Not sure if I love this or not -

I guess it depends on what they were promised to stay. But it's going to look to a lot of people as a campaign promise fulfilled.

Carrier ‏@Carrier 13m13 minutes ago
We are pleased to have reached a deal with President-elect Trump & VP-elect Pence to keep close to 1,000 jobs in Indy. More details soon.

UTC is Carrier's parent company. As a good businessmen I am sure Trump used current and future Pentagon contracts as leverage.

United Technologies Corp unit Pratt and Whitney has been awarded an $873.17 million cost-plus-incentive-fee contract to design, make, integrate and test turbofan adaptive aircraft engines, the Pentagon said on Thursday.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-utc-pentagon-idUSKCN0ZG33F

More recently

4. United Technologies’ subsidiary, Pratt and Whitney has clinched a modification contract worth $93.2 million for F119 engine sustainment. Work related to this deal is scheduled to be over by Dec 31, 2017.

Per the terms of this agreement, Pratt and Whitney will provide engine sustainment labor, data and combined test force operations and support. Notably, F119 is the most advanced, fifth-generation production engine that powers the Air Force’s F-22 Raptor. This engine offer the F-22 supercruise – the ability to operate supersonically without afterburning, facilitating exceptional combat performance without compromising on mission range.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/defense-stock-roundup-lockheed-martin-135801787.html

So they're keeping the jobs there. That's good, well done Donald.

But I believed we were also promised some jobs coming back. Get to work on that if you want to impress me.

I don't think United Technologies are keeping those jobs in Indy out of the goodness in their heart.

1000 jobs is great but there are 2000 United Technology employees so the glass is half full.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-utc-idUSKBN13P038

Finding the quid pro quo will be challenging

GRR Spartan wrote:I don't think United Technologies are keeping those jobs in Indy out of the goodness in their heart.

1000 jobs is great but there are 2000 United Technology employees so the glass is half full.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-utc-idUSKBN13P038

Finding the quid pro quo will be challenging

such a dem bonar....


trump found the leverage, and took it. good for him and bad for all fortune 500 who sell to the government. Definitely a shot across the bow.

LooseGoose wrote:I guess it depends on what they were promised to stay. But it's going to look to a lot of people as a campaign promise fulfilled.

Carrier ‏@Carrier 13m13 minutes ago
We are pleased to have reached a deal with President-elect Trump & VP-elect Pence to keep close to 1,000 jobs in Indy. More details soon.

Wait. I thought you said they weren't on the job yet?

NigelUno wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:I guess it depends on what they were promised to stay. But it's going to look to a lot of people as a campaign promise fulfilled.

Carrier ‏@Carrier 13m13 minutes ago
We are pleased to have reached a deal with President-elect Trump & VP-elect Pence to keep close to 1,000 jobs in Indy. More details soon.

Wait. I thought you said they weren't on the job yet?

Were you always this stupid or is there a life event we should know about?

So what if, rather than leverage government contracts, he just agreed to subsidize expected losses from keeping the jobs here? How is that going to play out?

If one truly embraces "conservative economic doctrine" isn't this picking winners and losers in a free market?

A 1000 jobs are staying at Carrier which is a good thing, especially for those 1000 employees.

But I have to ponder what ifs.  

If Presdent elect Sanders would have brokered the same deal would he be attacked as a socialist leading the country towards central planning?  

If President elect Clinton would have acted as Trump has just done would her motives be questioned and be the focus of another Congressional investigation?

Its good for those 1000 people.  Don't know whats going to happen to the other 1000 that are at the plant.

As I said up there ^^^ I'll reserve judgement until I know what the "deal" was. It can't be worse than Solyndra but that doesn't mean it's good either. Although I know it's now the American thing to do, I do my best not to jump to conclusions.

LooseGoose wrote:As I said up there ^^^ I'll reserve judgement until I know what the "deal" was. It can't be worse than Solyndra but that doesn't mean it's good either. Although I know it's now the American thing to do, I do my best not to jump to conclusions.

Don't sell yourself short. You make as many definitive statements about the unknown as anybody else here.

GRR Spartan wrote:If one truly embraces "conservative economic doctrine" isn't this picking winners and losers in a free market?

A 1000 jobs are staying at Carrier which is a good thing, especially for those 1000 employees.

But I have to ponder what ifs.  

If Presdent elect Sanders would have brokered the same deal would he be attacked as a socialist leading the country towards central planning?  

If President elect Clinton would have acted as Trump has just done would her motives be questioned and be the focus of another Congressional investigation?

Its good for those 1000 people.  Don't know whats going to happen to the other 1000 that are at the plant.

In many industries, the free market is nothing more than an illusion, but you're right the hypocrisy is apparent.

AnomanderRake wrote:

GRR Spartan wrote:If one truly embraces "conservative economic doctrine" isn't this picking winners and losers in a free market?

A 1000 jobs are staying at Carrier which is a good thing, especially for those 1000 employees.

But I have to ponder what ifs.  

If Presdent elect Sanders would have brokered the same deal would he be attacked as a socialist leading the country towards central planning?  

If President elect Clinton would have acted as Trump has just done would her motives be questioned and be the focus of another Congressional investigation?

Its good for those 1000 people.  Don't know whats going to happen to the other 1000 that are at the plant.

In many industries, the free market is nothing more than an illusion, but you're right the hypocrisy is apparent.

How does a President elect convincing a company to stay 'interfere' with free market?

Did Trump pass a law banning that company from moving? Does that company not have the choice to move if they want?

Trump is saving blue collar jobs and the left is attacking him for it. The left is completely mentally unhinged right now. Love it!

YAFI dude.

Using that logic you'd burn down your home to piss off the neighborhood.

Clearly we now have a two tier standard on the use of government and Mike Pence acting as IN governor is picking winners and losers in his free market state.

LooseGoose wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

Wait. I thought you said they weren't on the job yet?

Were you always this stupid or is there a life event we should know about?

Carrier brokered a deal with Trump and Pence? When did this meeting take place? Are Trump and Pence meeting with corporations as part of their transition? What deal could Trump and Pence have cut before they took office?

Trump is saving jobs, and all the angry left can do is criticize.

No wonder you are branded as the anti American party. You'd rather score meaningless political points over saving jobs.  

Sounds like it cost $700,000 in tax credits. IF that's all there was to it that's a bargain compared to what most companies get to keep/create jobs.

Big PR coup for Trump. I'm in wait and see mode. Looks like the big incentive was future federal contracts. Not that opposed to a move like this, very similar to what FDR used to do. Surprised the republicans are on board with this.

That being said, the company still moved a lot of jobs to mexico and other companies could get in line waiting for their tax break by threatening to relocate.

Jury is still out on this one imo.

Big PR to "save" 1000 of the 2000 jbs at that facility.
There are other manufacturng lant n IN closing this year and moving to Mexico without the fanfare and PR opportunities.


http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/30/business/economy/trump-saved-jobs-at-carrier-but-more-midwest-jobs-are-in-jeopardy.html?&hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=a-lede-package-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

Typical NYT, they must find an angle to criticize any politician with an (R) after their name.

LooseGoose wrote:Typical NYT, they must find an angle to criticize any politician with an (R) after their name.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/11/30/hundreds-could-still-lose-jobs-at-carriers-indianapolis-plant-despite-trump-deal.html

LooseGoose wrote:Sounds like it cost $700,000 in tax credits.  IF that's all there was to it that's a bargain compared to what most companies get to keep/create jobs.

The number is $7 million which makes sense. The avg salary of the jobs saved is 62k a year.

Basically the government is paying for those jobs.

Pretty much what went down was socialism aka corporate welfare. Bernie Sanders is right this sets a bad precedent and now other companies have an incentive now to threaten to relocate.

steveschneider wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:Sounds like it cost $700,000 in tax credits.  IF that's all there was to it that's a bargain compared to what most companies get to keep/create jobs.

The number is $7 million which makes sense. The avg salary of the jobs saved is 62k a year.

Basically the government is paying for those jobs.  

Pretty much what went down was socialism aka corporate welfare. Bernie Sanders is right this sets a bad precedent and now other companies have an incentive now to threaten to relocate.

Just a wild guess, you weren't a math major?
1000 jobs @ 62,000/yr = $62,000,000 aka $62 million a year.
Deal with Indiana is reportedly $7 mill over 10 years or $700,000 a year.
not even what those 1000 jobs will pay the state in taxes

What kind of pressure was applied on United Technologies is yet to be revealed.

I.B. Fine wrote:

steveschneider wrote:

The number is $7 million which makes sense. The avg salary of the jobs saved is 62k a year.

Basically the government is paying for those jobs.  

Pretty much what went down was socialism aka corporate welfare. Bernie Sanders is right this sets a bad precedent and now other companies have an incentive now to threaten to relocate.

Just a wild guess, you weren't a math major?
1000 jobs @ 62,000/yr = $62,000,000 aka $62 million a year.
Deal with Indiana is reportedly $7 mill over 10 years or $700,000 a year.
not even what those 1000 jobs will pay the state in taxes

What kind of pressure was applied on United Technologies is yet to be revealed.

Whoops, I did that on the fly and f'd it up.
You are correct sir.

LooseGoose wrote:Typical NYT, they must find an angle to criticize any politician with an (R) after their name.

Come on Goose,
if you read the link? Is there anything that's not factual?

Its picking winners and losers by Pence who's still governor until New years Day.  Totally above board and within his power
For a guy who didn't give a damn about Trump you seem to be making sure he isn't picked on.

Is the NYT inventing news or just puttng out stories yu don't like?  This is the same NYT that found employed Judith Miller who was beng fed information to cast the Bush2 administration in a positive light with the WMD stories.

GRR Spartan wrote: This is the same NYT that found employed Judith Miller who was beng fed information to cast the Bush2 administration in a positive light with the WMD stories.

And the same NYT that just took a moment to reflect how they had covered the election with too much of a liberal slant.....and then went right back to it.[/quote]

Damn Goose why the open wound?

They guy you needed to win to get the SCOTUS you want so why the stubbed toe all the time?

Turns out of the 2000 jobs that were bound for Mexico, 1100 were kept in Indiana. 300 of those jobs were in engineering and management that were going to stay in the US but move to another state.

That's 800 jobs which is good but not 2000 manufacturing jobs that was the buzz and United Technologies is getting $7M to reduce their production workforce by 50%.

I guess this deal has upset Mama Grizzley.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/sarah-palin-donald-trump-carrier-deal-crony-capitalism-232139

“When government steps in arbitrarily with individual subsidies, favoring one business over others, it sets inconsistent, unfair, illogical precedent,” she asserted.

And in an apparent jab at Trump, whom she famously endorsed in a rambling speech earlier this year, she asked: “Republicans oppose this, remember? Instead, we support competition on a level playing field, remember? Because we know special interest crony capitalism is one big fail.”

The op-ed is not subtle: Palin described such government intervention as a “hallmark of corruption” and “socialism,” and then compared it to policies of the Obama administration, which she regularly rails against.

Turtleneck wrote:I guess this deal has upset Mama Grizzley.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/sarah-palin-donald-trump-carrier-deal-crony-capitalism-232139

“When government steps in arbitrarily with individual subsidies, favoring one business over others, it sets inconsistent, unfair, illogical precedent,” she asserted.

And in an apparent jab at Trump, whom she famously endorsed in a rambling speech earlier this year, she asked: “Republicans oppose this, remember? Instead, we support competition on a level playing field, remember? Because we know special interest crony capitalism is one big fail.”

The op-ed is not subtle: Palin described such government intervention as a “hallmark of corruption” and “socialism,” and then compared it to policies of the Obama administration, which she regularly rails against.

Well we know that can't be true, all R's a automatons that walk in lockstep. They aren't independent thinkers like D's.

LooseGoose wrote:

Turtleneck wrote:I guess this deal has upset Mama Grizzley.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/sarah-palin-donald-trump-carrier-deal-crony-capitalism-232139

Well we know that can't be true, all R's a automatons that walk in lockstep. They aren't independent thinkers like D's.

What is your point? You have turned into quite the partisan hack. I was simply posting that one of Trump's early endorsers has her feathers ruffled. You seem to take everything so personally these days.

Turtleneck wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

Well we know that can't be true, all R's a automatons that walk in lockstep. They aren't independent thinkers like D's.

What is your point? You have turned into quite the partisan hack. I was simply posting that one of Trump's early endorsers has her feathers ruffled. You seem to take everything so personally these days.

I'm a cranky old son of a bitch, that's all.

Is Trump picking winners and losers?

I agree with those that have said presidents do not have exclusive say over the economy. Presidents contribute to a policy framework that impacts the economy, but they do not personally manage the economy. We tend to think they do personally manage the economy because every president wants to take credit for a good economy (but will deflect when it is bad).

Trump might be a departure. It seems like he does want to micromanage the economy from the White House. I am sure Congress will have some say, but situation with Carrier is interesting given what he said this morning. In a series of tweets, Trump stated:

The U.S. is going to substantialy reduce taxes and regulations on businesses, but any business that leaves our country for another country...fires its employees, builds a new factory or plant in the other country, and then thinks it will sell its product back into the U.S...without retribution or consequence, is WRONG! There will be a tax on our soon to be strong border of 35% for these companies...wanting to sell their product, cars, A.C. units etc., back across the border. This tax will make leaving financially difficult, but...these companies are able to move between all 50 states, with no tax or tariff being charged. Please be forewarned prior to making a very...expensive mistake! THE UNITED STATES IS OPEN FOR BUSINESS

So Carrier gets incentives and others will face penalties? In some ways this seems like picking winners and losers, deciding who gets favorable treatment and who does not. That is definitely the crony capitalism Palin mentioned in the link above, and is the crony capitalism that Trump said he would address throughout his campaign. It's too early to tell, but early actions do not look good.

LooseGoose wrote:

Turtleneck wrote:I guess this deal has upset Mama Grizzley.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/sarah-palin-donald-trump-carrier-deal-crony-capitalism-232139

Well we know that can't be true, all R's a automatons that walk in lockstep.  They aren't independent thinkers like D's.  

I'm curious, Goose, who do you side with? Palin or Trump?

Cameron wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

Well we know that can't be true, all R's a automatons that walk in lockstep.  They aren't independent thinkers like D's.  

I'm curious, Goose, who do you side with? Palin or Trump?

In theory I think Palin is closer to what SHOULD happen.

In reality I think Trump/Pence paid a fairly cheap price to keep some jobs here. That's in comparison to tax breaks/grants that I've seen that were much higher on a per job basis.

Yeah, that's a fence straddle. But Trump made campaign promises and honestly I like any politician actually trying to do what they promised even if I disagree with it.

It polls well...

Poll: Trump's Carrier deal is wildly popular

LooseGoose wrote:

Cameron wrote:

I'm curious, Goose, who do you side with? Palin or Trump?

In theory I think Palin is closer to what SHOULD happen.

In reality I think Trump/Pence paid a fairly cheap price to keep some jobs here. That's in comparison to tax breaks/grants that I've seen that were much higher on a per job basis.

Yeah, that's a fence straddle. But Trump made campaign promises and honestly I like any politician actually trying to do what they promised even if I disagree with it.

This deal actually sounds like pretty routine state incentives to keep/get jobs in the state. Even by GRR's math, that's less than $650/year/job for the state of Indiana. A family of 4 making $28k/yr pays more than that in state income tax, not to mention sales tax revenue, and these jobs will certainly average more.
Trump must have thrown some weight around, but I've yet to see where that is costing anyone anything.
If he manages to get corporate taxes cut to the 15% range (or lower), that will influence all companies.