Posted on 07/08/2010 6:56:17 AM PDT by Spydergoo
JEFFERSON CITY • In the Missouri Capitol, "Ford" has become a four-letter word.
"This is not about rewarding one company," state Rep. Jerry Nolte, R-Gladstone, told fellow House members last week as they were debating the Ford bill that Nolte is sponsoring. Nolte was careful not to mention the four letters that have become the center of attention in the special session called by Gov. Jay Nixon: F-O-R-D.
For Nolte and other lawmakers pushing the bill, they put on their best dodge anytime a lawmaker or reporter refers to the economic incentive package as the "Ford bill."
"This is not just about Ford," said Rep. Sam Komo, D-House Springs.
"This is about more than just Ford," echoed Missouri economic development director David Kerr.
Indeed, the session is also about a pension bill that would require future state employees to invest in their own retirement accounts, thus saving the state enough money to pay for the Ford incentives, which would amount to about $100 million over 10 years.
....
(Excerpt) Read more at stltoday.com ...
They put on their best Dodge, did they? Well I think the GM of Ford will appreciate such a Cadillac proposal. The libs and union types may Saab, and they’ll probably get a good case of the Benz, but I submit this will overcome all Challengers.
LOL, that was clever.
Gasp, my brain hurts.
Good show!
We only care about union jobs.
If you have a non-union job, we hate your job and want it to go away.
Not being from MO and not familiar with the bill, from the article I can’t see a bailout. It reads more like a tax incentive to keep Show Me staters employed.
Yugo!.............
The city of Chattanooga gave all kinds of breaks to Volkswagen to entice them to build a plant in the city. Now, in order to pay for it, they just voted to hike property tax rates 19%. Nineteen Percent! And it’s not like the people didn’t speak out against this increase - people stuffed the council’s chambers weekly in droves. Protested out in front of city hall. Wrote and called the councilmen daily. But the commies passed it anyway. “Screw the little people”, I guess.
Robbing the people to give a sweetheart deal to a favored entity stinks. It’s graft and corruption, plain and simple.
Looks like Missouri is trying to do the same thing, on a larger scale.
There should be NO tax incentives given to any entity that requires more money be stolen from other taxpayers. Period. This public/private partnership BS is nothing but a thin veil for favoritism and corporate governance. It’s cronie-capitalism at its worst.
An employer like Ford is multiplied in the regional economy. When Chrysler closed, 20,000+ lost their jobs in outstate Missouri and the St. Louis Metro. Dozens of companies, including two of my customers, went belly up.
WHAT? Suggesting that employees CONTRIBUTE to their own RETIREMENT ACCOUNTS??? Well now isn’t THAT a disgrace!!! And Ford Motor Company employs how many in Missouri?? I don’t know, but I guarantee they are a hell of a lot more productive than the politicians opposing them! So let’s make sure the bureaucrats get nothing but FREE pension funds for EVER! And actual job-creating businesses? Well SCREW THEM!
Tell that to the thousands of other Missouri employers who are NOT getting the same sweetheart deal.
How would you like it if your taxes went up because a legislator decided to give me a “tax incentive” to stay here?
Was showing this thread to a friend, but a phone call Taurus away momentarily.
If money can be saved by making changes to STATE employee pension funds, then why not make them REGARDLESS of tax breaks given to favored entities? It’s amazing that bureaucrats can always find ways to save money somewhere when they want to spend it somewhere else. They can never save money just for the sake of saving money.
Tell the caller you Mustang up and will call them back.
I didn’t want to Bug you, that’s The Thing................
That still doesn't make it a bailout.
From the article, I gather that Ford is supposed to make a rather large investment in the state in exchange for the tax break. Like it or not, that's the way states, regions, cities get businesses to come or stay. Not too many years ago, WV got Cabela's to come to Wheeling just that way. If another state made a better offer, they prolly would have gone there instead.
How would you like it if your taxes went up because a legislator decided to give me a “tax incentive” to stay here?
If you have a mortgage, and use the interest deduction on your 1040, I already do. That's just the way it is.
Well played! LOL!
Just think of how much larger that "multiplier" effect would be if they lowered taxes for EVERYBODY instead of just their favored (read: UAW) entities. There is no reason whatsoever that some people should pay higher taxes to benefit others. This is simply corporate welfare.
BTW, I wonder how the positive side of this special treatment balances against the negative effect it has on other entities that are not in favor with the administration de jour.
I have no problem with giving tax breaks to companies that invest. None whatsoever. However, this is a piece of legislation written specifically for Ford Motor Company. Other employers in the exact same financial situation will NOT get the same treatment. That’s what makes it a bailout. If it works so well for Ford, why not everyone else?
Apples and oranges. Mortgage Interest Deduction is available to ANYBODY (within a certain set of parameters) with a mortgage. It’s not targeted for the Rothschild family with all the money because the state is afraid the Rothschilds will relocate.
I believe if this were Toyota or Nissan they’d be looking at the same type of break. I agree that in the larger sense we need tax breaks across the board, but when in competition with other states for a large employer this seems like a reasonable concession, especially if in the bargain we get state pensions to a fixed contribution rather than fixed benefit basis.
This is a Republican proposal from the House Speaker.
LOL......now that was good......:)
And the author of Chattanooga's property tax increase is - are you ready for this - a Republican also. Mayor Littlefield's largest donar was SEIU. Littlefield was instrumental in getting the city to give so much taxpayer-funded freebies to VW.
In order to pay for the taxpayer-funded perks given to VW, he first went on an annexing binge, trying to grab as much high-value neighborhoods into the city as possible. Then, after a strong lawsuit stopped annexation in its tracks, he proposed a huge 33% property tax increase. It got widdled down to 15%, but given the city's spending habits involving things outside of the role of government, they should be giving taxpayers a 15% cut in taxes.
Littlefield is also in favor of a regional government instead of separate city governments for Chattanooga and the surrounding communities. He wants to be able to tax everyone in the county to pay for the transgressions of the cronies in Chattanooga. And, he wants the government to be even larger and more distant from those of us that actually pay the taxes.
Needless to say, his political career is about to end.
Anyway, regardless of the party, unequal taxation is nothing but cronyism. They're stealing from one group of taxpayers to buy the votes of another. Liberals do this with welfare and the "progressive" tax rate, and RINOs do it through their favored businesses.
It's wrong either way. Taxes should be flat, and should apply equally to all parties. Then, the most thrifty state will be the most attractive to business, not the state that can redistribute the most.
Tax incentives are the same as subsidies because somehow the difference in tax abatement for one company has to be made up by collecting the money from other companies in the form of higher taxes.
Frankly the taxpayers money, collected on every business in Missouri would be used to subsidize jobs in one city with no benefit to the rest of the state. If my taxes were abated on my business I might be more inclined to expand. But when my taxes are expected to pay for another profitable company to expand, I call it BS. The state is picking a winner, Union jobs and all, and I lose.
Actually, the way they set it up, although the break is designed to keep Ford, GM and Toyota (who both have factories in Missouri, too) can also get tax breaks, as can suppliers.
While it is backwards that they choose a particular industry, rather than lowering tax rates for ALL businesses, at least they didn’t treat competitors in the same industry differently, unlike Tennessee, Georgia, Kentucky, Ohio, and Indiana have all done - where one company gets a massive subsidy to start a factory, while a direct competitor that has been paying taxes for 20+ years or more is not given similar treatment to allow them to keep their plants competitive.
Some of these subsidies have grown so big that the state is essentially covering the wages of all the workers in the new plant for several years, then turning around and telling the old competitor that they don’t deserve equal treatment when they provide an equal number of jobs (because “creating” new jobs is sexy, but preserving old ones isn’t).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.