Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare-- | Page 5 | TigerDroppings.com

Posted byMessage
I B Freeman
Member since Oct 2009
6189 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

yes, but my point is your 2:1 comparison is apples/oranges.

"economic impact" dollars =/= government dollars

with income taxed at 6%, it would take $17 in salaries to replace a state outlay of $1.


eta: not counting the "velocity" factors that Russian loves so much, which I do agree with


Which is true but the velocity is badly overstated since it does not consider the negative on the industries in the economy that are not receiving the subsidies.






Back to top
C
LSU Fan
The Woodlands, TX
Member since Dec 2007
22206 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

it does not consider the negative on the industries in the economy that are not receiving the subsidies.


You're saying increased job competition is a bad thing for a state? I don't think Louisiana's unemployment is low enough for this to be a concern. Isn't it still above 6%?






Back to top
I B Freeman
Member since Oct 2009
6189 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

And how much did the film industry give the tax payers in return?


you tell me--you are the one that says the state government is revenue positive from the subsidies.






Back to top
Catman88
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge, LA
Member since Dec 2004
40286 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

If a subsidized industry hires away an employed person from another industry how do you say the subsidies "multiplies" in the economy?


How does this happen when you are adding 1 million new jobs? 1/4 of the current population would be in the film industry??






Back to top
I B Freeman
Member since Oct 2009
6189 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

it does not consider the negative on the industries in the economy that are not receiving the subsidies.


You're saying increased job competition is a bad thing for a state? I don't think Louisiana's unemployment is low enough for this to be a concern. Isn't it still above 6%?


I am saying your multiplier considers only the impact of the spending of the industry receiving the subsidy and does not consider the impact of the industries that do not receive the subsidy.

There is nothing right about these subsidies and there is nothing
good about them.

No home grown Louisiana company should have to compete with an industry whose labor cost is 35% cheaper than theirs because of state subsidies.

No new incoming industry who finances their business with their own money should to compete with them either.

You take the side of big government and their chosen winners and losers. I will stay with the business people who build their businesses with their own resources.






Back to top
Catman88
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge, LA
Member since Dec 2004
40286 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

consider the negative on the industries in the economy that are not receiving the subsidies.


Once again. YOUR example.. If 1 million jobs are created for the film industry just how will they take away 1 million jobs from other industries? Louisiana would have a housing boom and job boom like no other since maybe MAYBE the gold rush.






Back to top
I B Freeman
Member since Oct 2009
6189 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

If a subsidized industry hires away an employed person from another industry how do you say the subsidies "multiplies" in the economy?


How does this happen when you are adding 1 million new jobs? 1/4 of the current population would be in the film industry??


What are you talking about???






Back to top
Catman88
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge, LA
Member since Dec 2004
40286 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


What ARE YOU talking about?

There are no negative multipliers. They dont exist. You stated that if 1 million jobs were added this would not be a good thing. Im using what YOU stated.

There are what 4.5 million residents in Louisiana. So adding 1 million new jobs cannot take away from other industries. Rather NEW people would flow into the state to take those jobs as well as those from in state.






Back to top
  Replies (0)
LSURussian
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge
Member since Feb 2005
84243 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

If a subsidized industry hires away an employed person from another industry how do you say the subsidies "multiplies" in the economy?

OMG!!!! You are not to be taken seriously. You think the company that loses the employee just leaves the job unfilled? Or that there is no net increase in the number of persons employed in the state?!?

quote:

If the state takes takes from me to give to the film industry what happens to the multiplication that would have happened to my money?
The state is NOT taking your money to give to the film company. The state is giving tax CREDITS to the film company. Do you not know what a tax CREDIT is??

quote:

the state DID take from all tax payers over $200 million this year and decided film makers should have it.

No, the state did not do that. You just answered my question above. You DON'T know what a tax credit is.

As usual, your ignorance is so pervasive, I'm giving up on you.....AGAIN. I honestly don't know how someone as dumb as you can function in life.






Back to top
I B Freeman
Member since Oct 2009
6189 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

Once again. YOUR example.. If 1 million jobs are created for the film industry just how will they take away 1 million jobs from other industries? Louisiana would have a housing boom and job boom like no other since maybe MAYBE the gold rush.


So you are saying the subsidy should only be for absolutely new jobs that employ only the previously unemployed or someone who moves in out of state? I wonder given that definition if the film industry can claim any new jobs at all? That certainly calls into question all of their claims thus far doesn't it? They have been counting every employee as a new job.






Back to top
Catman88
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge, LA
Member since Dec 2004
40286 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


WTF?





Back to top
  Replies (0)
C
LSU Fan
The Woodlands, TX
Member since Dec 2007
22206 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

you are the one that says the state government is revenue positive from the subsidies


No, I'm saying the state is revenue positive. The govt is simply a means to allocate resources to improve the state.

quote:

you tell me

.3*x = $200mm
x=$666mm=Money spent by film industry to tax payers of lousiana.







Back to top
  Replies (0)
I B Freeman
Member since Oct 2009
6189 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


Russian you are a naive confused fool.

They did in fact spend our money on these film tax credits. The only debate is whether or not we got any of it back.






Back to top
LSURussian
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge
Member since Feb 2005
84243 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

So you are saying the subsidy should only be for absolutely new jobs that employ only the previously unemployed or someone who moves in out of state?

I honestly don't know whether to or .

Okay, I've decided.....







Back to top
  Replies (0)
LSURussian
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge
Member since Feb 2005
84243 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

They did in fact spend our money on these film tax credits.
In that case, please tell me your definition of 'tax credit.'






Back to top
TigerRad
LSU Fan
Columbia, SC
Member since Jan 2007
4607 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

In that case, please tell me your definition of 'tax credit.'



in this case, because the "credit" is transferrable and can be sold to anyone (and guaranteed purchase by the state if you cant find a buyer) - it is as good as a cash payment


still on your side, btw - but it is really a payment from the state to private entities - not a reduction in tax burden - im surprised you still dont know this after these two long threads






Back to top
LSURussian
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge
Member since Feb 2005
84243 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

it is as good as a cash payment

I have read about 6 sites describing and explaining how the film credits work and none of them say the state will cut a check to the film producer for 100% of the credits. The state sets a floor on the exchange value of the credits by offering to buy the credits at 85% of face value.

If you can find a website which explicitly says the film producers are being cut checks by the state for 100% of the tax credits' face value, I'd like to read about it.

Thanks.

BTW, I have never said I think the movie tax credits are optimal for the state's taxpayers. I don't know enough about what qualifies for applying about the credits, such as what expenses are valid, although the state's website on the film credits says "Only work physically performed by residents and non-residents in the State of Louisiana and only tangible goods acquired from a source within the state qualify for the program."

There is also a minimum of $300,000 which must be spent to qualify for the credits.

I did find this article by WWL ( LINK) which says...
quote:

"NEW ORLEANS -- At the University of New Orleans Nims Center Studios, two television shows and a movie are in the works, and they're about to start construction on another studio.

The city's film office says five movies are being filmed in New Orleans right now, bringing the total so far this year to 38, a $480 million boost for the local economy.

"I'm really proud not only of the over 200 films that have been produced here since then, but if you just look at this year alone, according to the state Department of Economic Development, the film industry will represent 10,000 jobs in this state,” Scalise said."


Ten thousand permanent new jobs, if it's true, in the state seems to me to be a good thing.

I also found this:
quote:

In 2011 Louisiana hosted more than 150 productions and about $1.3 billion of their combined $1.9 billion in budgets was spent in the state.
LINK

My main involvement in Freeman's last thread on this topic was when he said one million new jobs in the state paying an average salary of $50,000/year would be a bad thing for the state.






Back to top
TigerRad
LSU Fan
Columbia, SC
Member since Jan 2007
4607 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

If you can find a website which explicitly says the film producers are being cut checks by the state for 100% of the tax credits' face value, I'd like to read about it.


They arent, they are selling them to others for around 95%. If it was from the state directly it would be for 85, not 100. Either way, it is money out of state funds ending up in private pockets.

quote:

Ten thousand permanent new jobs, if it's true, in the state seems to me to be a good thing.


I tend to agree, which is why the expenditure may be worth it, imo. It is basically state-created and funded jobs. The overall impact i suspect would be a net positive.

quote:

My main involvement in Freeman's last thread on this topic was when he said one million new jobs in the state paying an average salary of $50,000/year would be a bad thing for the state.


IBFreeman is a horrible communicator, who has problems using the English language in this format. He is technically correct about the payments, but his conclusions about the consequences are dubious at best.

The million job example was a terrible attempt to make his point - through hyperbole - that the net effect of this "corporate welfare" would always be negative. That is, 50 billion in salaries paid to La workers by outside companies, would have to be reimbursed at 35% to those employers (17.5 billion) - an amount that the state could of course never afford to pay them (even with the new tax revenues coming in). The example is too simplistic and doesnt account for lots of other factors (which you and Catman88 have pointed out multiple times).

I am not defending his conclusions, only his premise.






Back to top
lsu13lsu
LSU Fan
Member since Jan 2008
2231 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

Ten thousand permanent new jobs


How are these permanent? Seems like a fickle bunch who will go where the subsidies are best? I assume California used to be the welfare state of choice but is now broke?






Back to top
LSURussian
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge
Member since Feb 2005
84243 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

How are these permanent?
Did you read the link?






Back to top


Back to top