Robert Zubrin Quotes

Most of us are aware of the sacrificial slaughter of Bear Sterns. Some people call it a bailout, but I call it a handout - a government handout to some of the richest people on Earth, paid for by American taxpayers.

Many financial and industrial companies have been bailed out with the public's money, but very few of those who had run those companies have been punished for their failures. Yes, the top managers of those companies have lost their jobs - but with a fat pension and mostly with a handsome severance payment.

I turned on Wall Street for the same reason everybody else did: The American taxpayer was forced to cut mook deals to bail out guys who didn't deserve it.

We've seen the government give out subsidies to companies, those companies turn around and use it for executive bonuses.

Perhaps the single most effective antagonist of American business is Ralph Nader, who - thanks largely to the media - has become a legend in his own time and an idol of millions of Americans.

Why should a company like Wal-Mart - who made $10 billion last year alone - be able to force taxpayers to foot the bill for their health-care costs?

The business of America shouldn't be subsidizing business.

What type of 'person' is the for-profit corporation? A spoiled brat - all rights and no responsibilities, a traditional conservative argument would say.

I often say that shareholders should feel very responsible for how responsive corporations are to the public trust.

Positive market incentives operating in the public interest are too few and far between, and are also up against a seemingly never-ending expansion of perverse incentives and lobbying.

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.

The collapse of Enron was devastating to tens of thousands of people and shook the public's confidence in corporate America.

I do not understand how it is that financial institutions could think that they could take taxpayer money and then turn around and act like it's business as usual. I don't understand how they can't see that the world has changed in a fundamental way, that it is not business as usual when you take taxpayer dollars.

As a psychopathic creature, the corporation can neither recognize nor act upon moral reasons to refrain from harming others.

The future will find one of its great problems is deciding how big a business enterprise must become before the public is entitled to know the full details of its management.

I think the bailouts in 2008 were wrong.

I don't know how we will ever have the moral authority to deal with social welfare if we can't deal with corporate welfare.

Like so many large companies in the U.S., Monsanto has prospered in large part due to U.S. taxpayer-funded programs and services.

I opposed the bailout of banks and car companies.

The Tea Party movement and the Occupy movement were both, in a sense, complaining about the same thing, namely the use of public money to rescue failed banks.

I want to get rid of corporate welfare.

In 1980, aided by $1.5 billion in loan guarantees from the U.S. government and his own pitchman routines on television, Lee Iacocca brought Chrysler back from the abyss.

I would rather be responsible and accountable and help to reward the public shareholders going ahead.

Over the years, Chevron has behaved in a way that reinforces the worst stereotypes about large corporations: it has cynically avoided responsibility for its past and watched in indifference as more people become sick and die because of its failure to deal with its legacy environmental issues.

The public subsidies provided to miners, loggers, and ranchers are as extravagant and as harmful to the public interest as the subsidies that the Federal Reserve and Treasury provide to the 'banks too big to fail.'