Aeolus451 said:
It's the choice of a government to subsidize and it depends on their agreement with the company. If a company breaks their agreement, pull any further funding. It's that simple. If a company moves some of their production to another area, it doesn't give you the right to steal any of their money for whatever stupid reason you try to justify it. If you want them to bring their jobs back, incentivize it by reducing their costs of operating there however you can til you tilt the balance. That doesn't mean decrease their taxes but increase the cost of worker benefits or up minium wage to where it negates the reduced taxes. It's simple math for the most part. How much does it cost to operate a 5000 employee factory in China compared to California or Ohio. If you can't decrease the costs enough to bring back jobs then they are gone til ya can. Again, you have no right to take any money from them that you didn't earn or because they're being a smart business. |
So your solution to bring companies back is to raise costs by increasing minimum wage or workers benifits? That seems very contradictory to your earlier statements. You're seriously defending the companies here and not the workers? If companies get state subsidies and decide to pull out, the state can recompense itself. And it can do so because the state has the monopoly on violence. I'm willing to go that far. Companies should have a bit of morals concerning their workers, if not, it should be enforced.
