Not really, I don’t think. Tax breaks for individual companies to “induce” them to do what government wants is not a “conservative” thing to do.
It’s not surprising that Trump did it, he’s more of a populist and not particularly conservative economically, he’s got a lifetime history of government/business entanglements.
It’s nice that Sarah is willing to say what she believes and not be worried about what Trump will think.
“Not really, I don’t think. Tax breaks for individual companies to “induce” them to do what government wants is not a “conservative” thing to do.”
Things are greatly distorted, and reversing the last decades of misgovernment may require extraordinary measures.
If we were on a level playing field to begin with, things would be different.
Suppose, in his meetings with Carrier, he spelled out specifically what the new climate would look like and convinced them to hang in there.
Thus, a relaxation in the expensive regulatory climate, a planned relief in the tax law for manufacturing in the United States, coupled with the proposed costs importing their manufactured goods from factories not in the United States, amount to a quantifiable dollar incentive that all manufacturers would enjoy by not moving their factories outside the country.
Of course the MSM is going to call this a "bribe" and "Crony Capitalism," but is it, or just the pro-business policy aims of Trump's new administration?
“Not really, I don’t think. Tax breaks for individual companies to “induce” them to do what government wants is not a “conservative” thing to do.”
So how is that any different than when Reagan lowered the tax rates to “induce” them to start investing and expanding?
What is the “conservative” thing to do? Because we are operating under NAFTA, and that is not this “level playing field”.
And with Carrier looking to head for the border, you either get the best deal to keep these Americans in a job, or you explain to them what magic conservative spell are you going to cast to keep these people off of the dole.
So Indiana can’t offer tax incentives to businesses? States have been doing this for generations to entice business to come or remain in their states since our founding.
There isn’t a thing wrong with the Carrier deal. Our tax code already heavily incentivizes them to relocate south. Correcting that simply levels the field.
Additionally, its simply smart to point out to them that their Mexican built product will be second place to an American built offering if they want to win US govt business.
Sarah is ....ill just say uninformed on this one.
Not really, I don’t think. Tax breaks for individual companies to “induce” them to do what government wants is not a “conservative” thing to do.
It’s not surprising that Trump did it, he’s more of a populist and not particularly conservative economically, he’s got a lifetime history of government/business entanglements.
It’s nice that Sarah is willing to say what she believes and not be worried about what Trump will think.
...
Trump is a macro and micro Business man...that said, perhaps Trump simply showed them the pro business administration plans including tax cuts and how that would improve their bottom line. That isn’t cronyism if all companies will benefit.