More Corporate Welfare!

[FOTD]

In earlier times, a family built business looked after their employees and the community.

Then the corporations, public held companies, bought the family businesses and owned up to their bottom line. The community became secondary. The employees became a commodity.

Those who believe in less government and believe in arranging these communal strategies are no more capitalists than the faith based are educators.

[guido911]

Guido,

A firefighter, police officer, and service member are "employees" doing service in exchange for monetary gain.  Thus, it isn't welfare.  A corporation is a privately owned for profit venture with the principle aim of making money for the owners.  Thus, when public money is given to the company to help the owners profit . . . it's welfare.

Please, tell me you were being obtuse and that you understand the difference between a public employee and a private company.  Maybe no one explained to you when you were in the military that a) you weren't a for-profit corporation and b) you were being paid for being in the military.  My guess is those two distinguishing features play a significant roll in determining the definition of corporate welfare.

Additionally, if the city of Broken Arrow was giving millions of dollars to a church just for doing what churches do . . .then yes, it would be welfare.  But since they don't, then no . . .I'd say that suggestion isn't at all relevant.

- - -

It IS a zero sum game.  Beyond any doubt and beyond any debate.  The company is NOT producing more because they are getting a bribe from BA - they are producing more because there is a greater demand for their product.  Without the standard practice of providing corporate welfare it would not be demanded.  If no one provided corporate welfare the production levels would be the same.  Again, NO production is gained by corporate welfare.  It merely redistributes tax payer wealth to individual owners - thus, it's a zero sum game. 

The only way to deny that argument is to say that without a gift of tax payer money they wouldn't expand their business.  Which doesn't make sense.  Either the demand for their product is there or not.  Either their business model makes money, or it does not.  If their business model is contingent on tax payer subsidies then in the long run it must be allowed to fail.  (and I feel the need to point out yet again, that this is presupposing all parties acting the same.  That is to say if no one gave money to companies.  Since they do, I'm not advising against playing the game.  I've been very clear).

Quality job IS corporate welfare.  We are taking money away from tax payers and giving it to the owners of companies.  It is a very easy concept to understand:  if a company is given money for doing nothing other than operating its business . . . it's a handout.

YES, by operating the company they may inject MORE into the economy than is taken out.  It might end up being a good investment.  But that doesn't change the fact that you redistributed wealth to reach that end.  You took money from many people to gain a large benefit for a select few and a small benefit for several others.  Just like the argument that society as a whole is better off by taking money from many tax payers and handing it out as benefits to the poor.  In theory we all end up ahead - but that doesn't suddenly mean it isn't welfare.

A TIF development is corporate welfare to a lesser extent.  It is essentially a tax payer backed loan to private enterprise.  However, it is somewhat different because infrastructure is a proper responsibility of government.  At the end of the day government builds roads, sewer lines, and other items that it ends up owning to serve a new tax base - - items which by the design of the TIF the persons benefiting from those assets end up paying for.  Where as by handing money over to a corporation an immediate $6mil transfer of wealth has occurred and the person benefiting from that transfer and those paying for it share no correlation.

Infrastructure has been relinquished as a job of government and is available to all comers - it is not bestowed upon select companies.  That's largely what cities do. So I don't usually consider infrastructure to be corporate welfare. A city provided parcel of land would be welfare in my world (if it was given).

Jeez, grow up or grow a pair CF. I was kidding.

[Teatownclown]

Broken Arrow is buying a location for Dick's Sporting Goods....

this stuff is just wrong.

[Conan71]

Broken Arrow is buying a location for Dick's Sporting Goods....

this stuff is just wrong.

I wish it wasn't this way, but it appears how business is done these days.  If you don't play ball with the big retailers you don't get them.  That said, they are getting the benefits of it if you look at the development which sprouted around Bass Pro.  As well, Bass Pro is a "destination" store which brings tax dollars from outside the metro area.

Not sure what's so special about Dick's Sporting Goods.  Do they sell Prince Alberts and condoms?

[Teatownclown]

What if they go bankrupt like %60 of big box retailers?

Again, this approach is wrong unless you are a socialist.

[Conan71]

What if they go bankrupt like %60 of big box retailers?

Again, this approach is wrong unless you are a socialist.

60%

Other than Circus Shitty and Ultimate Electronics who else has gone t/u recently to account for that 60%?

Last I checked Best Buy, Home Depot, Lowe's, Walmarts, Academy, Target, Sears, etc. ad nauseum were all still in business.

[Cats Cats Cats]

How is a startup supposed to compete vs a free location.

BTW only 11% vacant nationally.  I bet we might be higher. 

http://medinagazette.northcoastnow.com/2010/12/27/ohio-municipalities-struggle-to-fill-vacant-big-box-stores/

[Teatownclown]

How is a startup supposed to compete vs a free location.

BTW only 11% vacant nationally.  I bet we might be higher.  

http://medinagazette.northcoastnow.com/2010/12/27/ohio-municipalities-struggle-to-fill-vacant-big-box-stores/

Interesting article: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704729304576287073903939608.html

fyi, I heard that Dick's got a $3 million advance from the landlords to put their store in at the old Ultimate site.
YIKES!

This might get a rise out of you gunslingers!

[heironymouspasparagus]

Flight Safety has been in Broken Arrow for decades.  And this was just looking for a handout.

Their business model is to hire up for any new contract(s), run people hard for the duration, then have a huge layoff until the next contract.  It is the standard business model in that industry.  They were at 61st and 145th for many years.  Now they got a nice new building going in.  (Burtek did the same thing.)

Hey, Broken Arrow, I gotta business that needs a building.  Wanna play?

I don't think L3-AMI got that money from BA.  And they have been a much more stable company in the area.  Yeah, they have layoffs, too, but not like FS.

[guido911]

How is a startup supposed to compete vs a free location.

You know, that is a damned good question I have never thought about. Kudos.

[heironymouspasparagus]

They aren't.  The CEO is supposed to go to the city or county or state looking for a handout.  Then get an even bigger bonus for it!

[JCnOwasso]

Flight Safety has been in Broken Arrow for decades.  And this was just looking for a handout.

Their business model is to hire up for any new contract(s), run people hard for the duration, then have a huge layoff until the next contract.  It is the standard business model in that industry.  They were at 61st and 145th for many years.  Now they got a nice new building going in.  (Burtek did the same thing.)

Hey, Broken Arrow, I gotta business that needs a building.  Wanna play?

I don't think L3-AMI got that money from BA.  And they have been a much more stable company in the area.  Yeah, they have layoffs, too, but not like FS.

I hate to say that you are incorrect, but you are incorrect.  FlightSafety's business model has very little to do with the contracts they receive.  The BA plants sole mission within the corporate structure is to build simulators for the FlightSafety Training Centers.  The extra work they do for the Military or commercial markets was/is significant, but not what the purpose of the facility was for.  

Yes, they had been in BA for awhile, but they have also spent time in Tulsa.  There is plenty of industrial land open throughout the Tulsa/BA/Owasso Area, so they would go to the area that would give them a better deal.  It is not socialism, it is business.  But they gave BA the first shot, which is more than a lot of other companies would do.  

And the only layoff that I was aware of was after the airline industry tanked.  They may have had one during the economy colapse in 2009, but I was long gone by then.

[guido911]

I hate to say that you are incorrect, but you are incorrect.    

Don't sweat calling heiron incorrect. He's used to it. 

[heironymouspasparagus]

I have had friends there from time to time since early '80s.  Some got hired, some got fired.  The business model was always hire/fire - on shorter/longer cycles, some lasting many years.  A lot like Burtek.  And Lowrance/Navico.


Ah,...guido...keep trying... you might get it right sometime, too.  Probably not, but hey, everybody's gotta have a dream!

[JCnOwasso]

I have had friends there from time to time since early '80s.  Some got hired, some got fired.  The business model was always hire/fire - on shorter/longer cycles, some lasting many years.  A lot like Burtek.  And Lowrance/Navico.


Ah,...guido...keep trying... you might get it right sometime, too.  Probably not, but hey, everybody's gotta have a dream!

So by hiring and firing, they are laying off?  Could it be the people that they fired were not worth the money they were paying them?  They could have pulled a THALES and completely left the area.