Trump SAVES 1000 Carrier Jobs!....

[tod evans]

If government decides, based upon purely political reasons, which business will pay tax and which will not, I do not view that as a good thing.

There's no difference, in my eyes, between that and a direct subsidy.

And you're entitled to your viewpoint.

 

[Zippyjuan]

Giving a business money isn't the same as cutting their tax burden.

If I keep typing will it sink in?

Only in terminology. The fiscal impact on the company is the same. The fiscal impact on the government is the same.

 

[tod evans]

Only in terminology. The fiscal impact on the company is the same. The fiscal impact on the government is the same.

Oh good grief, the company actually has to earn money before it could be taxed at any percentage compared to having it given to them....

Send the other Zippy in for a while.

 

[Madison320]

If government decides, based upon purely political reasons, which business will pay tax and which will not, I do not view that as a good thing.

There's no difference, in my eyes, between that and a direct subsidy.

I don't know if they're the same, but they're both bad.

 

[presence]

Not the president(-elect)'s job.
We live in a constitutional republic, not an autocracy.
Business-specific meddling shouldn't be normalized.
https://t.co/usHTsZaw46

— Justin Amash (@justinamash)
November 25, 2016

 

[Zippyjuan]

Oh good grief, the company actually has to earn money before it could be taxed at any percentage compared to having it given to them....

Send the other Zippy in for a while.

Fair enough.

 

[Madison320]

Only in terminology. The fiscal impact on the company is the same. The fiscal impact on the government is the same.

Never mind.

 

[Zippyjuan]

The revenue to pay for it has to come from someplace (unless it is offset by spending cuts- rarely happening). If not from taxpayers then from government borrowing. Cutting taxes reduces their revenues.

 

[TheCount]

That's true but you're leaving something out. The fiscal impact on the taxpayers. A tax cut in place of a handout doesn't burden the taxpaying citizens. A handout does. It has to be stolen from them.

If the government does not cut spending to an equal degree then the financial burden absolutely does fall upon the taxpayer. The financial impact of a tax cut is exactly the same as a cash subsidy.

 

[Madison320]

If the government does not cut spending to an equal degree then the financial burden absolutely does fall upon the taxpayer. The financial impact of a tax cut is exactly the same as a cash subsidy.

You're right. The difference is that with a tax cut (vs a subsidy) the money stays with its owner.

 

[presence]

The issue here as I see it is preferential treatment; uncle picking winners and losers.

 

[UWDude]

Nobody even knows the details of the deal... ..but they are talking very authoritatively about how wrong it is.

 

[Superfluous Man]

The revenue to pay for it has to come from someplace

Wait. Are you talking about "paying for" a tax cut?

If so, you're 100% wrong, and ridiculously so. You don't pay for not getting money that was never yours. You pay for things you buy.

 

[Superfluous Man]

Nobody even knows the details of the deal... ..but they are talking very authoritatively about how wrong it is.

We don't need to know the details to be able to know how wrong it is.

You just so badly want your idol to be right that you're unwilling to accept the obvious.

 

[presence]

Nobody even knows the details of the deal... ..but they are talking very authoritatively about how wrong it is.

Carrier: Trump gave us state 'incentives' to save jobs

the details of the deal don't matter, the fact is that ENTITLEMENTS to STATE INCENTIVES are why carrier is staying

there is no way to twist that into a liberty position;
this is crony capitalism picking winners and losers not market forces

 

[Madison320]

Carrier: Trump gave us state 'incentives' to save jobs

the details of the deal don't matter, the fact is that ENTITLEMENTS to STATE INCENTIVES are why carrier is staying

there is no way to twist that into a liberty position;
this is crony capitalism picking winners and losers not market forces

How can he make deals when he's not even president yet?

 

[Superfluous Man]

How can he make deals when he's not even president yet?

Do you also think that he shouldn't be interviewing potential cabinet appointments until after he's sworn in?

 

[UWDude]

Carrier: Trump gave us state 'incentives' to save jobs

the details of the deal don't matter, the fact is that ENTITLEMENTS to STATE INCENTIVES are why carrier is staying

there is no way to twist that into a liberty position;
this is crony capitalism picking winners and losers not market forces

What incentives? what carrot and what sticks?

 

[UWDude]

We don't need to know the details to be able to know how wrong it is.

You just so badly want your idol to be right that you're unwilling to accept the obvious.

Trump is a master deal maker and negotiator. Nobody has any real idea how he encouraged Carrier to stay.

 

[Superfluous Man]

Trump is a master deal maker and negotiator. Nobody has any real idea how he encouraged Carrier to stay.

You're still doing it.