Here are some comments appearing at the post, Tucker Carlson Attacks Rich Entrepreneurs Including Bezos, the Walton Family and Kalanick:
I believe Carlson is a Libertarian. So corporate subsidies are fine? Either yes or no? I think he is saying noIt is positively bizarre to call general welfare a special subsidy for Amazon, WalMart and Uber.
Not necessarily sticking up for Carlson, but the people he attacked are State cronies...not "free-market" about these individuals. Not sure what the issue is.
The three pay market wages. If welfare is eliminated, they would then have to pay whatever the then
going market rate would be. If anything, welfare likely increases wages for the three since it keeps millions from seeking warm body wages/jobs since they can sit at home, fat and happy, collecting welfare checks.
As far as these firms being "state cronies," Amazon appears to do significant business with the government but that does not appear to be the case with WalMart or Uber.
What is really going on here is Tucker, and some libertarians, are being sucked in by a very sophisticated union attack on the three. All three firms resist unions aggressively.
The subtle message that Carlson is promoting is that these firms should pay more because they are being subsidized. And the next step is government regulation to get them to pay more, since they are already paying market wages.
Above market wages is exactly what the unions want for non-union firms, to make it more difficult for them to compete. So yeah, there is cronyism going on here. Union cronyism to get governments to act against market operators--and the union propaganda machine is sucking in Carlson and some libertarians.
Robert Wenzel is Editor & Publisher of