re: Sarah Palin: Trump's Carrier deal is 'crony capitalism'

quote:

---

But making a public statement when Trump is trying to gain momentum is idiotic and short sighted.

---

Can't criticize Dear Leader, huh?

No position for her and now she goes on the attack. Lol

She's starting to look a little rough.....but she's not wrong about this.

I never understood why Palin got the amount of hate that she did from the left, especially considering her history of tearing down the R establishment in her home state prior to her VP selection.

Does she come off as annoying? You bet. Would I vote for her? Never.

But to call her stupid, bash her kids, etc, was pretty much a standard Prog tactic.

Now the Progs will "like" her for a bit, but would never support her position here.

This will be a fun 4 years.

"Inducements" to recruit business has been around
for years. All those auto manufacturers that built
plants in the south didn't come here just for lower wages.
State and local governments put up millions.

Case in point: Continental Tire is soon to start
construction of a $1.5 billion commercial tire plant
near Clinton, Ms. where I live. The state of
Mississippi ponied up $289 MILLION in infrastructure
and tax credits. Hinds county and City of Clinton
ponied up a good bit, too.

That's how the game is played now-a-days.
The plant will have 2500 jobs.

I'm no fan of Palin and I supported Trump, but I'm in agreement with Palin here. The key is that it was arbitrary. The key to economic nationalism is not cutting individual deals with individual companies who threaten to relocate overseas. It's to change tax codes and regulations on business here in America and to renegotiate trade deals with foreign countries that creates incentives for ALL business to remain in the United States and compete here.

It is a dangerous precedent to cut a deal specifically for Carrier though the political context is obviously relevant here.

There is no precedent being said here. This kind of deal has gone on for 15 years, maybe longer. The difference in this case, is that the deal was done with the express purpose of keeping workers in the United States, not to increase corporate profits. I'm not going to say that motivations are more important than results, however the only president that is being set is the president of the United States specifically looking out for the interests of the employees of the company, not the company or shareholders

Pardon any miss spellings or wrong words, I'm dictating.

quote:

---

In the meantime, how about being happy for the people who get to keep their J-O-B

---

As long as people keep jobs virtually any action should be acceptable.

Thank god she won't be in his administration. Trump is about to teach these losers how to win. He's already won the election, which she never did/the Republican party hasn't done in a long time. He's not even implemented his policies yet.