No you foolish children. In our system, the State is granted revenues by the people as a collective good. It is their property granted TO the Government not vice versa. It is up to the voters in IN to render the judgment on their Representatives at the voting booth if this was a wise move or a foolish move for the collective to reduce tax burdens on Carrier in exchange for the collective good of keeping the 1100 jobs.
Your basing your argument on a fraudulent Marxist premise that the State is the owner, of all economic output and thus any reduction of taxes must be made up elsewhere. NO the people, via the avenue of their elected Representatives, can simply choose to give the state less of THEIR revenue at any time. Your fail point here is your are attempting to manufacture a false premise and then demanding everyone debate based on your false premise. Your assumptions are wrong so your whole argument is based on an intellectual fraud. You seem unable to grasp that point since it is a reasoned rational position that confounds your rote recitation of imprinted ideological dogmas. Like most dogmatists, you simply chat your dogmas louder rather then learn anything. That is an intellectually infantile response on your part.
You seem to have quite a hang-up on semantics.
I've never used the "paid for" terminology. I have said that if the state operates a balanced budget, which states are pretty much obliged to do, and grants Carrier a $7M tax break the other taxpayers will have to make that up, unless the state reduces apending by $7M.
That's trivially obvious and I don't know why it's giving you such heartburn.
.
;-)