Trump, Pence and Carrier Corp. Reach Deal to Keep Nearly 1000 Jobs in Indiana

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by jdillings, Nov 29, 2016.

  1. SLC Flyfishing, Nov 30, 2016
    Last edited: Nov 30, 2016

    SLC Flyfishing Suspended

    SLC Flyfishing

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2007
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #26
    Obvious point is obvious. :rolleyes:
     
  2. Snoopy4 macrumors 6502a

    Snoopy4

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2014
    #27
    It will depend. If it's tax breaks, then who cares. If it's blank checks, then it is the same.
     
  3. Plutonius macrumors 604

    Plutonius

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2003
    Location:
    New Hampshire, USA
    #28
    A company can produce goods / services much cheaper elsewhere which is why the companies are pulling out of the US.

    What would you do ?

    1) Give companies some monetary and other incentives to stay in the US.

    or

    2) Let the companies leave the US.

    I'm waiting for your answer.
     
  4. jpietrzak8 macrumors 65816

    jpietrzak8

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    #29
    Yes! This is exactly what Trump has done, and exactly what he has campaigned on: the free market has failed us in this country, so he's going to move to make all industry state-sponsored. Welcome to the new regime, comrades!
     
  5. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #30
    And welcome to the next societal flip flop, because Trump supporters, who are largely conservative and proponents of the free market, will now have no problem with the government coming in and subsidizing industry.
     
  6. tunerX Suspended

    tunerX

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2009
    #31
    Depending on who you ask, a tax a break and subsidy are pretty much equal and are both gifts from the government and tax payers. If you look at some of the responses in this thread people actually consider letting people/companies keep their own money as a form of subsidization.
     
  7. Plutonius macrumors 604

    Plutonius

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2003
    Location:
    New Hampshire, USA
    #32
    The individual states do this all the time to attract and keep companies.

    It is a question with a binary soluton. Either the companies leave or we give them incentives to stay. Which would you pick ?
     
  8. steve knight macrumors 68030

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #33
    Tax breaks are paid for by you and me. Someone has to pay for them. Welfare for the wealthy.
     
  9. Snoopy4 macrumors 6502a

    Snoopy4

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2014
    #34
    No, tax breaks diminish the unnecessary burden of government on corporations so they can create jobs instead of put people out of work and on the welfare wagon. Government should respond by tightening its belt, not finding other sources of revenue for its stupidity.
     
  10. lowendlinux Contributor

    lowendlinux

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2014
    Location:
    North Country (way upstate NY)
    #35
    Why are those my only options?
     
  11. aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #36
    Nothing wrong with doing business overseas. However, companies--Apple included--that offshore American jobs or replace American workers with H1-B foreigners are treasonous, IMO. I'm pretty sure textiles manufacturing had moved overseas long before Trump was branding shirts and ties, so he'll get a pass on that. However, he's on notice.
     
  12. jpietrzak8 macrumors 65816

    jpietrzak8

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    #37
    No, tax breaks without corresponding cuts in spending increases the unnecessary burden of government on all the rest of us. I don't see Trump proclaiming any spending cuts to go with his largesse here...

    Government should tighten its belt without lowering taxes. This is the concept of a "balanced budget". Get rid of the deficit, start lowering the debt, and you can move the country into a virtuous cycle that by itself will improve the economy and lessen the need for more government spending...
     
  13. Bug-Creator macrumors 6502a

    Bug-Creator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Location:
    Germany
    #38
    Spending money to keep jobs that wouldn't be competetive otherwise will work nice in the shortterm.

    In the long term it will increase public debt while making US production even less competetiv
     
  14. zin macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 5, 2010
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #39
    Wow, -52 days into President Trump's term and he's already saved more jobs from outsourcing than President Obama.

    Reports are saying one of the reasons they agreed to a deal was because their parent company was threatened with fewer federal defence contracts. Why is Barry trying to promote an outsourcing trade deal instead of stepping in to save these jobs?
     
  15. tunerX Suspended

    tunerX

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2009
    #40
    The federal government should tighten its belt and lower taxes.
     
  16. lowendlinux Contributor

    lowendlinux

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2014
    Location:
    North Country (way upstate NY)
    #41
    If our education system even slightly resembled the German system I'd buy that but it doesn't
     
  17. jpietrzak8 macrumors 65816

    jpietrzak8

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    #42
    And so, just continue to drive up the debt? Let's just cancel all taxes altogether, and leave the tab for our children to pick up.
     
  18. samcraig macrumors P6

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #43
    Sorry - he gets a pass? Pretty sure the electronics industry moved overseas a long time ago too.

    Treasonous is hyperbole. My .02. I don't like that these jobs and opportunities have been moved overseas (and more specifically, the $$ via Ireland, etc) but I wouldn't call it treasonous. If taking advantage of laws that exists is treasonous, Trump is "treasonous" for not paying taxes for many many years, right?
     
  19. aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #44
    Components, yes, but offshoring manufacturing is more recent. Earlier Macs were made in the U.S.

    Of course it's hyperbole but hyperbole has it's place to emphasize the importance of certain issues.
     
  20. tunerX Suspended

    tunerX

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2009
    #45
    Another bodies in the streets argument.

    Your argument only has legs if there will always be zero growth in GDP.
     
  21. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #46
    No doubt this will be tax breaks (just like the current negotiations with companies in the UK) and possibly environmental 'get-out-of-jail' cards. If so, my prediction is that the managerial class will give themselves fat bonuses and run the plant into the ground with lack of investment. Then they'll 'be forced' to close the plant because it's no longer viable, let the workers go, and open a new plant in Mexico. Meanwhile, as more of these deals with corporations are made, the tax base will decrease, causing more austerity and further erosion of any safety net for workers. I guess we'll have to wait and see - I hope I am wrong. In any case this is good news, at least for now.
     
  22. oneMadRssn macrumors 601

    oneMadRssn

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Location:
    New England
    #47
    Easy. If the net benefit of being able to buy those goods for a lower cost is greater than the value of those jobs, let them leave. If the value of those jobs is greater than the net benefit of lower cost goods, then offer subsidies to the companies not exceeding the difference between the value of the jobs and the net benefit of lower cost goods. It's basic arithmetic here.

    For example:
    - Company makes Widgets that cost $100 if made in the US, or $50 if made in China.
    - US companies/consumers buy 1 million widgets per year.
    -- Thus net benefit of lower cost is $50 million ($100mil - $50mil)
    - If made in the US, Company employs 1,000 workers making $50k each.
    - If made in China, those 50% of those workers would be unemployed and the remainder would earn $40k each.
    -- Thus value of those jobs is $30 million ($50mil - $20mil).
    --- Benefit of lower cost Widgets > value of jobs.
    --- Answer: Let Company leave.

    For example (differences from above underlined):
    - Company makes Widgets that cost $100 if made in the US, or $75 if made in China.
    - US companies/consumers buy 1 million widgets per year.
    -- Thus net benefit of lower cost is $25 million ($100mil - $75mil)
    - If made in the US, Company employs 1,000 workers making $100k each.
    - If made in China, those 50% of those workers would be unemployed and the remainder would earn $50k each.
    -- Thus value of those jobs is $75 million ($100mil - $25mil).
    --- Value of jobs > net benefit of lower cost Widgets.
    --- Answer: Give Company up to but not greater than $50 million in incentives to stay.

    Math!

    (Yes this is a simplification, there are many more factors to consider. Nearly all of them can be reduced down to basic arithmetic and added to the equation.)
     
  23. tgara macrumors 6502a

    tgara

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2012
    Location:
    Connecticut, USA
    #48
    Yep, exactly. The old saying still applies: You want more of something, tax it less. If you want less of something, tax it more.
     
  24. jpietrzak8 macrumors 65816

    jpietrzak8

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    #49
    Been plenty of growth in the GDP in the last eight years, yet still we have a deficit. Heck, there's been a deficit ever since the days of Clinton. At some point you've gotta admit that, growth or no growth, we've gotta stop spending money we don't have.
     
  25. DakotaGuy macrumors 68040

    DakotaGuy

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    South Dakota, USA
    #50
    I'll never be wild about Trump, but I'll give him credit for keeping a campaign promise. You know if Clinton had been elected those 1,000 people would be out of work.
     

Share This Page