6 ms·

>Instead of arbitrary tax breaks, it sounds like some cities ought to mandate the benefactors create at least some n number of jobs with a total comp of $x for

>Instead of arbitrary tax breaks, it sounds like some cities ought to mandate the benefactors create at least some n number of jobs with a total comp of $x for employees living within the same town, city, county or whatever municipality. You can't go adding requirements in a race to the bottom. Cities are competing on tax incentives in order to attract business. If I start requiring contractual guarantees to those incentives it's functionally the same as just offering a smaller incentive and the business may go elsewhere. The problem is that cities are allowed to compete for business on this playing field at all.

bilbo0s 8y ago
I don't even mind a city competing on that field if they want to do so. My issue is when cities compete on that field with state money ala Racine-Foxconn. So now Pardeeville, which has problems of its own, is on the hook to subsidize jobs for a bunch of illinois guys who will be taking the train in to Racine every morning. That's not cool. But yeah, if Racine County wanted to come up with the 4 billion on their own, that would be a whole different story.
- frgtpsswrdlame 8y ago
  >I don't even mind a city competing on that field if they want to do so. I think you should since it's fundamentally distortive of the market. While a few giant corporations who are going to get the mayor and some council member's names splashed across the paper get billion dollar deals the rest of the employers in the area don't - it's an unfair competitive advantage. There's two marketplaces at work here. One is with cities as atomistic units competing amongst themselves for jobs and the other is within cities with businesses competing amongst each other (on multiple dimensions.) Right now we corrupt both, the proper solution is to corrupt neither and that requires entirely ending these tax deals.

bilbo0s 8y ago

I don't even mind a city competing on that field if they want to do so. My issue is when cities compete on that field with state money ala Racine-Foxconn. So now Pardeeville, which has problems of its own, is on the hook to subsidize jobs for a bunch of illinois guys who will be taking the train in to Racine every morning. That's not cool. But yeah, if Racine County wanted to come up with the 4 billion on their own, that would be a whole different story.

frgtpsswrdlame 8y ago
>I don't even mind a city competing on that field if they want to do so. I think you should since it's fundamentally distortive of the market. While a few giant corporations who are going to get the mayor and some council member's names splashed across the paper get billion dollar deals the rest of the employers in the area don't - it's an unfair competitive advantage. There's two marketplaces at work here. One is with cities as atomistic units competing amongst themselves for jobs and the other is within cities with businesses competing amongst each other (on multiple dimensions.) Right now we corrupt both, the proper solution is to corrupt neither and that requires entirely ending these tax deals.