Trump to Announce Carrier Plant Will Keep Jobs in U.S.

[Vyxn]

From the earliest days of his campaign, Donald J. Trump made keeping manufacturing jobs in the United States his signature economic issue, and the decision by Carrier, the big air-conditioner company, to move 2,000 of them from Indiana to Mexico was a tailor-made talking point for him on the stump.
On Thursday, Mr. Trump and Mike Pence, Indiana’s governor and the vice-president elect, plan to appear at Carrier’s Indianapolis plant to announce they’ve struck a deal with the company to keep a majority of the jobs in the state, according to officials with the transition team as well as Carrier.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/29/bu...n-us.html?_r=0

So there you have it Ford and now Carrier Trump hasn't even been sworn in yet and he has done more in 20 days as president elect than Obama has in 8 years as president to keep well paying manufacturing jobs here in the US

[Garnier Fructis]

I wonder what the deal is.

[Sunseeker]

So there you have it Ford and now Carrier Trump hasn't even been sworn in yet and he has done more in 20 days as president elect than Obama has in 8 years as president to keep well paying manufacturing jobs here in the US

If by "done more" you mean "done more getting reamed in the ass by corporations" yeah okay. Wooo a whole 2000 jobs were kept in exchange for Trump going soft on big business.

[Vyxn]

"In exchange for keeping a few jobs, Trump dropped his drawers and bent over, backing off of yet another campaign promise he made to voters in order to prove once again that Wall Street comes first."

2,000 manufacturing workers isn't wall street missy

[Blobfish]

Way to go Trumpy.

Probably promised them lucrative Government contracts

[Templar 331]

easing regulations and overhauling the corporate tax code

Aka. allow companies to cut corners with public and worker safety while being taxed less. >.>

[Gorgodeus]

2,000 manufacturing workers isn't wall street missy

You missed the part where it said that Trump will be

easing regulations and overhauling the corporate tax code

aka: making the rich richer. Only a fool thinks that Trump gives a rats ass about the average worker.

[Vyxn]

If by "done more" you mean "done more getting reamed in the ass by corporations" yeah okay. Wooo a whole 2000 jobs were kept in exchange for Trump going soft on big business.

you tell that to the 2,000 factory worker that is 2,000 less we would have on food stamps 2,000 workers pay checks that supported the local economy

- - - Updated - - -

You missed the part where it said that Trump will be


aka: making the rich richer. Only a fool thinks that Trump gives a rats ass about the average worker.

aka keeping middle class Americans their jobs and probably another 1,000 jobs saved in the local economy

[Vyxn]

Trump went to the negotiating table on behalf of the people and walked away with a coupon for half-off one small soft drink with the purchase of any sandwich at menu price in exchange for promising to build United Technologies an in-ground pool full of money.

so you rather stick it to the corporation and not give a dam about the jobs lost for your vindictiveness
and Democrats wonder why they lost. why republicans now control 34 state governorships 29 states with both house and senates, the presidency and the federal house and senate

[DarkTZeratul]

you tell that to the 2,000 factory worker that is 2,000 less we would have on food stamps 2,000 workers pay checks that supported the local economy

- - - Updated - - -



aka keeping middle class Americans their jobs and probably another 1,000 jobs saved in the local economy

You do realize that since Obama took office, unemployment numbers have dropped by over half a million, right? And you're bragging about a theoretical 2000?

[Deleted]

you tell that to the 2,000 factory worker that is 2,000 less we would have on food stamps 2,000 workers pay checks that supported the local economy

I'd tell them to get out while they can because government can't subsdize businesses which are not competitive indefinitely. Eventually someone says "wouldn't it be cheaper to just pay these guys to do nothing>?" and it will be.

Protecting worker's rights is fine, but in a capitalist economy you can't prop up businesses with taxpayer money indefinitely. It would be vastly better to retain those workers to do something that would actually make money.

How do I know this? Because conservatives have been lecturing the left about it all our lives. We know subsidy doesn't work within a capitalist global economy because we tried it in europe and it failed. You have to invest in macro-economy infrastructure and create the conditions for businesses to thrive if you are going to spend: the micro-economics are best left to the market, government is too inflexible for it to be effective.

[Vyxn]

You sure have a way of inventing meaning that isn't there. I don't want anyone to stick it to corporations or do much of anything else out of mere spite, but half of his platform was how he was the master negotiator and he'd have everyone from China to Wall Street bent over the table and begging him for more. Instead, he's a limp dicked negotiator who plays softball with businesses and then roars about his consolation prize, a participation trophy really, like he won the national championship. Maybe that's the best anyone can do, but when you run your platform on how you're going to stick it to all of the lil guy's enemies and how you're fucking Super Negotiator Man and everyone else just sucks at it, you had better fucking deliver on it. If people have the least bit of interest in holding him to any sort of objective standard, he'll be run out of the White House by an angry mob, but we all know that's too much to ask of the people.

so you read the deal made? can you please provide it so the rest of us can read it

[Vyxn]

I'd tell them to get out while they can because government can't subsdize businesses which are not competitive indefinitely.

Protecting worker's rights is fine, but in a capitalist economy you can't prop up businesses with taxpayer money indefinitely. It would be vastly better to retain those workers to do something that would actually make money.

How do I know this? Because conservatives have been lecturing the left about it all our lives. We know subsidy doesn't work within a capitalist global economy because we tried it in europe and it failed. You have to invest in macro-economy infrastructure and create the conditions for businesses to thrive if you are going to spend: the micro-economics are best left to the market, government is too inflexible for it to be effective.

allowing a business keep more of what it earned isn't propping it up with tax payer money

and now much more macro can you get with one business at a time

- - - Updated - - -

So do you just not read your articles before posting them?

In exchange for keeping the factory running in Indianapolis, Mr. Trump and Mr. Pence are expected to reiterate their campaign pledges to be friendlier to business by easing regulations and overhauling the corporate tax code


Is that what you call limp dick negotiations

I guess you went to the Obama school of community organizer business negotiations which run businesses out of the country

[Jimmy Woods]

Heh, trying to mislead...
From the article:

On Thursday, Mr. Trump and Mike Pence, Indiana’s governor and the vice-president elect, plan to appear at Carrier’s Indianapolis plant to announce they’ve struck a deal with the company to keep roughly half of the jobs in the state, according to officials with the transition team as well as Carrier.

WOW, near 1000 carrier employees are still being laid off. Ask one of those laid off employees how they feel about the deal? I guess sucks to be them. They were going to get a nice severance package (2 year pay + education costs) and now that could be gone.

[twelvethirty]

hasnt even taken office yet

[Deleted]

allowing a business keep more of what it earned isn't propping it up with tax payer money

and now much more macro can you get with one business at a time

[/COLOR]

A tax cut is mathematically identical to a benefit payment.

One business at a time is micro-economics. Macro-economics is dealing with the bigger picture. For example, national broadband upgrades.

I can't see how Trump is going to be able to usefully intervene dealing with one business at a time. 2000 jobs is a very small part of the US workforce. There needs to be some delegation.

[Garnier Fructis]

My fucking lord, by 'ease regulations' this guy better not be talking about undoing the ban on CFC's.

[Dsc]

Meanwhile the jobs that were slated to head to Mexico stay here in the U.S., in the communities, and help support some of those people trapped negative job growth numbers Obama "created" consisting of part time taco bell minimum wage welfare supplemented jobs in a .5%GDP economy the Left trumpets as being awesome. Mind you that Trump hasn't even taken office yet.

[Deleted]

So there you have it Ford and now Carrier Trump hasn't even been sworn in yet and he has done more in 20 days as president elect than Obama has in 8 years as president to keep well paying manufacturing jobs here in the US

Ford never was going to move, it was going to expand in Asia to sell more cars there.

Also keeping manufacturing jobs in your country only works if you sell those products in your country. If you don't, then no company, no matter what the government does to help them, will manufacture their products too far away from the continent of destination and have gigantic export and shipping costs to cover.

[Independent voter]

Yeah, if I were a big company I would lay low for a while with the whole moving jobs overseas, globalization thing blows over. You'd get a ton of bad publicity if nothing else.