Details of the carrots or inducements?

Maybe Trump will expand upon this if & when he does a press conference. Looking forward to see how he responds to questions by the "corrupt & biased media". The pres-elect hasn't done a press conference since July. These are quite different than standing in front of a crowd in an arena or state fair and spouting anything off the top of his head regardless of accuracy and inciting a crowd. It actually takes knowledge of subject matter. The American people are waiting for the first couple of press conferences by Donald.

Where Obama has repeatedly failed, Donald Trump succeeds:

Carrier says it has deal with Trump to keep jobs in Indiana

By JULIE PACE - From Associated Press - November 29, 2016 9:10 PM EST

WASHINGTON (AP) — Air conditioning company Carrier said Tuesday that it had reached a deal with President-elect Donald Trump to keep nearly 1,000 jobs in Indiana. Trump and Vice President-elect Mike Pence planned to travel to the state Thursday to unveil the agreement alongside company officials.

Trump spent much of his campaign pledging to keep companies like Carrier from moving jobs overseas. His focus on manufacturing jobs contributed to his unexpected appeal with working-class voters in states like Michigan, which has long voted for Democrats in presidential elections.
The details of the agreement were unclear. Carrier tweeted that the company was "pleased to have reached a deal" with Trump and Pence to keep the jobs in Indianapolis.

A transition official confirmed that the president-elect and Pence, who is ending his tenure as Indiana governor, would appear with Carrier officials Thursday. The official insisted on anonymity because the official was not authorized to discuss the trip ahead of an official announcement.

Trump said last week that he was "making progress" on trying to get Carrier to stay in Indiana.
In a September debate against Democratic rival Hillary Clinton, he railed against Carrier's decision to move hundreds of air-conditioner manufacturing jobs from Indianapolis to Mexico.

"So many hundreds and hundreds of companies are doing this," Trump said. "We have to stop our jobs from being stolen from us. We have to stop our companies from leaving the United States."

During the Republican primaries, Trump said he would said he would demand that Carrier parent company United Technologies reverse a decision to move two of its Carrier heating and ventilating parts plants to Mexico, eliminating 2,100 U.S. jobs.

Carrier wasn't the only company Trump assailed. He pledged to give up Oreos after Nabisco's parent, Mondelez International, said it would replace nine production lines in Chicago with four in Mexico. He criticized Ford after the company said it planned to invest $2.5 billion in engine and transmission plants in Mexico.

The event in Indiana will be a rare public appearance for Trump, who has spent nearly his entire tenure as president-elect huddled with advisers and meeting with possible Cabinet secretaries. He plans to make other stops later this week as part of what advisers have billed as a "thank you" tour for voters who backed him in the presidential campaign.

[Edited on 11/30/2016 by Muleman1994]

LOL, my guess is the american citizens will have ended up keeping them here, after all with the Tax cuts Trump is giving the parent company....he isn't doing sh!t.....we the tax payers will be.

Beyond tax breaks, the company would have had several motivations to reach a deal with the Trump administration, said Mohan Tatikonda, an operations management professor for the Indiana University Kelley School of Business.

For one, Carrier's parent company, Connecticut-based United Technologies Corp., is a large government contractor. The company "would like to start off on the right foot" with a new presidential administration, Tatikonda said, particularly because the government plays a large role in its business.

[Edited on 11/30/2016 by LeglizHemp]

Details of the carrots or inducements?

If I was a CEO, I'd be on the phone with the transition team right now.

"Whattaya give me to stay? We weren't even planning on moving, but what ya got?"

Where Obama has repeatedly failed, Donald Trump succeeds:

And Mike Pence, since a lot of tax incentives for businesses are also determined by the state.

I'm happy for the 1000 employees (1000 other Carrier jobs are still Mexico-bound), but it will be interesting to see if this drives prices up for customers. How will this be funded?

While Carrier will forfeit some $65 million a year in savings the move was supposed to generate, that’s a small price to pay to avoid the public relations damage from moving the jobs as well as a possible threat to United Technologies’ far-larger military contracting business.

Roughly 10 percent of United Technologies’ $56 billion in revenue comes from the federal government; the Pentagon is its single largest customer. With $4 billion in profit last year, the company has the flexibility to find the savings elsewhere.

Ah, I see. So, Yuge Federal Tax incentives for the corporation, but we saved 1000 jobs. Does this set a precedent that companies can threaten to leave in order to broker a profitable federally financed deal to stay? Tax dollars at work...

Much to the liberals dismay, Donald Trump has saved American jobs and fulfilled a campaign promise.

Not a word from Obama who failed to stop companies and jobs from fleeing The U.S.

Long before taking his oath of office Donald Trump is getting the job done.

Much to the liberals dismay, Donald Trump has saved American jobs and fulfilled a campaign promise.

Not a word from Obama who failed to stop companies and jobs from fleeing The U.S.

Long before taking his oath of office Donald Trump is getting the job done.

You are the class clown aren't you? It is one thing to save jobs using the long arm of the government as Trump and Pence have done and another thing entirely to establish an environment where investment and industry function together to create jobs. What you are applauding here is state driven socialism and not capitalism. You seem to get the two very different economic systems confused.

The obsession with Obama continues. Very creepy.

Much to the liberals dismay, Donald Trump has saved American jobs and fulfilled a campaign promise.

Not a word from Obama who failed to stop companies and jobs from fleeing The U.S.

Long before taking his oath of office Donald Trump is getting the job done.

You are the class clown aren't you? It is one thing to save jobs using the long arm of the government as Trump and Pence have done and another thing entirely to establish an environment where investment and industry function together to create jobs. What you are applauding here is state driven socialism and not capitalism. You seem to get the two very different economic systems confused.

Federal meddling in the Free Open Capitalist Market is only OK with Mule when Republicans do it. Also, Federal handouts at tax payer expense are only OK when Billion Dollar Corporations do it. He doesn't understand the parallels.

We don't know what deal was made. Until then, unless I worked for Carrier, I wouldn't celebrate yet. Trump can't strike deals with every company that finds profit overseas.

The obsession with Obama continues. Very creepy.

You should see the wall of Hillary photos on his bunker ceiling.

Much to the liberals dismay, Donald Trump has saved American jobs and fulfilled a campaign promise.

Not a word from Obama who failed to stop companies and jobs from fleeing The U.S.

Long before taking his oath of office Donald Trump is getting the job done.

You are the class clown aren't you? It is one thing to save jobs using the long arm of the government as Trump and Pence have done and another thing entirely to establish an environment where investment and industry function together to create jobs. What you are applauding here is state driven socialism and not capitalism. You seem to get the two very different economic systems confused.

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Ah a leading WP moron keeps making a fool of himself.
If it were socialism the government would have nationalized the business and seized it.

The establishing an environment where investment and industry function together will be done, as Donald Trump has stated, when he is actually in office and can get the 35% corporate tax rate, highest in the world, down to a level where companies and therefore jobs will stop fleeing the U.S.

Obama was told, by business leaders, what needed to be done and Obama ignored the professionals as he has throughout his failed Presidency.

Looks like the jobs are staying. Hatred of Trump aside, isn't that something we should be happy about?

Much to the liberals dismay, Donald Trump has saved American jobs and fulfilled a campaign promise.

Not a word from Obama who failed to stop companies and jobs from fleeing The U.S.

Long before taking his oath of office Donald Trump is getting the job done.

You are the class clown aren't you? It is one thing to save jobs using the long arm of the government as Trump and Pence have done and another thing entirely to establish an environment where investment and industry function together to create jobs. What you are applauding here is state driven socialism and not capitalism. You seem to get the two very different economic systems confused.

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Ah a leading WP moron keeps making a fool of himself.
If it were socialism the government would have nationalized the business and seized it.

The establishing an environment where investment and industry function together will be done, as Donald Trump has stated, when he is actually in office and can get the 35% corporate tax rate, highest in the world, down to a level where companies and therefore jobs will stop fleeing the U.S.

Obama was told, by business leaders, what needed to be done and Obama ignored the professionals as he has throughout his failed Presidency.

China has plenty of private companies but remains communist. Northern Europeans have private industries but are socialist states.

The issue in this case is that Trump cut a deal. As a private entrepreneur he can cut deals like this and it can be a good deal. But as a President Elect he is responsible for establishing polices and opening opportunities for capital investment in the types of industries that create jobs. Tax policy aside he has not yet moved in that direction.

I hope he succeeds.

Looks like the jobs are staying. Hatred of Trump aside, isn't that something we should be happy about?

1000 out of 1400, yes, it is a good thing....on the surface. just like last 8 or 8 or 8 or 4 or 8 or 4 or 2 or 6 year stretches of presidents (change years and from prez to congress if you like for my story) , we should also know the details of any deals. and of course one side will love it and the other will hate it. then we should look at how people have felt over the years about similar deals, decide whether their choice is partisan or not......dissect it to the molecular level....and then only then.....will we know if this was a good thing

I think this sets a great tone for the new year. Number one, the PRes -Elect is not just spending time on the golf course. Number two, he is not afraid to pick up the phone and learn about the barriers preventing companies from staying here and is willing to commit to change things. Number three, he is about results.

THis is a small but significant win for the Pres. Elect

i wouldn't start so early with time on the golf course....i mean the man owns golf courses

i guess my state of indiana is paying them 700k to stay? hmmmm....well least people in other states aren't buying these jobs.....they are buying other jobs? what is the message here? is this welfare?....is this a different kind of welfare and does it benefit the employee or the employer....or the taxpayer......i'm just asking......thoughtful responses are appreciated

The only thing wrong with this deal is that it doesn't go far enough, maintaining enough of the jobs and send a stronger signal to other companies.

What cost? What is the cost not to do it?

Laid off workers go on unemployment. After employer sponsored healthcare benefits expire for laid off workers, more subsidies get paid under the Affordable Care Act for their health insurance. Community taxes collected under pay roll taxes evaporate. School districts have less money. Property values fall. Been there, done that. We've been doing that for decades. Not working out too well is it. And you wonder why the rust belt voted Trump? You wonder why blue collar union members voted Trump? Go have a fancy economist tell them again that tax incentivizes for Carrier is a bad thing. You go tell that to the stores in the towns those workers live in. You go tell that to the emergency services people that rely on approved tax levies. Laid off workers don't vote for levies.

You see the domino effect? We can't afford to not do it.

I don't care if they want use the carrot or the stick. We must keep jobs here and we must get more jobs here from both foreign and US companies a like. Doesn't matter to us (US) if it is a corporate tax abatement program to keep people employed here, or tax and tariff penalty program for companies either moving operations outside our border or foreign companies bringing in foreign make goods.

Carrier have alot of government contracts or other UTI companies do alot of business with the government. Good. You tell them, "if they enjoy doing business with the federal government they should think twice about where they invest their next plant (here or foreign country)". You tell them "you better think twice before shuttering your US plant for one in Mexico". Is that a threat? Who the fuck cares. This is serious shit here, you want to keep seeing this country going down the shitter? Then you keep opposing deals like this. Maybe not in your back yard, ok. Who cares about the people in that far off community? This is one country and what happens in every town, city and state effects this country and it effects you whether you know it or not.

To think that this in any way is a bad things is almost beyond my comprehension. Will more companies test the government in order to get deals? If we (US) get what we want / need out of it who cares? We must not only protect existing jobs and build into these deals job expansion requirement or triggers - this is 100% the right direction and it doesn't matter if it is a Democrat or a Republican doing it.

Now, not only will Carrier stand to make less profit due to keeping the plant here with US labor, but they are at a competitive disadvantage to foreign made finished goods.

Look, the components that go into all these assemblies are made and have parts coming from all over the world, for now, we can't change that. First and foremost we need to keep as many of these manufacturing or assembly jobs that we have. Many of the parts that the Indiana plant works with are going to be foreign made, and that is what it is. We need to focus first on what we have and if that is as good as it gets for right now than so be it.

Now, Carrier Corp and it's dealers have to bid residential and commercial goods and services against some of their competitors that do not use any US manufacturing or assembly labor. That puts Carrier at a disadvantage.

So the next step must be to incentivize more foreign made assemblies to be done here. This will work to level the playing field and put less pressure on companies like Carrier to seek foreign labor if less of the competitors they are competing against are benefiting from foreign labor.

Forget what you were taught in the economics class and forget these lock-step economists that look at the world as a global pool of labor, where capital seeks it's biggest return regardless of national boundries. That my friends, is a race to the bottom, not what has happened here with Carrier.

We are Americans. We need to promote, protect and grow jobs in this country. The rest of the world will have to figure out their own situation because we aren't going to let them have our jobs any more.

Again, the only thing wrong here is that it didn't go far enough.

I started following politics and current affairs when I was 14. I'm now 46. That entire time I've heard the gospel of the sacred sanctity of the free market and government just needs to get of the way and stay out of the way.

Apparently all that was BS, now it's by any means necessary.

That was fast.

I started following politics and current affairs when I was 14. I'm now 46. That entire time I've heard the gospel of the sacred sanctity of the free market and government just needs to get of the way and stay out of the way.

Apparently all that was BS, now it's by any means necessary.

That was fast.

Pretty sure you are speaking to the broader philosophy from the right or economists in general. I've been very consistent in my views, any posts you find on the topic in the last 12 years here will prove that. But I'm sure most of the long time members remember how strong I speak on the issue.

What is good in the classroom and in theory hasn't worked well for us. I think it has worked well for the rest of the world at our expense. Economic theory knows no boarders. I want economic and trade policy that is in our favor, one that maximizes the benefits of our market for our workers, communities, state and federal governments. I don't care whether that is how Republicans are supposed to feel because I am not a Republican. The issue may be tougher to square for those belonging to the Republican side of things.

I started following politics and current affairs when I was 14. I'm now 46. That entire time I've heard the gospel of the sacred sanctity of the free market and government just needs to get of the way and stay out of the way.

In many cases, the government should stay out of the way. Namely (particularly) with needless regulation, affirmative action, red tape, confiscatory taxation, fees, licensing, etc.......Long list. As a business operator, I deal with these issues daily, and can guarantee that much of my time is wasted in non-productive tasks that have NOTHING to do with the profitability or well being of my business, nor my employees.

I fail to see how an effort to keep some jobs here is in quite the same realm as the above. Folks have been complaining about "outsourcing" for years, and as soon as someone starts taking action that's not right, either?

Details of the carrots or inducements?

If I was a CEO, I'd be on the phone with the transition team right now.

"Whattaya give me to stay? We weren't even planning on moving, but what ya got?"

Yes the pundits are all over this, somehow I think it would backfire on the company attempting the shakedown, plus until proven otherwise, I think our President Elect is a smarter negotiator than this.

Nebish - thank you for weighing in, thoughtful response !

It is "mind bottling" ( <-- Will Ferrell nod ) to me how some turn this event into a negative.

Some would say this is exactly one of the reasons Trump got elected, his ability to shake things up, unconventional methods, results.

I for one cannot wait to see what else he does.

Now, not only will Carrier stand to make less profit due to keeping the plant here with US labor, but they are at a competitive disadvantage to foreign made finished goods.

Now, Carrier Corp and it's dealers have to bid residential and commercial goods and services against some of their competitors that do not use any US manufacturing or assembly labor. That puts Carrier at a disadvantage.

hmmmm, if that's the case, does not make sense why carrier decided to stay. Maybe I am missing something, but I think more might be revealed today.

http://www.wthr.com/article/trump-pence-coming-to-indianapolis-thursday-to-discuss-carrier-deal

The only thing wrong with this deal is that it doesn't go far enough, maintaining enough of the jobs and send a stronger signal to other companies.

What cost? What is the cost not to do it?

Laid off workers go on unemployment. After employer sponsored healthcare benefits expire for laid off workers, more subsidies get paid under the Affordable Care Act for their health insurance. Community taxes collected under pay roll taxes evaporate. School districts have less money. Property values fall. Been there, done that. We've been doing that for decades. Not working out too well is it. And you wonder why the rust belt voted Trump? You wonder why blue collar union members voted Trump? Go have a fancy economist tell them again that tax incentivizes for Carrier is a bad thing. You go tell that to the stores in the towns those workers live in. You go tell that to the emergency services people that rely on approved tax levies. Laid off workers don't vote for levies.

You see the domino effect? We can't afford to not do it.

I don't care if they want use the carrot or the stick. We must keep jobs here and we must get more jobs here from both foreign and US companies a like. Doesn't matter to us (US) if it is a corporate tax abatement program to keep people employed here, or tax and tariff penalty program for companies either moving operations outside our border or foreign companies bringing in foreign make goods.

Carrier have alot of government contracts or other UTI companies do alot of business with the government. Good. You tell them, "if they enjoy doing business with the federal government they should think twice about where they invest their next plant (here or foreign country)". You tell them "you better think twice before shuttering your US plant for one in Mexico". Is that a threat? Who the fuck cares. This is serious shit here, you want to keep seeing this country going down the shitter? Then you keep opposing deals like this. Maybe not in your back yard, ok. Who cares about the people in that far off community? This is one country and what happens in every town, city and state effects this country and it effects you whether you know it or not.

To think that this in any way is a bad things is almost beyond my comprehension. Will more companies test the government in order to get deals? If we (US) get what we want / need out of it who cares? We must not only protect existing jobs and build into these deals job expansion requirement or triggers - this is 100% the right direction and it doesn't matter if it is a Democrat or a Republican doing it.

Now, not only will Carrier stand to make less profit due to keeping the plant here with US labor, but they are at a competitive disadvantage to foreign made finished goods.

Look, the components that go into all these assemblies are made and have parts coming from all over the world, for now, we can't change that. First and foremost we need to keep as many of these manufacturing or assembly jobs that we have. Many of the parts that the Indiana plant works with are going to be foreign made, and that is what it is. We need to focus first on what we have and if that is as good as it gets for right now than so be it.

Now, Carrier Corp and it's dealers have to bid residential and commercial goods and services against some of their competitors that do not use any US manufacturing or assembly labor. That puts Carrier at a disadvantage.

So the next step must be to incentivize more foreign made assemblies to be done here. This will work to level the playing field and put less pressure on companies like Carrier to seek foreign labor if less of the competitors they are competing against are benefiting from foreign labor.

Forget what you were taught in the economics class and forget these lock-step economists that look at the world as a global pool of labor, where capital seeks it's biggest return regardless of national boundries. That my friends, is a race to the bottom, not what has happened here with Carrier.

We are Americans. We need to promote, protect and grow jobs in this country. The rest of the world will have to figure out their own situation because we aren't going to let them have our jobs any more.

Again, the only thing wrong here is that it didn't go far enough.

So you would agree that repealing Obamacare and privatizing Medicare are also bad ideas? If free market principles have failed in the economic realm and if we are now ready to embrace a mixed economy, should we not extend this rationale to our health and well being? Healthy workers improve productivity and the government should invest in their health. From the posts here it seems that after electing a Republican president and voting in Republican majorities in the Senate and House, there is growing interest in abandoning the central doctrine of the Republican party and that is privatization, privatization and more privatization.

Trump's tax plan totally favors the very rich. It's like he designed it for his family. The Republicans are very eager to pass this package and it will likely come first as it only requires 51 and not 60 votes in the Senate. Given that jobs are going to be saved at Carrier through government intervention, one can at least ask where were the rich? Last winter Charles Koch wrote an interesting essay where he agreed with every point Bernie Sanders was making as he campaigned, except for how these essential remedies should be financed. Koch argued that the private sector and not the public sector should be in charge of this. Now as America needs the Koch brother and other billionaires where are they? They don't seem to be doing anything other than waiting for their tax breaks at which point they will argue there are still too many regulations for them to invest in American jobs and services.

With the Carrier deal Trump might have stumbled onto something and hopefully he has the good sense to transfer any positive benefits into other sectors of America. If he does that Trump will be a very popular president.

hmmmm, if that's the case, does not make sense why carrier decided to stay. Maybe I am missing something, but I think more might be revealed today.

Possibly we will learn more today. It would be good if ALL details are put out for the public to see. I don't know enough to speak to how much is required to be transparent and what does not need to be disclosed. We do know months ago Governor Pence could not give away enough to induce Carrier to stay.

We also have never seen Trump's tax returns. To believe he will release them after an audit is naive. We will never see them. That alone brings a certain amount of suspicion to what's in this deal & how he will govern.

Good for Carrier, but we need to see a big picture policy of how things will operate in the future re: dissuading companies to leave America or entice companies to come here. There can't be actions for a bunch of one-offs.

It is "mind bottling" ( <-- Will Ferrell nod ) to me how some turn this event into a negative.

I don't think it's negative, it's definitely good for the Indianapolis community and the 1000 workers. We just need to know at what cost to tax payers, both state and federal. Will companies threaten to leave for a better deal? Trump can't, and shouldn't, make deals with every single company that finds it more profitable elsewhere. Is this a pyrrhic victory?

I think there is also a surprise of the hypocrisy of a Republican President meddling in private business and state economics. Many are equating it with Nixon going to China, and it's an interesting parallel. It should be interesting moving forward whether this is morning in America or a total disaster.

hmmmm, if that's the case, does not make sense why carrier decided to stay. Maybe I am missing something, but I think more might be revealed today.

Possibly we will learn more today. It would be good if ALL details are put out for the public to see. I don't know enough to speak to how much is required to be transparent and what does not need to be disclosed. We do know months ago Governor Pence could not give away enough to induce Carrier to stay.

We also have never seen Trump's tax returns. To believe he will release them after an audit is naive. We will never see them. That alone brings a certain amount of suspicion to what's in this deal & how he will govern.

Good for Carrier, but we need to see a big picture policy of how things will operate in the future re: dissuading companies to leave America or entice companies to come here. There can't be actions for a bunch of one-offs.

I too an anxious to hear more.

They had said something to the effect of they could save $65 million in wages (not sure over what time span) by moving to Mexico. The tax benefit / incentive package is believed to be in the millions, but the new story I saw implied it was not an equal offset. But there are other factors that could be in play. Remaining a preferred government contractor / supplier. Public Relations for the company. Saving labor is one thing, but there is still the transportation of finished goods to consider and some allowance for damage to product that happens from such transportation. All other factors aside, it makes sense to have your final assembly location close to the market you will be selling the product into. Lots of factors go into it, will be good to know more of what all the moving pieces are.

I agree, there needs to be atleast a rough policy position on how a Trump administration is going to address these issues with other corporations going forward. I do think it needs to be flexible enough to allow for circumstances and negotiations, as in one company may get a better deal than another for a variety of reasons.

So you would agree that repealing Obamacare and privatizing Medicare are also bad ideas? If free market principles have failed in the economic realm and if we are now ready to embrace a mixed economy, should we not extend this rationale to our health and well being? Healthy workers improve productivity and the government should invest in their health. From the posts here it seems that after electing a Republican president and voting in Republican majorities in the Senate and House, there is growing interest in abandoning the central doctrine of the Republican party and that is privatization, privatization and more privatization.

Trump's tax plan totally favors the very rich. It's like he designed it for his family. The Republicans are very eager to pass this package and it will likely come first as it only requires 51 and not 60 votes in the Senate. Given that jobs are going to be saved at Carrier through government intervention, one can at least ask where were the rich? Last winter Charles Koch wrote an interesting essay where he agreed with every point Bernie Sanders was making as he campaigned, except for how these essential remedies should be financed. Koch argued that the private sector and not the public sector should be in charge of this. Now as America needs the Koch brother and other billionaires where are they? They don't seem to be doing anything other than waiting for their tax breaks at which point they will argue there are still too many regulations for them to invest in American jobs and services.

With the Carrier deal Trump might have stumbled onto something and hopefully he has the good sense to transfer any positive benefits into other sectors of America. If he does that Trump will be a very popular president.

I wouldn't say that repealing Obamacare is a bad idea. I don't know if fixes can be implemented within the program and if repeal is more a PR move than anything else, or if it is too much of a mess to be kept and fixed. I do think it is a mess. Do you?

I would be closer to wanting a single payer Medicare for all system than I am with giving the insurance companies more control and profit. My thing has always been that I believe everyone, no matter how rich or how poor, should always have some financial stake in their well-being and health. IE, if a person engages in risky behavior (be that smoking, unhealthy eating habits, participating in sports with high chance of injuries) should bear some burden for the cost of their care for any condition or problem that arises out of the said risky behavior. If you put yourself at risk then you should have to foot some of the bill to fix whatever has gone wrong with you. If we could have a federal system where people are held financially accountable for some of their decisions then I could go for that. I want people to have some meaningful skin in the game for their own care, not just have it 100% funded and subsidized by the federal government.

I'm not sure what you are saying on the rich Americans part or what you want them to do. I suspect most of these people own or run corporations, or many corporations, they invest. Banks and financial institutions rely on their deposits so money can be pumped out for loans and working capital. They buy and sell real estate, often owning more than one home (and paying property taxes and the maintenance on multiple homes). They travel and spend money at resorts. They give to charity. They dine out. They shop at grocery stores and shop online for Christmas gifts. They buy new cars and trucks at the auto dealerships down the road. If you are implying that somehow rich people just sit on their ass and wait to pay less taxes come April I'm pretty sure you are mistaken. A wealthy person's impact in our economy is in fact magnified and often more significant that what any number of people on this forum or that forum do with their money.

As for Trump being popular, I think this is still tricky. The less popular he is with traditional Republicans (the ones that didn't want to support him anyway) and the more popular he is with Democrats (atleast privately) will likely equal a successful 4 years. If he falls in line with conventional Republican thinking then we will have a new President in 4 years.

[Edited on 12/1/2016 by nebish]

I guess i'll wait and see how many dollars per job saved Trump is going to spend vs how many dollars Obama spent per job in the auto bailout (keeping in mind a lot of that was payed back)

I guess i'll wait and see how many dollars per job saved Trump is going to spend vs how many dollars Obama spent per job in the auto bailout (keeping in mind a lot of that was payed back)

One difference that was discussed back during the auto bailout was that if GM would go bankrupt, another company would have to fill the void of cars that GM was producing. Either by buying GM and it's assets and building cars in their existing or by other auto companies upping production to keep the supply chain full of cars that was reduced when GM no longer could do so.

So, it would've been short term pain and lots of it, but many of the laid off workers likely could've found work building cars at the same plant they were previously employed at if another company bought it, or they could relocate to another plant that would likely be adding a 3rd shift to build more cars. And possibly at new plants eventually built by remaining auto companies, again, to fill the void left by GM.

Unless the new cars were going to be built in Mexico, Canada, Japan, Korea, etc at that point we would be down shit creek without a paddle, so it would be imperative for the federal government to take steps to protect auto workers in this country.

In this case, Carrier closes up shop at the Indianapolis, these workers do not have any other job to remain hopeful for. The product is made outside our boarder, the competitors in the field don't need to increase any domestic production so they don't need to hire these laid off workers. The workers will use TRA money and get educated in a field that probably pays less and unfortunately may already be oversaturated with prospective applicants...no hope.

What I'm saying is that I think there is more of a case that if a US company goes bankrupt, and assuming there is still a demand for the goods/services that company offered, eventually those workers can be absorbed back into that same industry. If a US company outsources there becomes little to no natural sequence of events that is going to land them a job comparable to what they had. So then it is almost a better "investment" saving jobs from outsourcing than it is saving them from bankruptcy. One man's opinion.

[Edited on 12/1/2016 by nebish]