Should the President offer tax breaks to individual companies to keep jobs in the U.S.?
In March 2016, the Carrier air conditioning company announced it would move 1,400 jobs from the U.S. state of Indiana to Mexico. In November 2016 U.S. President elect Donald Trump and Carrier announced a deal which would keep 1,000 jobs in Indiana in exchange for $7 million in tax breaks. Proponents argue that the deal prevented jobs from moving overseas and will help grow the U.S. economy. Opponents argue that the deal will encourage more private companies to make threats about job losses in exchange for tax breaks.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Discussions from these authors are shown:
Voting for candidate:
Zipcode:
Depends on the company. Sometimes yes but it's a complicated issue with a lot of pieces and effects
No, and companies who send jobs overseas should be seized by the government and liquidated to all impacted labor within the company.
It should be illegal to offer a job to an overseas company or subsidiary while there is an unemployed American that can be trained and hired to perform the role.
No, unemployment insurance should be sufficient for people to live off of, and in the first place, the government shouldn't let companies, especially banks, make overly risky investments and cause recessions which lead to unemployment.
No, the incentive should be that if private corporations want to do that, then the government would support publicly owned businesses (or private businesses that decide to stay) like worker-coops that hire within the country.
The companies are already making enough money to pay their workers enough, but CEOs often pocket the money.
Yes, but there should be harsher penalties for companies illegally outsourcing labor to cheaper countries from America
The president should take one from Xi's book and straight up execute billionaires whom act against the state.
No, instead the U.S. should use exit taxes and capital controls to disincentivize moving jobs and capital out of the U.S.
No, but other means should be used to prevent larger corporations from predatorily using cheap labor in other countries.
No, Companies should be heavily regulated to discourage exporting jobs outside of the U.S.
No, nationalize all industry.
No, but require companies to give the workers ownership of the abandoned facilities
No, and other countries should disincentivise outsourcing.
No, no one in the federal government should be allowed to give large corporations special treatment.
No, but the government should make sure that companies are not taking advantage of foreign slave labor and make sure that foreign workers are compensated fairly.
The government should take partial or whole ownership of key domestic industries
No, the government should tax their products at a rate as to make it so that the more economic choice for consumers is to purchase domestically made products.
No, the government should buy the companies and turn them into democratic worker co-ops.
No, impose more regulation on business and the market.
No, but do so for small businesses.
Yes for businesses who are actually unable to increase the wages of their workers but big corporations should be forced to increase their workers wages.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
