Honda Car Forum

Hachiroku ãƒ�ãƒ�ãƒ*ク wrote:

> On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 22:38:05 -0500, News wrote:
>
>
>>>Only problem is, Toyota makes a *profit*.
>>>
>>>YEah, setting up a company that operates at a loss is pretty stupid,
>>>isn't it?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Profit or loss is not the issue.
>>
>>The issue is municipalities issuing incentives to steal other
>>municipalities' businesses and tax revenues.
>>
>>Not even a zero sum game, a race to the bottom.
>
>
> How do you figure?
>
> Toyota is still turning a profit even though sales are down.
>
> GM shows a loss on the auto business when cars are selling. They make
> their money on financials.
>
> Toyota keeps people employed even when the plant is shutdown.
>
> All that adds up to taxes coming in.
>


Yes, and less taxes, less services, less disposable income, less
charity, less, less, less, less.

Enjoy your race to the bottom. First one there loses, big time.

On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 22:38:05 -0500, News wrote:

>> Only problem is, Toyota makes a *profit*.
>>
>> YEah, setting up a company that operates at a loss is pretty stupid,
>> isn't it?
>>
>>
>
> Profit or loss is not the issue.
>
> The issue is municipalities issuing incentives to steal other
> municipalities' businesses and tax revenues.
>
> Not even a zero sum game, a race to the bottom.

How do you figure?

Toyota is still turning a profit even though sales are down.

GM shows a loss on the auto business when cars are selling. They make
their money on financials.

Toyota keeps people employed even when the plant is shutdown.

All that adds up to taxes coming in.

On Dec 13, 10:38 pm, News <N...@Group.name> wrote:
> Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/(B wrote:
> > On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 19:32:49 -0500, News wrote:
>
> >>Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/(B wrote:
>
> >>>On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 17:59:34 -0500, Tim wrote:
>
> >>>>Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/(B wrote:
>
> >>>>>On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 16:10:18 -0500, Tim wrote:
>
> >>>>>>I don't think this is a loan, is it? It is giving Toyota the money to
> >>>>>>pay these workers wages for 7 or 8 years, from the taxpayer and workers
> >>>>>>themselves. This is what has to stop.
>
> >>>>>It's called getting the manufacturer into your area. See, they aren't
> >>>>>dumb. They know that 4,000 underemployed people put more of a drain on the
> >>>>>system than giving the manufacturer a tax break. it works well because
> >>>>>instead of having 4,000 people making minimum wage, paying taxes at the
> >>>>>minimum wage rate, and often asking for assistance such as fuel assistance
> >>>>>or Food Stamps, you now have 4,000 people paying IN taxes at a higher rate.
> >>>>>While they may not be making as much as if they had 4,000 people paying
> >>>>>higher taxes AND a corporation paying taxes, they are still coming out
> >>>>>ahead.
>
> >>>>>This is where 'trickle-down' works. Now you have 4,000 people with REAL
> >>>>>wages and more disposable income, so more people are going to open shops
> >>>>>in the area, and again the 'lost' taxes are more than compensated.
>
> >>>>>So, they didn't really give anything away. They're probably laughing their
> >>>>>asses off at Detroit.
>
> >>>>So you pay $250,000.00 per job? So you use taxes to pay the wages from
> >>>>which taxes are then deducted.
> >>>>You must be an economist.
>
> >>>They aren't 'paying' anything. They have given Toyota tax breaks for
> >>>moving the factory into the town.
>
> >>>In the long run, it makes economic sense. Like I said, 4-6,000 people
> >>>*working* is a lot better than 4-6,000 people NOT working, or making
> >>>minimum wage.
>
> >>>The tax incentive will run out, and then the factory will be paying taxes.
>
> >>>The town is coming out ahead.
>
> >>Yeah, just setting up a race to the bottom.
>
> >>Ask Indianapolis how their big maintenance hangar deal worked out.
>
> > Only problem is, Toyota makes a *profit*.
>
> > YEah, setting up a company that operates at a loss is pretty stupid,
> > isn't it?
>
> Profit or loss is not the issue.
>
> The issue is municipalities issuing incentives to steal other
> municipalities' businesses and tax revenues.
>
> Not even a zero sum game, a race to the bottom.

The rightwingnuts can't comprehend anything beyond rightwingnut
rhetoric.

"JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis@yahoo.com> wrote in message
newsC%0l.4960$%z5.4352@newsfe09.iad...
> Close attention to the workings of your city or town council will reveal
> that such dealings are not always based on good business sense.
> Unfortunately, such close attention might require ripping yourself away
> from television once or twice a month.

Not everyone exercises good business sense all the time. But sometimes they
are good business sense. But the bottom line is that in a democracy, the
majority rules, and if you don't like it you can try to elect someone else
or move.

"News" <News@Group.name> wrote in message
news:V9SdnZ4jBJseG9nUnZ2dnUVZ_jGdnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
> Yes, and less taxes, less services, less disposable income, less charity,
> less, less, less, less.
>
> Enjoy your race to the bottom. First one there loses, big time.

How can it be less? When there was nothing but farm land or undeveloped (and
untaxed) land there is no real estate tax, no sales tax, no payroll, no
economic development. If they don't get the tax breaks in the US, they will
build cars offshore.

Speaking of tax breaks for automakers, does that mean you are against a
government bailout of GM and Chrysler?

On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 20:26:44 -0800, edspyhill01@yahoo.com wrote:

>> > Only problem is, Toyota makes a *profit*.
>>
>> > YEah, setting up a company that operates at a loss is pretty stupid,
>> > isn't it?
>>
>> Profit or loss is not the issue.
>>
>> The issue is municipalities issuing incentives to steal other
>> municipalities' businesses and tax revenues.
>>
>> Not even a zero sum game, a race to the bottom.
>
> The rightwingnuts can't comprehend anything beyond rightwingnut
> rhetoric.

To the contrary; we know that it's better to have people working than to
be asking the government for money.

The L00ney Left can't seem to grasp that WORK is better than Welfare.

On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 23:07:26 -0500, News wrote:

>> How do you figure?
>>
>> Toyota is still turning a profit even though sales are down.
>>
>> GM shows a loss on the auto business when cars are selling. They make
>> their money on financials.
>>
>> Toyota keeps people employed even when the plant is shutdown.
>>
>> All that adds up to taxes coming in.
>>
>
>
> Yes, and less taxes, less services, less disposable income, less
> charity, less, less, less, less.

Huh? Why am I even discussing this with you?

In some areas, all there were were minimum wage jobs. Toyota came in and
started paying wages competitive with some Union scale jobs.

So, rather than making $6.75 an hour, Joe Blow is now making $19 an hour.

And he doesn't have disposable income?

Please...explain this one to me. I *REALLY* want to hear how you came up
with this.

On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 23:35:13 -0500, Mark A wrote:

> "News" <News@Group.name> wrote in message
> news:V9SdnZ4jBJseG9nUnZ2dnUVZ_jGdnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>> Yes, and less taxes, less services, less disposable income, less charity,
>> less, less, less, less.
>>
>> Enjoy your race to the bottom. First one there loses, big time.
>
> How can it be less? When there was nothing but farm land or undeveloped (and
> untaxed) land there is no real estate tax, no sales tax, no payroll, no
> economic development. If they don't get the tax breaks in the US, they will
> build cars offshore.

Wow. Usually I dont; have trouble with Pretzel Logic, but this one is
giving me a headache. Raising people's wages causes lower bottom line?

I suppose if you're dependent upon the government for everything this
would make sense, but as a working person, I can't see it. Go into an area
with minimum wage jobs with jobs that pay $19+ per hour, and it's a losing
situation?

Back in 1995 I was working for GE in their Help Desk for the Plastics
division. There was a guy in Mt Vernon IN that had gotten a job with
another company, going from Desktop Support to Network Admin.
I like working with my hands as much as with my brain, so I looked into
the position. He said he would give me a recommendation.

The job paid $16 an hour. Toyota had just opened a truck plant in
Evansville, 7 miles down the road, and was paying about $14. I work at GE,
my wife works at Toyota. Not only that, but nice 3-4 bedroom houses were
going for $50,000!!!

We didn't so it because my wife decided she didn't want to move that far
from her family. Shoot. $6,000 a month with a $50,000 mortgage? Sounds
like Fat City to me!


>
> Speaking of tax breaks for automakers, does that mean you are against a
> government bailout of GM and Chrysler?


That's not a tax break! That's just GIVING them the money!

On Dec 13, 11:56 pm, Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/(B <Tru...@e86.GTS> wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 20:26:44 -0800, edspyhil...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >> > Only problem is, Toyota makes a *profit*.
>
> >> > YEah, setting up a company that operates at a loss is pretty stupid,
> >> > isn't it?
>
> >> Profit or loss is not the issue.
>
> >> The issue is municipalities issuing incentives to steal other
> >> municipalities' businesses and tax revenues.
>
> >> Not even a zero sum game, a race to the bottom.
>
> > The rightwingnuts can't comprehend anything beyond rightwingnut
> > rhetoric.
>
> To the contrary; we know that it's better to have people working than to
> be asking the government for money.
>
> The L00ney Left can't seem to grasp that WORK is better than Welfare.

You want work at slave labor ages. The only purpose of the republican
filibuster is to break the UAW union. Republicans memos said just
that. You are one of the old farts here that is beyond the tome/age
of raising kids, buying houses, making a life, building a family life
and safing fo reducations and retirements. Old people should not be
allowed to vote once retired - by then they've become mean, nasty,
ornery, and just plan miserable.

Hachiroku ãƒ�ãƒ�ãƒ*ク wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 23:07:26 -0500, News wrote:
>
>
>>>How do you figure?
>>>
>>>Toyota is still turning a profit even though sales are down.
>>>
>>>GM shows a loss on the auto business when cars are selling. They make
>>>their money on financials.
>>>
>>>Toyota keeps people employed even when the plant is shutdown.
>>>
>>>All that adds up to taxes coming in.
>>>
>>
>>
>>Yes, and less taxes, less services, less disposable income, less
>>charity, less, less, less, less.
>
>
> Huh? Why am I even discussing this with you?
>
> In some areas, all there were were minimum wage jobs. Toyota came in and
> started paying wages competitive with some Union scale jobs.
>
> So, rather than making $6.75 an hour, Joe Blow is now making $19 an hour.
>
> And he doesn't have disposable income?
>
> Please...explain this one to me. I *REALLY* want to hear how you came up
> with this.
>


I know this is difficult for you, but some other Joe Blow USED TO BE
making $40/hr. Hence the race to the bottom.