What about these gifts to Toyota

Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> "Mark A" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>All this other stuff about economics is a smokescreen. Do you really think
>
> a
>
>>Northerner cares whether the South makes a big financial mistake and gives
>>too many tax breaks and the government there goes bankrupt? No, they would
>>love that. The Northerners only care when the Southerners start stealing
>>their jobs. This is no different than if the job is offshore, because
>
> people
>
>>in the North hate Southerners just as much as they hate Mexican, or
>
> Indian,
>
>>or Chinese workers.
>>
>
>
> Please lift your eyes from your own parochial vision for a moment.
>
> For starters, most of these tax deals work something like this. The company
> comes in, gets 6 years of property tax deferrals. Then at the end of the 6
> years the company tells the local government that if the local government
> starts
> taxing them at the normal rate, that they won't make money any longer, and
> will have to close down the factory and move elsewhere. If the local
> government
> calls BS and refuses to extend the property tax deferrals anymore, than the
> company does move - to the next local government that is willing to give
> them
> another 6 years of property tax deferrals.
>
> In manufacturing by the time 6 years has rolled around, all the machinery
> in the plant is essentially obsolete anyway, the product matrix has changed,
> and the workflow has also changed, it's just as easy to build a new plant
> with
> new machines & new workflow as it is to stay in the existing one and
> renovate it.
>
> In the meantime the local infrastructure of homes, roads, police coverage
> and so on, has to be paid for. And it's paid for by all of the homeowners
> in
> that municipality - the vast, vast majority of them NOT working for that
> company, and NOT getting paid by it, and indeed, not even working at
> businesses that have anything to do with it or it's employees.
>
> The politicians that approve these deals are not doing it as a result of
> economic analysis. They are doing it as Resume-builders because 4
> years later they want to be running for some other political office and
> they want to be able to point to job creation as their legacy. It's easy
> to prove a decision you made created some jobs - but it's difficult to
> prove that a decision a politician made ended some jobs. There's
> even people still claiming that President Bush didn't make any decisions
> that cost jobs, if you can believe it.
>
> The end result of all of this is for the municipality to manage things,
> they have to raise property and income taxes to a high rate - or let
> police coverage get lower, school funding get lower, etc. So you either
> end up with a slapped-together housing tract that ends up decaying 20
> years later until the next hurricane comes through and the municipality
> expects FEMA to pay for it, or you end up with housing tracts that
> gentrify and price all of the young families out of town.
>
> Also in the meantime the federal government is making payments to
> cities - you probably didn't know that the feds do this, didn't you - and
> because the cities are running short the feds pay out more and more
> money. Then the Federal deficit goes through the roof.
>
> However, the fact is that I really don't fault these manufacturing
> businesses for doing this, and you know why? I'll tell you. It is because
> every other civilized country in the world has nationalized healthcare,
> and no other businesses anywhere else in the world have to fund
> employee health care. As a result a business in the US already
> out the door is competing with other businesses in other countries
> that are getting giant government subsidies already - because their
> employees are getting medical benefits from the government, not
> the businesses.
>
> The entire system is screwed. When a municipality gives away tax
> revenue to a company through property tax deferrals, that lost money
> is made up elsewhere in the economy and people who derive no
> direct benefit from that company end up paying for it. Just as
> the employees of the company getting the deferral are paying for
> other companies deferrals that they derive no benefit from either.
>
> The entire system is socialist, not capitalist. And the people claiming
> that it's majority rule are lying. The fact is the vast majority of these
> property tax deferral deals only become public well after the fact,
> too late for any organized resistance to make it's case to the public
> to stop the deal. Sure, the newspaper may run a few articles about
> the great government giveaway and a few disgruntled taxpayers may
> write letters, but by the time the next election happens, it's done and
> forgotten.
>
> Oh sure, if you don't like it you can move to another country. But
> most other civilized countries are also socialist these days. So you
> gain nothing, really - except that you likely don't have to listen to these
> deluded fools like yourself who continue to claim that the US
> federal, state & local governments are NOT socialist.
>
> Ted




Nicely descibed: a race to the bottom.

"Mark A" > wrote in message
...
> "JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote in message
> ...
>> In Long Island many years ago, farm land used for cabbage & potatoes was
>> being assessed at rates meant for McMansion developments and fancy
>> vineyards. It was driving farmers out of business until the law was
>> changed.
>>
>> No more generalizations, please.
>
> All observation about economics and politics is generalization. This is
> especially true in a Republic like the USA, where we have state and local
> governments that can do different things (much to the consternation of the
> left who are basically totalitarians).
>
> In the specific cases we are discussing, where companies are building
> plants in the Southern part of the USA, I can assure you that things are
> quite different than in Long Island NY (where the poor Walmart temporary
> worker was crushed to death by the barbarians who live there).
>
> In Mississippi, and other places in the South where manufacturers have
> received tax breaks for building plants, the proposed land site yielded
> extremely low property taxes before the factories were built there. So
> there were no taxes to give away, because the companies would not build
> there without the tax break.
>
> But in reality, this whole argument has nothing to do with taxes or
> economics, it is about race and regional warfare. Those in the Northern
> parts of the US are at war with the South. Northerners believe that those
> from the south (white or black) are inferior intellectually, and the
> Northerners don't like it when the South starts stealing the manufacturing
> base away from them.
>
> All this other stuff about economics is a smokescreen. Do you really think
> a Northerner cares whether the South makes a big financial mistake and
> gives too many tax breaks and the government there goes bankrupt? No, they
> would love that. The Northerners only care when the Southerners start
> stealing their jobs. This is no different than if the job is offshore,
> because people in the North hate Southerners just as much as they hate
> Mexican, or Indian, or Chinese workers.
>



Yeah. I woke up this morning and my first thought was about how much I hate
people from particular locations.

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

> "Mark A" > wrote in message
> ...

> > "News" > wrote in message
> > t...

> >> Yes, and less taxes, less services, less disposable income, less charity,
> >> less, less, less, less.
> >>
> >> Enjoy your race to the bottom. First one there loses, big time.
> >
> > How can it be less? When there was nothing but farm land or undeveloped
> > (and untaxed) land there is no real estate tax, no sales tax, no payroll,
> > no economic development.
>
> That's a pretty big generalization there, Marky boy. Are you saying that
> farm land and undeveloped land are not subject to assessment and taxation?

Taxes on regular land can be decreased through a rent-u-cow service.
One local person who saved money this way was Kemper Marley, a liquor
magnate, murderer (including by bomb), and good buddy of Cindy
McCain's family:

http://www.tucsonweekly.com/tw/05-27-99/mailbag.htm

Yes, it says, "strategically placed cows."

Another tax loophole we had here exempted homes from all property
taxes, provided their owners parked their airplanes there.

Mark A wrote:

> All observation about economics and politics is generalization. This is
> especially true in a Republic like the USA, where we have state and local
> governments that can do different things (much to the consternation of the
> left who are basically totalitarians).

Heavy alcohol consumption in the morning causes the absurd to appear
rational to its writer.

Mike Hunter wrote:

> "Gosi" > wrote in message
> ...

> > It is as always a question of demand and supply.
> > In new companies you can hire in a lot of less qualified workers and
> > most of the job is done by robots.
> > In GM introducing robots did not allow management to make the same
> > cost reductions because of contracts with unions done in the past.

> You have no concept of how vehicles are made today or how GM operates, if
> that is what you believe.

Back in the mid 1980s, former GM chairman Roger Smith boasted that
Saturns would be produced in a "lights out" factory, meaning a totally
automated one. By saying that, did Smith demonstrate having a
realistic concept of how Saturns were going to be made in the early
1990s, when the factory started production?

Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/(B wrote:

> I don't support welfare, public or corporate.

In practice you do, unless you pay no taxes.

Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/(B wrote:

> GM builds cars for $75 an hour, wages and benefits.

That widely-quoted figure is wrong.

larry moe 'n curly wrote:
>
> Mike Hunter wrote:
>
>
>>"Gosi" > wrote in message
...
>
>
>>>It is as always a question of demand and supply.
>>>In new companies you can hire in a lot of less qualified workers and
>>>most of the job is done by robots.
>>>In GM introducing robots did not allow management to make the same
>>>cost reductions because of contracts with unions done in the past.
>
>
>>You have no concept of how vehicles are made today or how GM operates, if
>>that is what you believe.
>
>
> Back in the mid 1980s, former GM chairman Roger Smith boasted that
> Saturns would be produced in a "lights out" factory, meaning a totally
> automated one. By saying that, did Smith demonstrate having a
> realistic concept of how Saturns were going to be made in the early
> 1990s, when the factory started production?


More like a vision of how every GM and Cerberus plant will be if the
bailout fails.... "lights out".

Nate Nagel wrote:

> If Joe Blow is making $40/hr to work on an assembly line, that is a
> problem. That's $83,200 a year. That's certainly unsustainable when
> plenty of people more skilled/educated aren't making that much.

Check Lincoln Electric's production workers and how a decreasing-
piecework pay system can greatly increase worker output.

> Hell, I don't make that much, and housing prices etc. here are at least 4x here
> what they are in Detroit. I didn't make that much as an engineer at a
> Michigan-based auto industry supplier, either.

And the typical Roto-Rooter franchise holder makes more than the
average air conditioning mechanic, despite the latter's need for a
much higher level of skill. That's why that hero of the libertarians
and conservatives, Adam Smith, said that the free market wasn't the
answer to all economics matters.

Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/(B wrote:

> On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 10:06:24 -0500, News wrote:

> > The "race to the bottom" is a general theme. Applies widely, outside
> > the auto industry. You see it everywhere outsourcing is involved. You
> > see it when New Jersey subsidizes the move of Wall Street jobs across
> > the river.
> >
> > Howe about YOUR job? Is it immune?
>
> Yup! I fix what the Chinese screw up.

Board swapping != fixing