Leslie

I probably haven't seen that movie in over a decade yet I know exactly what you are talking about. It scarred me that badly.

Leslie

The punking of Christie is now officially complete. I hope.

Olly_

Roll on 2018 I guess, it's a shame we probably won't be rid of him early now.

Jerseygirl

We lived near Christie in Mendham...he seemed an OK kinda guy. I have also met Corey Booker...I really like him and would vote for him at the drop of a hat.

FlaviusAetius

There was an interesting discussion a few days ago regarding how to address income disparity. The City of Portland, Oregon, has decided to tackle the issue by assessing a surtax on those companies (540 of them) resident in the city where the CEO is compensated 100x that of the lowest paid worker. It's not clear how many companies would be subject to the surtax, but the City expects to get $2.5 million a year from this scheme. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...ome-inequality

It will be interesting to see how many of the targets remain in the city after the surtax goes into effect. I'm not making any predictions here, but it will be interesting to watch this laboratory experiment in action. Presumably, the companies will weigh the impact of the surtax vs the cost of moving outside the city. This is where the offer of incentives by communities just outside Portland city limits might begin to resemble a bidding war.

Incidentally, re Carrier, the $7,000,000 tax break offered by Indiana to the company is spread over 10 years, so the savings to the company is $700.00 per year per job saved. Hardly enough to influence them from what was a firm decision to leave. I'm sure the Donald got them to change their mind by reminding the CEO of the parent UTI of just how much business UTI does with the federal government. But that's better than any effort Obama made to save those jobs.

These sorts of incentives are everywhere. We've seen myriads of advertisements on TV from NY State offering 10 years of no New York taxes to companies who locate there or expand and create new jobs.

morpeth

For Indiana though one would have to look at the multiplier effect for each job saved in terms of state income and sales tax and from worker spending- I am surprised they didn't even offer more incentives except I assume the tax break offered was related to property and such taxes state had more freedom to offer- and I agree that Trump probably used more leverage of what overall federal business they may lose or at least not get.

Years ago I remember when San Francisco imposed a local payroll tax , 1% if I recall. The company I worked for looked at the cost and decided over time to shift administrative and clerical workers out of the city, until it got to point it would be able to lease whole floors of its office building because they had transferred so many people. So in the end perhaps a well-intentioned move simply didn't take into account basic economics.

Philk

Analysis of the Time Trump cover pic

kimilseung

There is a scene in The Talented Mr Ripley, when one of the uber rich guys enter Ripley's apartment and decry it with the one word "beourgeoise".
I am reminded of it every time I see Trump's homes.

Giantaxe

Or maybe it did, given that San Francisco has consistently had an unemployment rate markedly below the national average (currently 3.3%)? The payroll tax did get converted into a gross receipts tax a couple of years ago, and I believe it's the only US city with such a tax. It also has a stronger mandate to provide health insurance than the ACA.

RoadWarriorFromLP

The Indianapolis Star reported in August that Pence's administration had given $24 million in incentives to ten companies.

Under Mike Pence, Indiana gave incentives to companies that offshored jobs

So that would indicate that Carrier received a package that was about three times higher than the average. Contrary to your comments, the package provided to Carrier is not a trivial amount.

Pence has been negotiating with Carrier since March. At that time, Pence said, "If there is any way to save these jobs in the state of Indiana, we told the company we’re ready to work with them. We’re ready to sit down and find a way to do that."

So Pence offered a fairly generous package after months of discussion. Given Pence's administration, the company knew that it could threaten to leave, only to be provided with more incentives on top of the incentives that it had already received.

You right-wingers are suckers for strongmen. In this case, the strongmen were at Carrier -- they knew that could issue a threat with the knowledge that it would pay off.

If a Democrat had rolled over like that, you would be up in arms. So thanks for the selective outrage, the inconsistency hasn't gone unnoticed.

FlaviusAetius

I would not have been up in arms if Obama had been able to do what Trump did, as my concern was with the 1100 families whose jobs were saved. You made an unwarranted assumption. I still maintain that the $700.00 per job per year ($58.33 per month for each employee) would not have been sufficient to reverse Carrier's decision.

I suspect that the stick of a threatened tarriff on ACs shipped into the US from Mexico, as well as the carrot of lower corporate taxes and a friendlier regulation regime (and perhaps the threat of the loss to UTI of future federal contracts) strong-armed UTI into reversing its decision. But we won't know. But Trump did it and Obama never even tried. Trump should get some credit.

dakota44

One problem. It is not 1100 jobs. They are still moving a number if them...3 or 4 hundred...and they are spending the money on automation to eliminate more jobs. It's a total scam.

RoadWarriorFromLP

Er, the incentives came from Indiana.

You may not have noticed, but Mike Pence is the governor of Indiana.

Most of the time, the federal government does not provide these incentives. (Federalism, remember?)

Obama already bailed out the auto industry, and probably saved well over 100,000 jobs in the process. But let me guess -- you didn't like that very much.

Incidentally, Mitt Romney pledged in 2012 that his White House would get the unemployment rate down to 5.9 or 6.0%. The unemployment rate in November 2016 was 4.6%. But that isn't good enough for you, either, is it?

Ebonhawke

Yes, the funds are coming from Indiana, but prior to Trump's involvement, Pence had been negotiating with Carrier/UTI with no success. However, it isn't really reasonable to believe that UTI gave up a labor cost reduction that in the scale of the hundreds of millions of dollars over 10 years for $7M in tax breaks.

I think it's plausible to assume that there was an under-the-table deal/blackmail made by Trump to UTI that involved UTI's defense contracts, and that the Indiana tax break was simply put forward as the reason for their reversal.

Rexnord, who is just down the street from the Carrier plant, and shares the same union, is moving 300 jobs to Mexico as well. They were targeted by a Trump tweet shortly after the Carrier deal, but no tax break deal as yet for them. Oh - they don't have significant defense contracts to be used as leverage/blackmail.

Ebonhawke

I'm quite curious to see Trump's reaction if/when he tries to enact a 35% tariff, as he will need Congressional approval, and there will likely be enough Republicans opposed to such a measure that it will fail to pass.