5 ms·
> A tax cut for Samsung is effectively a tax hike for everyone else. That is a remarkably zero sum way to think about it.
by arcanus 6y ago
> A tax cut for Samsung is effectively a tax hike for everyone else.
That is a remarkably zero sum way to think about it.
- f430 6y agozero sum implies everyone loses in the long run. Samsung benefits. Texas state benefits. Workers benefit. Community benefits.
- specialist 6y agoPlease enumerate all the ways the community benefits. Be mindful to include externalities in your ledger.
- mywittyname 6y agoThese business can act as anchors to attract skilled talent to the region. If that happens, then a small no-name town can really prosper. But the reality is that companies don't really want to be the ones anchoring a small town. The sacrifice is too great in terms of limited talent pool, and lack of amenities necessary to attract talented people. Maybe after 20 years, the town grows into something significant, but at that point, the market has shifted so much that it probably doesn't matter. In this situation, the decision is made, regardless of tax incentives. Samsung can't just plop one of these plants anywhere. The plant needs to be in a place that has a large enough pool of talent, the amenities (schools, restaurants, housing, etc) that attract new talent (ideally without Samsung having to pay for relocation), and have the logistics infrastructure to support business. I've seen plenty of large companies negotiate for aggressive tax breaks locally, only to up and move to places like NYC, LA, or another high-tax locale a few years later because they either can't attract talent, or senior executives don't like living in cheap midwestern cities.
- specialist 6y agoNegative sum. Corruption destroys wealth. The vast majority loses a lot so that a few can benefit a little. The difference between creating wealth and merely transferring wealth (aka theft, grift).