Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
whats wrong with the statment you are putting in quotes?
Gee. Despite some great rebounds in corporate profits (as well as income for those in the top 1%) and huge cash balances, job growth hasn't exactly been robust.
In the here and now, the state has around 94 billion dollars of debt, plus it needs additional tax revenue to operate every single year. The states yearly revenue is around 80 billion.
How can the state afford tax breaks when it is swimming in debt?
What is your solution to fix the existing problem? You are talking about idealogy, but it brings no solution to the table. "Aggressive tax cuts" are not feasible when the state is in such poor shape
At some point you gotta stop crying over spilled milk, realize what the situation is, and work out a way to fix it
i don't agree with how marco puts it, but the reality of the situation is, a company brings jobs which brings income taxes. i don't think it would be prudent to allow these companies to leave the state and lose the jobs and tax revenue. i don't like the tax breaks, but what should they do? let the companies leave?
I thnk some people are really having a problem with the math. They focus so much on the tax break side they literally can't see any other aspect of this.
it's a double edged sword though. because of the way states compete against each other, it causes states to race to the bottom on these things. that's bad from a national standpoint, in my opinion. but the reality is, southern states are finally starting to come into modern times and trying to attract business. i guess we can say they've recovered from the "war of oppression" (that's why my family from north caroline refers to it as). so, the other states are competing to retain the business they are trying to attract. it's not going to be good for the state budgets, but eventually, it will level off nationally.
Goya needed a new building as their present facility is too small and the opening of Seaview Drive makes parking on the roadway no longer possible. The cost of moving out of state would be very expensive for them and cause a major disruption of their operations.
I have no doubt they could have built a new facility with a lot less is tax rebates. Who is next for the handout?
why would building a new building in NJ cost significantly less than leaving the state?
it's a double edged sword though. because of the way states compete against each other, it causes states to race to the bottom on these things. that's bad from a national standpoint, in my opinion. but the reality is, southern states are finally starting to come into modern times and trying to attract business. i guess we can say they've recovered from the "war of oppression" (that's why my family from north caroline refers to it as). so, the other states are competing to retain the business they are trying to attract. it's not going to be good for the state budgets, but eventually, it will level off nationally.
Yes, but I'd say that southern states have been working hard to attract business for a long time; the flood of departures for the south from NJ started at least 30 years ago.
whats wrong with the statment you are putting in quotes?
Bush tax cuts to spur hiring didn't work - AND WERE NOT FUNDED
Medicare Part D giveaway - NOT FUNDED
Iraq War - NOT FUNDED
Afghanistan War - NOT FUNDED
I was saying that you should at least be honest - the GOP have hardly been spent-thrifts...
Gee. Despite some great rebounds in corporate profits (as well as income for those in the top 1%) and huge cash balances, job growth hasn't exactly been robust.
Yes, but I'd say that southern states have been working hard to attract business for a long time; the flood of departures for the south from NJ started at least 30 years ago.
true, but it's gotten more competitive recently I think.
They would need to hire an entirely new work force for one.
some workers move with a company when this happens, some don't. the new workforce would likely be lower salaries. so not sure this argument makes sense either.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
