Regulating markets is the governments job, ignoring that shows your ignorance. You have contradicted yourself in an admirable fashion. You point out that governments at all levels interfere with free trade by using tax incentives, etc. to artificially attract business to a particular area, but then use the existence of this interference and its consequences as justification for further governmental intervention! Amazing.
Oh, and by the way, I have made no personal attacks on you. I don't know if you are a dummy or are brilliant. However, your posts expose an ignorance of the principles of economics. That's a simple fact. I am ignorant of a number of things. That's also a fact. The problem arises when someone is ignorant of something, but does not, for what ever reason, recognize his ignorance. It pays to know what you know and know what you don't know.
I don't see a lot of TIF based programs in the US that seem to be stemming the tide of offshore labor (quite the opposite in the case of HP). Our government is doing little to protect our labor market but they seem to be fine with a free-flow of outbound foreign investment and massive inbound illegal labor.
We are talking about a global market right? How is it a contradiction to point out that other governments attract investment (the kind that grows the local labor market) but we do not?
Economic are quite simple you just choose to ignore one of the most important inputs, labor. Labor is the engine by which consumers consume and governments finance themselves.
Supply side econ is supposed to trickle in a way that creates new jobs. What is your spin on "trickle down" now that trickling only occurs toward corporate equity rather than growing the labor market?