I’m sorry. That is certainly one way of looking at it but I think that the right way of looking at it was that the local economy was at risk and Indiana made an offer which Trump sweetened by pointing out that the business environment was changing and it would be in their interest to stay. The changes Trump is planning will be in the interest of all the other American companies as well. He is sweetening the pot to get the businesses to bring their off shore capital to America as well, which will do a lot to reduce our debt & deficit.
To succeed in turning America’s business environment around Trump is going to need to work on many things simultaneously, the macro-environment for all companies and the micro-environment for certain industries and particularly important companies. It is not as you suggest a one size fits all situation.
Trump is my guy because his aims are the same as mine, to make America great again and restore the American dream to all Americans, and because he is a pragmatist who will do what it takes to get there and knows what is necessary. In America’s interest just as he did in the Carrier deal.
Your solution sounds good “extend the same “breaks” to both companies and all others for that matter” but it would result in the status quo which is converting America to a third class country. The premise that the singularly important aspect is to avoid favoritism is naive, unworkable and doesn’t address specific issues only “fairness”.
It reminds me of Obamacare which is very fair, everyone gets the same healthcare which is super expensive because it mandates coverage of items that people don’t want while the high deductibles insure that people are screwed.
“To succeed in turning America’s business environment around Trump is going to need to work on many things simultaneously, the macro-environment for all companies and the micro-environment for certain industries and particularly important companies. It is not as you suggest a one size fits all situation.”
True.
In my view, Trump is an “economic protectionist” for the US (as he should be). Cutting deals will have to extend beyond US borders. More so because there are many multinational companies operating for profit in other countries at present.
All eyes will be on him to see how he manages, firstly, within USA.