Carrier stays in US

[Anomalocaris]

You also need to consider this 7 million does not include the cost to the entire US economy because, essentially the same AC units, delivering the same benefit and utility to the end user, if made in the US, would now impoverishes the end users all over the US more.

Carrier's annual revenue does not appear easy to find because it is privately held.  But typical appliance industry generates about $250,000 in annual revenue per employee.   The Indiana plant therefore generates roughly $250,000,000 in annual revenue.   Let's say for the sake of argument the entire sales from the plant is to American consumers.   Let's say moving the plant to Mexico allows each AC unit be sold for 5% less.  That means if the plant had been moved to Mexico, the American consumers of carrier Ac Equipment would be enriched to the tune of 5% X $250,000,000 or $12.5 million, each year, relative to if the plant stayed in Indiana.  Or keeping the plant in Indianan impoverishes the American consumer to the tune of 12.5 million a year, every year, until eventually it becomes unsustainable and either closes or moves overseS anyway, before considering the cost of the tax break.

So, by keeping the carrier plant in the US, you gain some short term savings in unemployment benefits, yes.  But in addition to the 7 million in extra tax it cost the American economy, it also cost the American economy an additional $12.5 million per year, every year.

At the same time, it disincentivize the workforce at that plant from retraining themselves for new roles in which their contribution actually enriches the American economy, rather than impoverishes it.

[John V]

Carrier's annual revenue does not appear easy to find because it is privately held.  But typical appliance industry generates about $250,000 in annual revenue per employee.   The Indiana plant therefore generates roughly $250,000,000 in annual revenue.   Let's say for the sake of argument the entire sales from the plant is to American consumers.   Let's say moving the plant to Mexico allows each AC unit be sold for 5% less.  That means if the plant had been moved to Mexico, the American consumers of carrier Ac Equipment would be enriched to the turn of 5% X $250,000,000 or $12.5 million, each year, relative to if the plant stayed in Indiana.  Or keeping the plant in Indianan impoverishes the American consumer to the tune of 12.5 million a year, every year, until eventually it becomes unsustainable and either closes or moves overseS anyway, before considering the cost of the tax break.

$12,500,000 divided by 1,000 workers means we could afford to give each worker $12,500 per year just to break even. 

[Anomalocaris]

Carrier's annual revenue does not appear easy to find because it is privately held.  But typical appliance industry generates about $250,000 in annual revenue per employee.   The Indiana plant therefore generates roughly $250,000,000 in annual revenue.   Let's say for the sake of argument the entire sales from the plant is to American consumers.   Let's say moving the plant to Mexico allows each AC unit be sold for 5% less.  That means if the plant had been moved to Mexico, the American consumers of carrier Ac Equipment would be enriched to the turn of 5% X $250,000,000 or $12.5 million, each year, relative to if the plant stayed in Indiana.  Or keeping the plant in Indianan impoverishes the American consumer to the tune of 12.5 million a year, every year, until eventually it becomes unsustainable and either closes or moves overseS anyway, before considering the cost of the tax break.

$12,500,000 divided by 1,000 workers means we could afford to give each worker $12,500 per year just to break even. 

Ah, no.  You don't compensate people for making you poorer.   In effect trump and pence has just became enablers of a crime of extortion in which each of these 1000 works are extorting $12,500 from the US economy, every year, in addition to the $7million the carrier corp has extorted from government tax receipt. Worse. The loot from the extortion is in effect being used to facilitate these workers' ability to avoid being retrained to be really productive, as oppose to doing make work and pretending to be contributing.

[mihoda]

Yes. As I've been saying repeatedly in different ways, the size of transfer payment is smaller than the savings from cheaper goods. And, the kicker is that the benefit is in perpetuity while the transfer payment needs only exist until that worker is rehabilitated or dies.

What about those in the next generation with the same natural abilities as these workers?

Tell me, does your argument only apply to now or do you constantly worry about all the people around us who only have neolithic level tool use?

---

Do you go out of your way to drive a horse and buggy to keep only those with the 'natural ability' to make buggies employed?

[John V]

Ah, no.  You don't compensate people for making you poorer.   In effect trump and pence has just became enablers of a crime of extortion in which each of these 1000 works are extorting $12,500 from the US economy, every year, in addition to the $7million the carrier corp has extorted from government tax receipt.  Worse.  The loot from the extortion is in effect being used to facilitate these workers' ability to avoid being retrained to be really productive, as oppose to doing make work and pretending to be contributing.

Tell me, does your argument only apply to now or do you constantly worry about all the people around us who only have neolithic level tool use?

---

Do you go out of your way to drive a horse and buggy to keep only those with the 'natural ability' to make buggies employed?

The point to both of you is that, no, I don't think that all workers are capable of being trained to earn good work- or middle-class wages in an information economy, or whatever you want to call an American economy without manufacturing. As I said in my first post: "The problem is that you can't educate everyone in America for higher-tech jobs. Performance at those jobs isn't just a function of education, it also requires some amount of innate intelligence. There are people with adequate intelligence for manufacturing jobs, but not for higher-tech jobs. We're getting to be a white collar/hamburger flipper economy without a great middle ground."

For example, why hasn't Brian37 trained himself to be in a good position, instead of bitching about his poor fortunes on here?

So...what are you going to do for the people who just can't be competitive in such an economy? Write living wage laws? But you can't do that, as that would artificially increase prices for everyone, and you're apparently against that...at least when Trump does it.

---

Do you go out of your way to drive a horse and buggy to keep only those with the 'natural ability' to make buggies employed?

What do you do for such people? Or are you going to say they don't really exist, thereby admitting to a straw man?

Do you think that there are people who do have the ability to build certain things, but may not have the ability to, say, program computers?

[mihoda]

Ah, no.  You don't compensate people for making you poorer.   In effect trump and pence has just became enablers of a crime of extortion in which each of these 1000 works are extorting $12,500 from the US economy, every year, in addition to the $7million the carrier corp has extorted from government tax receipt.  Worse.  The loot from the extortion is in effect being used to facilitate these workers' ability to avoid being retrained to be really productive, as oppose to doing make work and pretending to be contributing.

Tell me, does your argument only apply to now or do you constantly worry about all the people around us who only have neolithic level tool use?

---

Do you go out of your way to drive a horse and buggy to keep only those with the 'natural ability' to make buggies employed?

The point to both of you is that, no, I don't think that all workers are capable of being trained to earn good work- or middle-class wages in an information economy, or whatever you want to call an American economy without manufacturing. As I said in my first post: "The problem is that you can't educate everyone in America for higher-tech jobs. Performance at those jobs isn't just a function of education, it also requires some amount of innate intelligence. There are people with adequate intelligence for manufacturing jobs, but not for higher-tech jobs. We're getting to be a white collar/hamburger flipper economy without a great middle ground."

For example, why hasn't Brian37 trained himself to be in a good position, instead of bitching about his poor fortunes on here?

So...what are you going to do for the people who just can't be competitive in such an economy? Write living wage laws? But you can't do that, as that would artificially increase prices for everyone, and you're apparently against that...at least when Trump does it.

---

Do you go out of your way to drive a horse and buggy to keep only those with the 'natural ability' to make buggies employed?

What do you do for such people? Or are you going to say they don't really exist, thereby admitting to a straw man?

Do you think that there are people who do have the ability to build certain things, but may not have the ability to, say, program computers?

My comment about stone users was to draw attention to the fact that we *have no* large population of inherently unable people among us.

While it's entirely likely that there will be a future where most work is automated, I think that future undercuts your point severely. With a large population that is unable to engage in significant economic activity,  redistribution of wealth is politically required or there will be revolution from either above (genocide) or below.

[John V]

My comment about stone users was to draw attention to the fact that we *have no* large population of inherently unable people among us.

Unable for what? As I asked - are there not people who can work in a factory, but couldn't program a computer, even with training?

There are plenty of people who are limited by intelligence or other qualities, and training can't fix that. If you think everyone working at Wal Mart could prosper in the new economy if just given some training, you're kidding yourself.

While it's entirely likely that there will be a future where most work is automated, I think that future undercuts your point severely. With a large population that is unable to engage in significant economic activity,  redistribution of wealth is politically required or there will be revolution from either above (genocide) or below.

I'm advocating redistribution of wealth...just in a way that lets people have a decent job and some self-respect.

[mihoda]

It's a shame that self-respect appears so synonymous with luddism.

[mihoda]

An aside: Someone is having a stopped clock moment!

Palin is calling Trump's Carrier deal "Crony Capitalism."

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/sa...ism-232139

[Tonus]

She probably thinks she's paying him a compliment.