Honda Car Forum

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.

http://www.leadercall.com/opinion/lo...ces_printstory

The strange thing is we will never know whether the huge subsidy of the
Tupelo Toyota plant is good or bad for Mississippi.
We know the direct subsidy is $350 million right off the bat. That’s the
amount Mississippi will borrow to aid the Toyota plant. State officials
have yet to disclose the amount of future tax breaks. If the Nissan
plant is a guide, the total subsidy will be about a half billion dollars.
That’s a big chunk of change for 2,000 guaranteed jobs. State officials
are already hinting the final job number may be close to 4,000 but
that’s wishful thinking. Since auto companies have been able to
effectively sell jobs, it’s doubtful they will deliver any more than
their contractual obligation.
So let’s look at the math: a half billion divided by 2,000. That comes
to a whopping $250,000 per job....

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.
>
> http://www.leadercall.com/opinion/lo...ces_printstory
>
> The strange thing is we will never know whether the huge subsidy of the
> Tupelo Toyota plant is good or bad for Mississippi.
> We know the direct subsidy is $350 million right off the bat. That's the
> amount Mississippi will borrow to aid the Toyota plant. State officials
> have yet to disclose the amount of future tax breaks. If the Nissan
> plant is a guide, the total subsidy will be about a half billion dollars.
> That's a big chunk of change for 2,000 guaranteed jobs. State officials
> are already hinting the final job number may be close to 4,000 but
> that's wishful thinking. Since auto companies have been able to
> effectively sell jobs, it's doubtful they will deliver any more than
> their contractual obligation.
> So let's look at the math: a half billion divided by 2,000. That comes
> to a whopping $250,000 per job....

Capitalists are the biggest fans of socialism, and state laws against
subsidizing businesses have never prevented any handouts to them.

"Tim" <jmeth111@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:9497e$4942d33a$cef8ac46$30187@TEKSAVVY.COM...
>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.
>
> http://www.leadercall.com/opinion/lo...ces_printstory
>
> The strange thing is we will never know whether the huge subsidy of the
> Tupelo Toyota plant is good or bad for Mississippi.
> We know the direct subsidy is $350 million right off the bat. That’s the
> amount Mississippi will borrow to aid the Toyota plant. State officials
> have yet to disclose the amount of future tax breaks. If the Nissan plant
> is a guide, the total subsidy will be about a half billion dollars.
> That’s a big chunk of change for 2,000 guaranteed jobs. State officials
> are already hinting the final job number may be close to 4,000 but that’s
> wishful thinking. Since auto companies have been able to effectively sell
> jobs, it’s doubtful they will deliver any more than their contractual
> obligation.
> So let’s look at the math: a half billion divided by 2,000. That comes to
> a whopping $250,000 per job....


Hopefully you'll stay focused on this concept. It goes on constantly with
lots of businesses, including Wal Mart and others you're highly aware of.

"JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:fSA0l.26322$v37.200@newsfe01.iad...
> Hopefully you'll stay focused on this concept. It goes on constantly with
> lots of businesses, including Wal Mart and others you're highly aware of.

It happens with all business, depending on the size of the business and how
many jobs, tax revenue, property tax revenue, etc it brings into the city,
state, etc. No one is forcing the city or state to do this, but financial
analysis shows that it is beneficial. You take a bunch of undeveloped land
and make a factory or store, and now the property taxes or sales taxes being
generated are huge, and offset the initial tax breaks or infrastructure
development required (there would be zero taxes to give breaks on if they
don't have incentive to move their business there). Then on top of the
business by itself, you have the property tax and income revenue from the
new employees, and then the multiplier effect of the money that they spend
at other businesses.

This is not about capitalism vs. socialism, this is about democracy versus
totalitarianism. There are dictators like JoeSpareBedroom who want to tell
other people how to run other people's city or state, even though he doesn't
even live there. In a democracy, majority rules and if you don't like it you
can move to the Peoples Republic of Berkley or some other suitable place
that you will happier living in.

"Mark A" <someone@someone.com> wrote in message
news:diB0l.7128$YU6.897@bignews8.bellsouth.net...
> "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:fSA0l.26322$v37.200@newsfe01.iad...
>> Hopefully you'll stay focused on this concept. It goes on constantly with
>> lots of businesses, including Wal Mart and others you're highly aware of.
>
> It happens with all business, depending on the size of the business and
> how many jobs, tax revenue, property tax revenue, etc it brings into the
> city, state, etc. No one is forcing the city or state to do this, but
> financial analysis shows that it is beneficial. You take a bunch of
> undeveloped land and make a factory or store, and now the property taxes
> or sales taxes being generated are huge, and offset the initial tax breaks
> or infrastructure development required (there would be zero taxes to give
> breaks on if they don't have incentive to move their business there). Then
> on top of the business by itself, you have the property tax and income
> revenue from the new employees, and then the multiplier effect of the
> money that they spend at other businesses.
>
> This is not about capitalism vs. socialism, this is about democracy versus
> totalitarianism. There are dictators like JoeSpareBedroom who want to tell
> other people how to run other people's city or state, even though he
> doesn't even live there. In a democracy, majority rules and if you don't
> like it you can move to the Peoples Republic of Berkley or some other
> suitable place that you will happier living in.


Financial analysis does not always show that it is beneficial. Be careful
with your generalizations. You will now respond in a predictable fashion.

Mark A wrote:
> "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:fSA0l.26322$v37.200@newsfe01.iad...
>> Hopefully you'll stay focused on this concept. It goes on constantly with
>> lots of businesses, including Wal Mart and others you're highly aware of.
>
> It happens with all business, depending on the size of the business and how
> many jobs, tax revenue, property tax revenue, etc it brings into the city,
> state, etc. No one is forcing the city or state to do this, but financial
> analysis shows that it is beneficial. You take a bunch of undeveloped land
> and make a factory or store, and now the property taxes or sales taxes being
> generated are huge, and offset the initial tax breaks or infrastructure
> development required (there would be zero taxes to give breaks on if they
> don't have incentive to move their business there). Then on top of the
> business by itself, you have the property tax and income revenue from the
> new employees, and then the multiplier effect of the money that they spend
> at other businesses.
>
> This is not about capitalism vs. socialism, this is about democracy versus
> totalitarianism. There are dictators like JoeSpareBedroom who want to tell
> other people how to run other people's city or state, even though he doesn't
> even live there. In a democracy, majority rules and if you don't like it you
> can move to the Peoples Republic of Berkley or some other suitable place
> that you will happier living in.
>

Still taxpayer funding. Is it as bad as a loan in poor economic times?
People seem to think it's just the Big Three that are asking for
taxpayer handouts.

"Tim" <jmeth111@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:86b51$4942e42a$cef8ac46$10710@TEKSAVVY.COM...
> Mark A wrote:
>> "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:fSA0l.26322$v37.200@newsfe01.iad...
>>> Hopefully you'll stay focused on this concept. It goes on constantly
>>> with lots of businesses, including Wal Mart and others you're highly
>>> aware of.
>>
>> It happens with all business, depending on the size of the business and
>> how many jobs, tax revenue, property tax revenue, etc it brings into the
>> city, state, etc. No one is forcing the city or state to do this, but
>> financial analysis shows that it is beneficial. You take a bunch of
>> undeveloped land and make a factory or store, and now the property taxes
>> or sales taxes being generated are huge, and offset the initial tax
>> breaks or infrastructure development required (there would be zero taxes
>> to give breaks on if they don't have incentive to move their business
>> there). Then on top of the business by itself, you have the property tax
>> and income revenue from the new employees, and then the multiplier effect
>> of the money that they spend at other businesses.
>>
>> This is not about capitalism vs. socialism, this is about democracy
>> versus totalitarianism. There are dictators like JoeSpareBedroom who want
>> to tell other people how to run other people's city or state, even though
>> he doesn't even live there. In a democracy, majority rules and if you
>> don't like it you can move to the Peoples Republic of Berkley or some
>> other suitable place that you will happier living in.
>
> Still taxpayer funding. Is it as bad as a loan in poor economic times?
> People seem to think it's just the Big Three that are asking for taxpayer
> handouts.


......especially to companies which have proven that they aren't being run in
a competent fashion, and have no clear plan for fixing that problem.

Part of the deal is "narrow mindedness"....

Mississippi will offer a large employer (this, BTW, goes on all over the
place) tax incentives to open their business in a particular area.... The
idea is to offer fair pay for the skills required. Is this a handout? Or is
it a fair trade off for an economic stimulus?

This will decrease unemployment numbers, put people to work for wages that
are fair in terms of skills and knowledge required and, in general,
stimulate the local economy.

Quite a it different from autoworkers that are doing much better (in terms
of wages and benefits) than those people that defend their stance... Ones
wage is one thing... Your wage may be $20 per hour... Your cost to your
wmployer is quite another thing... and, in the case of a UAW employee, your
cost to your employer could be as much as $70 per hour.

Tunnel vision runs rampant in some regions.... even though it is often the
biggest part of the problem.



"Tim" <jmeth111@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:9497e$4942d33a$cef8ac46$30187@TEKSAVVY.COM...
>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.
>
> http://www.leadercall.com/opinion/lo...ces_printstory
>
> The strange thing is we will never know whether the huge subsidy of the
> Tupelo Toyota plant is good or bad for Mississippi.
> We know the direct subsidy is $350 million right off the bat. That’s the
> amount Mississippi will borrow to aid the Toyota plant. State officials
> have yet to disclose the amount of future tax breaks. If the Nissan plant
> is a guide, the total subsidy will be about a half billion dollars.
> That’s a big chunk of change for 2,000 guaranteed jobs. State officials
> are already hinting the final job number may be close to 4,000 but that’s
> wishful thinking. Since auto companies have been able to effectively sell
> jobs, it’s doubtful they will deliver any more than their contractual
> obligation.
> So let’s look at the math: a half billion divided by 2,000. That comes to
> a whopping $250,000 per job....

larry moe 'n curly wrote:
> Capitalists are the biggest fans of socialism,

"trickle down" socialism. why? because they get to skim the cream off
the top. look at the banking debacle. bankers stuffed themselves with
commissions for handing out crappy loans they knew wouldnt get paid off.
then when the shit hits the fan, they ask for (and get) 700 billion
dollars. first thing they do? more bonuses, vacations, and retreats for
the awesome job they did.

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.