Totally agree here. These deals are done on a daily basis. Hell Rahm just blew himself today about getting the McDonalds ground breaking on its HQ started. Tax incentives to get businesses to move a town over, and to stay in a town are incredibly common. Hell as a part of a local board, I have personally voted on approving parts of some of them in a town of 30k people.

 

It's not an economic platform to actually keep companies from moving jobs overseas. Sure, states and towns do this all the time. Do we really want Trump's economic policy for keeping jobs here to be negotiate with companies on a case-by-case basis?

 

The issue for me isn't the fact that Carrier got this deal, but that it's being touted as evidence of Trump keeping jobs stateside in any sort of sustainable way.

Trump loves American jobs. Tweeted today that he wanted to cancel the Boeing contract for the next Air Force One. That should negatively affect a thousand or so American jobs, if not more.

It's not an economic platform to actually keep companies from moving jobs overseas. Sure, states and towns do this all the time. Do we really want Trump's economic policy for keeping jobs here to be negotiate with companies on a case-by-case basis?

 

The issue for me isn't the fact that Carrier got this deal, but that it's being touted as evidence of Trump keeping jobs stateside in any sort of sustainable way.

 

That really isn't true. Municipalities lose businesses to Mexico and Asia all of the time and in fact do negotiate incentive packages to keep them from doing so. I know for a fact in my hometown this is exactly how we lost ANCO wiperblades to Mexico.

Yes, deals gutting corporate taxes and regulations are done all the time. Carrier wanted these breaks and got them in exchange for a town number of jobs that make trump look good, but it's the exact opposition of what his whole campaign rhetoric was.

 

And Carrier is going to spend the money automating the plant, which will ultimately result in fewer jobs. That's a very real problem for the economic future in general, but this isn't some sort of "trump gets tough!" deal it was being reported as.

 

Production has been stagnant, reality is depressed wages after 09 may have resulted in firms relying on human labor instead of investing in infrastructure like automation. Probably need more of it not less.

 

Unlikely with our new economic policy that emphasizes human manufacturing and energy as the heart of the economy. Just like we should have focused on textiles in the 1800s.

That really isn't true. Municipalities lose businesses to Mexico and Asia all of the time and in fact do negotiate incentive packages to keep them from doing so. I know for a fact in my hometown this is exactly how we lost ANCO wiperblades to Mexico.

 

Do you really think that's sustainable federal policy to keep jobs here? Negotiate on a case-by-case basis?

 

I understand how this works at a state or local level, I really don't see how it works as national policy.

Do you really think that's sustainable federal policy to keep jobs here? Negotiate on a case-by-case basis?

 

I understand how this works at a state or local level, I really don't see how it works as national policy.

The company it happened with was in the same state as the VP so they could get tax breaks directly, and the company it happened with also has a larger conglomerate that has huge contracts with the federal government. It's clearly not a model for policy that can move to many other places. It's not a big deal, but saying "it's not a big deal" is an attack on the people who insist that it's a big deal, so saying that it isn't a big deal is a partisan thing that only dirty hippies like me will say.

Yep, lost is the hype from the Trump side was the fact that 700-800 jobs were moving regardless...they (Carrier) weren't going to invest in all that infrastructure/logistics development in Mexico and then turn around and abandon it all of a sudden.

 

One positive, though, about Carrier is that they actually have a progressive training program (corporate-sponsored) that might end up being a model or template for moving lower-level workers to sustainable employment opportunities in the future if they are made redundant. Theoretically, 25-50% of workers could continue on with the company, as an engineer or tech specialist/analyst, for example.

 

 

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/06/amazon-go-s...hoo&ref=yfp

How will Trump stop Amazon Go from costing jobs?

Edited December 7, 20169 yr by caulfield12

It's also markedly different from what he campaigned on, which was to punish companies with tariffs, not give them a bunch of breaks.

I have nazis on campus tonight and the news media didn't call them nazis.

 

 

Mistlejoe @josefgoldilock

"We won. America belongs to white men." - Richard Spencer

7:25 PM - 6 Dec 2016

Well at least we're no longer being politically correct. That's what we keep being told is a good thing.

The local Union president for the Indiana Carrier workers dared to criticize trump for misrepresenting the situation today.

 

The president elect took to Twitter to publicly and directly insult the man.

 

That man is now receiving death threats. This is how authoritarianism takes hold. Silence all critics, make it clear that anyone who speaks up will face retribution.

Read a good story today analyzing whether Bernie would have beaten Trump. The answer was "yes." But remember the DNC wanted Hillary desperately and connived against Bernie. Bernie was change just like Trump, only Bernie was a real candidate not a TV star wannabee like Trump. Bernie should be our president right now.

The celebrities like Rosie who are whining should realize they should have gotten behind Bernie not Hillary who the article called one of our most despised politicians ever.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/2016-e...4b0c4b63b0c6928

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politic...trump/93530352/

Edited December 8, 20169 yr by greg775

The local Union president for the Indiana Carrier workers dared to criticize trump for misrepresenting the situation today.

 

The president elect took to Twitter to publicly and directly insult the man.

 

That man is now receiving death threats. This is how authoritarianism takes hold. Silence all critics, make it clear that anyone who speaks up will face retribution.

 

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/201...ltitasking.html

 

Didn't hear the part about the death threats until now...

Just talked to Chuck: "He needs to worry about getting his cabinet filled and leave me the hell alone."https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/806660011904614408 …://https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump...0011904614408 …

 

Chuck, a union leader in Indianapolis, says he is now getting death threats. https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/806660011904614408 …://https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump...0011904614408 …

 

http://www.islandpacket.com/news/politics-...e119594213.html

The local Union president for the Indiana Carrier workers dared to criticize trump for misrepresenting the situation today.

 

The president elect took to Twitter to publicly and directly insult the man.

 

That man is now receiving death threats. This is how authoritarianism takes hold. Silence all critics, make it clear that anyone who speaks up will face retribution.

 

Oh yeah, NO one has criticized Trump and lived to tell about it. GMAFB.

Oh yeah, NO one has criticized Drumpf and lived to tell about it. GMAFB.

No big surprise that you picked that part of his post to pick apart and no comment on the dude getting death threats towards him and his children.

Do you disagree that having the soon-to-be President calling you out individually on a national platform because you dared to criticize him and then receiving death threats has a chilling effect on criticizing Trump?

No big surprise that you picked that part of his post to pick apart and no comment on the dude getting death threats towards him and his children.

 

No response is necessary. Everyone agrees that it's wrong except for the few assholes doing it.

No response is necessary. Everyone agrees that it's wrong except for the few assholes doing it.

 

This includes the soon-to-be President of the United States. This is how you silence critics. This is how authoritarianism takes hold.

Do you disagree that having the soon-to-be President calling you out individually on a national platform because you dared to criticize him and then receiving death threats has a chilling effect on criticizing Trump?

 

I dunno, you don't seem concerned. People in this thread don't seem concerned. People in the media don't seem concerned.

 

You're going to an extreme that isn't reasonable.

This includes the soon-to-be President of the United States. This is how you silence critics. This is how authoritarianism takes hold.

 

Wait, so a President can never respond to criticism? And he's advocating violence?

Wait, so a President can never respond to criticism? And he's advocating violence?

 

A President directly responding to a single private citizen criticizing him via a massive national platform is miles beyond inappropriate.

 

He isn't explicitly advocating violence, but he has to know how his supporters (and internet lynch mobs in general) will react. And that reaction benefits him if the next person thinks twice before publicly speaking out against him because he can wield enormous power to ruin their lives directly and indirectly and is a petty, thin-skinned baby.

Wait, so a President can never respond to criticism? And he's advocating violence?

Calling out individual citizens? That's unheard of.

A President directly responding to a single private citizen criticizing him via a massive national platform is miles beyond inappropriate.

 

He isn't explicitly advocating violence, but he has to know how his supporters (and internet lynch mobs in general) will react. And that reaction benefits him if the next person thinks twice before publicly speaking out against him because he can wield enormous power to ruin their lives directly and indirectly and is a petty, thin-skinned baby.

 

I agree it was inappropriate for a President to do. I agree he's a petty, thin-skinned baby.

 

These tweets, however, are not anything close to advocating violence or suggesting to his followers that they shut him, and others like him, up.

 

Chuck Jones, who is President of United Steelworkers 1999, has done a terrible job representing workers. No wonder companies flee country!

 

If United Steelworkers 1999 was any good, they would have kept those jobs in Indiana. Spend more time working-less time talking. Reduce dues

Edited December 8, 20169 yr by JenksIsMyHero

I dunno, you don't seem concerned. People in this thread don't seem concerned. People in the media don't seem concerned.

 

You're going to an extreme that isn't reasonable.

 

We're pretty much all using pseudonymous names here. The media has some level of power, but Trump will have more and his supporters have already been harassing members of the media and even calling for lynching them, for months. Trump himself has expressed a desire to sue any media outlet who criticizes him out of existence.

 

I'm going to an "extreme" that has played out under authoritarians time and time again. Will we get to that point again, in this country? I don't know, but just putting our fingers in our ears and saying "LA LA LA IT CAN'T HAPPEN HERE LA LA LA!" only helps usher it along. Making excuses for abuses of power and conforming to expected authoritarian demands without them having to explicitly make them is how they get and maintain power.

Calling out individual citizens? That's unheard of.

 

Sure it is, but we've never had a President use social media platforms like Trump before.