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.
The assumption that capital isn't mobile. Which is why it's best to just not be hostile to capital investment to begin with. If a state creates a very hostile business environment like Connecticut or Illinois capital will just leave and go to friendly environments in Texas or Florida. Or if the United States is hostile to capital it will just go to friendlier environments in Mexico or Singapore. This is a major flaw, we're essentially in a global competition for capital. Say we became a socialist country It may work initially; until capital just leaves, then we all become poor.
The assumption that capital isn't mobile. Which is why it's best to just not be hostile to capital investment to begin with. If a state creates a very hostile business environment like Connecticut or Illinois capital will just leave and go to friendly environments in Texas or Florida. Or if the United States is hostile to capital it will just go to friendlier environments in Mexico or Singapore. This is a major flaw, we're essentially in a global competition for capital. Say we became a socialist country It may work initially; until capital just leaves, then we all become poor.
The assumption that capital isn't mobile. Which is why it's best to just not be hostile to capital investment to begin with. If a state creates a very hostile business environment like Connecticut or Illinois capital will just leave and go to friendly environments in Texas or Florida. Or if the United States is hostile to capital it will just go to friendlier environments in Mexico or Singapore. This is a major flaw, we're essentially in a global competition for capital. Say we became a socialist country It may work initially; until capital just leaves, then we all become poor.
That’s not a flaw. That’s a feature.
The left has never had any problem with murdering rich people. Rich is a comparable term. Once the capitalists are murdered, the middle class would become the rich and so they must be slaughtered too. It goes on and on until everyone is dead and dirt poor.
I am a frayed knot! Case in point, President Donald J. Trump. Great proponent of fair trade and tax cuts that would make the USA very competitive in the world, period.
The assumption that capital isn't mobile. Which is why it's best to just not be hostile to capital investment to begin with. If a state creates a very hostile business environment like Connecticut or Illinois capital will just leave and go to friendly environments in Texas or Florida. Or if the United States is hostile to capital it will just go to friendlier environments in Mexico or Singapore. This is a major flaw, we're essentially in a global competition for capital. Say we became a socialist country It may work initially; until capital just leaves, then we all become poor.
Please tell me what you consider a hostile business environment.
Well hold on there's actually a major flaw in your argument. Connecticut is a rich state, and while Illinois may have problems Chicago itself is doing great. And California, which is very liberal, if it were a country it would be the sixth largest economy in the world.
Plus how do you explain poor states like West Virginia, Alabama, Mississippi or Louisiana that are very conservative????
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.