In January , in the midst of the primary election campaign in the United States, Ronald Reagan , who was competing against Gerald Ford for the Republican nomination, brought to the fore the case of a woman from Chicago who, using different identities, with declared addresses, and different telephone numbers had come to collect food subsidies, social assistance, war veterans' and widow's pensions, for an amount of $, tax-free per year (at that time). Reagan used it as an example of the waste and lack of control in government spending (then chaired by Ford). Thus the concept of “welfare queen” was born. A recently published book sheds definitive light on the case: The Queen: the forgotten life behind an American myth (ISBN X). According to this book, which not only proves her real existence in the case, the welfare queen not only really existed, and was arrested and convicted for her frauds, but after going to jail, she returned to her old tricks.
If a few weeks ago we talked in this blog about “tiny subsidies” , today we are talking about the big attractors of subsidies: those organizations capable of attracting to themselves a very important part of the subsidy activity of public adm Latvia WhatsApp Number List inistrations. Of course, we assume that in this case they do it from this side of the law, and not like the welfare queen. We turn once again to the National Subsidies Database , of the Ministry of Finance, from which the Top beneficiaries of subsidies in are selected (excluding other aid such as loans, etc.), which alone total the round figure of , €, Almost , million euros, with a range that goes from €,, (top ) to €,, (top). These large attractors capture % of all subsidies. These data must be taken with due qualifications, since the Autonomous Community of the Basque Country does not report its subsidies through this channel (to find out why, ask Montoro&Montero), and many public organizations report the aid granted with a certain delay.
Grouped by categories, the Top attractors are distributed according to the following table: The majority of beneficiary groups “live” in the public sector itself (Universities, general administrations,…), or at least in border orbits (political parties, professional associations,…). So we are genuinely going to focus on two groups of beneficiaries based on principles that are foreign to or immune to the gravitational force of the public, such as private companies way: BRINGO (NGO briefcase – NGO briefcase), ComeN'Go (come and go NGO – round trip NGO), CONGO (commercial NGO – commercial NGOs), CRINGO (criminal NGO – criminal NGO), GONGO (government-owned NGO – government-owned NGO), GRINGO (government run and initiated NGO – NGOs founded and managed by governments), MANGO (mafia NGO – mafia NGOs), PANGO (party NGO) and MONGO (my own NGO – my own personal NGO) There is no doubt that MANGO has extraordinary evocations in Spanish. Along with well-known institutions, there are others that, even by consulting their website, it is not very clear what they do.