluter, I'll show you a subsidy. I'll show you a fat cat using political clout to escape the discipline of the free market and force the public to pay his production costs.
You show me pollution and I will show you people who are not paying their own way, people who are stealing from the public, people who are getting the public to pay their costs of production. All environmental pollution is a subsidy.
We can applaud the state lottery as a public subsidy of intelligence, for it yields public income that is calculated to lighten the tax burden of us prudent abstainers at the expense of the benighted masses of wishful thinkers.
King v. Burwell pointed at but did not directly challenge the ACA's most essential weakness: Government-mandated participation in health insurance exchanges as a precondition to receiving a subsidy is not the best or most effective means of achieving its goal of expanded access to health coverage.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!