Trump acting as President

[Woobie]

Getting back to the Carrier deal, I do not think the $7 million in incentives had much to do with this.

The wage differential I heard was $3 an hour vs. $26 an hour. That's a delta of $23 an hour, or $46k per year, per employee. There were going to be $65 Million in savings, with that wage differential multiplied across 1400 employees. And now - we really believe Carrier is going to settle for $37 Million LESS in savings, PER YEAR, in exchange for a measly $7 Million in incentives?

No. They were either shamed into keeping some jobs...they genuinely thought this was worth it to get Trump's ear for a while...or...they were worried about their Government contracts.

Here's a NYT article which seems to suggest some of the points above:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/01/business/economy/trump-carrier-pence-jobs.html?_r=0

The folks stressing the "crony incentives" angle are mostly getting it wrong. They should be playing the "authoritarian" angle. This was a "one-off" deal, precisely because the specific characteristics of this particular deal-target made them more willing to deal than other companies might be. It turns out the incentives were the least part of it. This company is into the taxpayer, Bigly, and wants to stay that way.

(excerpt, for those who care about the details):

"...United Technologies, Carrier’s parent, saw the writing on the wall as soon as Mr. Trump declared victory last month. Offering to preserve jobs, even at the cost of some of the $65 million savings the company expected from the move, could serve its larger corporate interests.“Every penny counts, but if we step back and I’m looking at earnings of $6.60 per share this year, 2 cents is an easy concession if the president-elect listens to some of the company’s bigger concerns,” said Howard Rubel, a senior equity analyst with Jefferies, an investment banking firm in New York.
And Mr. Trump and Mr. Pence, while providing a carrot through the state incentives and promises of future business tax cuts, held an implicit stick: the threat of pulling federal contracts from Carrier’s parent, United Technologies. Mr. Trump and his team were well aware that the amount United Technologies stood to lose in those contracts dwarfed the savings from moving some of its operations to Monterrey from Indiana.
Despite only accomplishing half of what had been promised in the campaign, Mr. Trump and Mr. Pence predicted that the number of jobs ultimately preserved could rise as Carrier follows through on its promise to invest more than $16 million in the state.
That provision, plus the incentives, were worked out between Carrier and officials from the state of Indiana’s economic development office, with Mr. Pence overseeing the process.

The vice president-elect insisted that the incentives did not represent a giveaway on Mr. Trump’s part, and claimed United Technologies had turned down a similar-size package of breaks in March.
What made the difference, he said, was Mr. Trump’s public pressure, as well his promise to cut corporate taxes and ease regulation.
“These jobs were gone,” Mr. Pence said. “I sat the executives down in my governor’s office in the statehouse in early March. They said we aren’t in a position to reconsider this in any way, shape or form.”
Mr. Trump, too, played down the role of the incentives. And he said he did not directly raise the $5 billion to $6 billion in federal contracts United Technologies receives, much of it from the Pentagon.
But company officials are acutely aware that its Pratt & Whitney unit, among other things, supplies jet engines to the Air Force’s most advanced fighter and many other planes, making it much more vulnerable to political pressure than other, lesser-known manufacturers that have been steadily closing shop in the Midwest and moving production south of the border.
“It may have a played a role in their equation,” Mr. Trump allowed. “I never mentioned it. I didn’t feel I had to.”

Sheesh. It's almost like someone in here was saying this all along. Now I wonder, who could that have been?

 

[churchmouse]

Sheesh. It's almost like someone in here was saying this all along. Now I wonder, who could that have been?

Hung with a new rope.
People will be slicing up every move he makes until (and even beyond) him proving his intentions are for "US".........

 

[Twangbanger]

...People will be slicing up every move he makes until (and even beyond) him proving his intentions are for "US".........

Ooh...this comment will get them hopping Church.

Did anybody catch the little tidbit about how the total impact of this entire plan to UTC's bottom line is less than 4 cents a share? On a company that is earning $7 a share? You're going to devastate the lives of over 2,000 people who built your products, so you can elevate your earnings per share from $6.56 to $6.60?

But I'm less surprised by them, than by INGO. Globalists are actively trying to figure out how to reduce people back to the normal human condition of slavery, while we debate Constitutional arcana. Exhibit "A" why vast numbers of people think Republicans don't give a sxxt about them; and they're right. You'd think we would learn; people sitting in the poorhouse with a copy of the Constitution shoved up their azzes generally are not good advocates of Liberty.

 

[hoosierdoc]

I heard that stat. Really made me think this was the beginning of their move south, not the end of it. Just didn't make sense to move such a small amount

 

[Kutnupe14]

Soooo, since we're talking about jobs. Wasn't there an jobs report that just came out. Anyone willing to say something positive about that?

Kut (wonders how this will be spun)

 

[Cemetery-man]

I'm glad for them. There's a 1000+ people in Indy whose holidays will be a lot more 'merry' this year. Good for Trump/Pence!

 

[jamil]

Nevertrumpers gonna nevertrump.

You really think that's what this is about? I voted for Trump. But I'm not going to ignore the things Trump does that I would have criticized Obama for if he had done them.

Sheesh. It's almost like someone in here was saying this all along. Now I wonder, who could that have been?

Those were some facts that change the discussion.

Hung with a new rope.
People will be slicing up every move he makes until (and even beyond) him proving his intentions are for "US".........

Isn't that supposed to be the job of the electorate? Why would we trust people we give that kind of power to? Why would we not criticize the POTUS just because we voted for him? The way it was looking, it had crony capitalism written all over it. And now we've thrown in some good old fashioned back room arm breaking.

Ooh...this comment will get them hopping Church.

Did anybody catch the little tidbit about how the total impact of this entire plan to UTC's bottom line is less than 4 cents a share? On a company that is earning $7 a share? You're going to devastate the lives of over 2,000 people who built your products, so you can elevate your earnings per share from $6.56 to $6.60?

But I'm less surprised by them, than by INGO. Globalists are actively trying to figure out how to reduce people back to the normal human condition of slavery, while we debate Constitutional arcana. Exhibit "A" why vast numbers of people think Republicans don't give a sxxt about them; and they're right. You'd think we would learn; people sitting in the poorhouse with a copy of the Constitution shoved up their azzes generally are not good advocates of Liberty.

Yeah, I saw that. I think I agree with hoosierdoc that they were looking to make a migration.

Oh, and I'm not a globalist. But I also think the reasoning you ascribe to what the globalists are up to has a fair touch of hyperbole. I think it's simpler than that. It's as cause/effect as anything. I think they want to turn that $.04/share to more. It's not that they want something particular for normal people. I think they don't care about that. But OMG, the New York billionaire persimmon god-king will save us from the evil billionaires by threatening to break their legs.

 

[churchmouse]

With some it really is. Maybe not so much you but seriously, look at the deal and how it came down. The Tax thing had to be on the table from Carson and his bunch. Trump/Pence stepped in and made them take that to save face I would imagine. They took what the state officials had already put on the table and ran with it. Folks were real quick to throw Trump/Pence under the bus. The art of the deal.

It seems the microscope will be focused squarely on Trump which is odd as that same looking glass could never seem to find the big "O" when he was cooking up his deals behind the closed doors.

This will be interesting to watch as it unfolds.

And yes, it is our job to hold those elected to the task at hand. Again, so poorly done by the electorate over the last 8 years.

Wonder if Trump could play golf at all with out being ripped by the media.

 

[churchmouse]

Soooo, since we're talking about jobs. Wasn't there an jobs report that just came out. Anyone willing to say something positive about that?

Kut (wonders how this will be spun)

Not seen this......

 

[foszoe]

Soooo, since we're talking about jobs. Wasn't there an jobs report that just came out. Anyone willing to say something positive about that?

Kut (wonders how this will be spun)

The reply will be lower wages and lower labor participation rates

 

[Brad69]

When President Obama was asked about Carrier in June he said the jobs were gone nothing could be done. He went on to say that Trump was not going to save the jobs it was impossible!
Ford is now starting negotiations, Apple is researching how to build phones in the U.S. China is pooping itself!
This is all before the man has put his hand on the Bible.
I wonder if HRC had won what would the 1,000 families be doing?

 

[churchmouse]

When President Obama was asked about Carrier in June he said the jobs were gone nothing could be done. He went on to say that Trump was not going to save the jobs it was impossible!
Ford is now starting negotiations, Apple is researching how to build phones in the U.S. China is pooping itself!
This is all before the man has put his hand on the Bible.
I wonder if HRC had won what would the 1,000 families be doing?

Her and the big "O" could give a **** about anyone outside their circle.

 

[jamil]

Soooo, since we're talking about jobs. Wasn't there an jobs report that just came out. Anyone willing to say something positive about that?

Kut (wonders how this will be spun)

Spun? How about not cherry picking?

Yeah. The unemployment rate looks better than it has in decades. But why not talk about the economy as a whole?

Here's horrendously right wing rag New York Time's "spin".

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/02/upshot/the-new-jobs-numbers-signal-the-end-of-an-economic-era.html

One way to see an increase in the the employment rate is to get a higher percentage of the public working--the numerator. Another way is to decrease the number of people in the job market--the denominator. If you're going to say the unemployment rate is a barometer for Obama's economic policies you need to present the whole story and accept the results of the whole story. Remove 4% from the denominator and the sub-5% unemployment isn't exactly the same good news that it was 10 years ago.

I'm not saying Obama is completely responsible for the drop in labor participation. The mortgage meltdown due to Democratic policies mostly did that. But a pretty good chunk of the labor market dropped out during the period for that 4.6%. That does make the numbers mean something different. And it does tend to indict Obama's policies. If you dangle a carrot over the door where people get free **** instead of having to work for it, and you dangle a stick in front of the door for earning your own ****, people will generally take the "free ****" door.

Also what about the quality of jobs? And what about GDP? In which sectors is the primary growth in jobs and GDP? Are those the sectors most helpful for sustained growth?

I generally think the market will typically find a way to work the best way it can despite a president's meddling policies. A president doesn't make the economy better. The president can impede the market more or less. Still the market has worked despite Obama's impediments, and is in shape to thrive given the right leadership. If Trump actually does what he says he's going to do, and the sum of his economic policies actually remove the impediments to making stuff here, we will see the denominator grow along with the numerator. And we'll again see those 4-5% GDP numbers.

And I think at this point, that's still a big "if". He says he's going to cut ridiculous regulations, but then Ivanka says she wants to make fighting climate change one of her signature issues. WFT? That doesn't inspire confidence that President Trump will do a whole lot to remove the ridiculous EPA regs. But I'll bet your salary that the ridiculous real estate regs will be slashed.

 

[spec4]

Ivanka buying into the climate change hoax is not a good thing. Have to see where this goes.

 

[jamil]

With some it really is. Maybe not so much you but seriously, look at the deal and how it came down. The Tax thing had to be on the table from Carson and his bunch. Trump/Pence stepped in and made them take that to save face I would imagine. They took what the state officials had already put on the table and ran with it. Folks were real quick to throw Trump/Pence under the bus. The art of the deal.

It seems the microscope will be focused squarely on Trump which is odd as that same looking glass could never seem to find the big "O" when he was cooking up his deals behind the closed doors.

This will be interesting to watch as it unfolds.

And yes, it is our job to hold those elected to the task at hand. Again, so poorly done by the electorate over the last 8 years.

Wonder if Trump could play golf at all with out being ripped by the media.

On INGO the microscope was always on Obama, which is as it should be. And it should be on Trump too. But as far as the electorate goes, and as especially an indictment on the media, I wish they'd have had a microscope on Obama all this time. I hate that when we switch parties in charge, everything switches. The in charge party's supporters stop holding their guy accountable, and the opposition party starts scrutinizing more. Everyone should always be scrutinizing power. That's how we hold them accountable and it's how we maintain our liberties.

Trump probably shouldn't have said he won't be playing golf. If he ever does, the press will absolutely tee off on him much worse than the right teed off on Obama.

 

[Jludo]

From what I gather many here believe it's a good idea for state governments to have a wing that selectively doles out tax breaks and incentives to particular companies if it saves/creates jobs?

 

[jamil]

Ivanka buying into the climate change hoax is not a good thing. Have to see where this goes.

Ivanka's convention speech is one of the things that turned me further against Trump. That speech would have been applauded at the DNC. Ivanka is a Democrat in her heart. That gives me pause about Trump's inner thoughts as compared with his outward rhetoric.

 

[jamil]

From what I gather many here believe it's a good idea for state governments to have a wing that selectively doles out tax breaks and incentives to particular companies if it saves/creates jobs?

It's a lost cause. Because is what it is and stuff. Right?

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Spun? How about not cherry picking?

Yeah. The unemployment rate looks better than it has in decades. But why not talk about the economy as a whole?

Here's horrendously right wing rag New York Time's "spin".

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/02/upshot/the-new-jobs-numbers-signal-the-end-of-an-economic-era.html

One way to see an increase in the the employment rate is to get a higher percentage of the public working--the numerator. Another way is to decrease the number of people in the job market--the denominator. If you're going to say the unemployment rate is a barometer for Obama's economic policies you need to present the whole story and accept the results of the whole story. Remove 4% from the denominator and the sub-5% unemployment isn't exactly the same good news that it was 10 years ago.

I'm not saying Obama is completely responsible for the drop in labor participation. The mortgage meltdown due to Democratic policies mostly did that. But a pretty good chunk of the labor market dropped out during the period for that 4.6%. That does make the numbers mean something different. And it does tend to indict Obama's policies. If you dangle a carrot over the door where people get free **** instead of having to work for it, and you dangle a stick in front of the door for earning your own ****, people will generally take the "free ****" door.

Also what about the quality of jobs? And what about GDP? In which sectors is the primary growth in jobs and GDP? Are those the sectors most helpful for sustained growth?

I generally think the market will typically find a way to work the best way it can despite a president's meddling policies. A president doesn't make the economy better. The president can impede the market more or less. Still the market has worked despite Obama's impediments, and is in shape to thrive given the right leadership. If Trump actually does what he says he's going to do, and the sum of his economic policies actually remove the impediments to making stuff here, we will see the denominator grow along with the numerator. And we'll again see those 4-5% GDP numbers.

And I think at this point, that's still a big "if". He says he's going to cut ridiculous regulations, but then Ivanka says she wants to make fighting climate change one of her signature issues. WFT? That doesn't inspire confidence that President Trump will do a whole lot to remove the ridiculous EPA regs. But I'll bet your salary that the ridiculous real estate regs will be slashed.

But Mr. Trump will be inheriting an economy largely healed from its trauma of the last nine years, and with most indicators pointing in the right direction.

Here in a couple months, the news reports of single moms falling behind because all they can find is McJobs will once again be head lining the news. All those working aged men that are largely ignored will be paraded back into the public eye when the "journalists" once again decide there is news in their stories of greedy businessmen leaving them behind in quest of $0.04 in stock prices.

I hope those "journalists" stretch first though...After 8 years of not having to bend over backwards and twisting and distorting to get their stories out, they're likely to be rather stiff and out of condition--they might pull something.

 

[jamil]

But Mr. Trump will be inheriting an economy largely healed from its trauma of the last nine years, and with most indicators pointing in the right direction. ]

Here in a couple months, the news reports of single moms falling behind because all they can find is McJobs will once again be head lining the news. All those working aged men that are largely ignored will be paraded back into the public eye when the "journalists" once again decide there is news in their stories of greedy businessmen leaving them behind in quest of $0.04 in stock prices.

I hope those "journalists" stretch first though...After 8 years of not having to bend over backwards and twisting and distorting to get their stories out, they're likely to be rather stiff and out of condition--they might pull something.

About the double standard, I removed that part of the post because of length. But I remember the left saying that about the Bush economy. But they can't seem to apply the same standards now.