|
|
|
|
|
|
by mcny
3079 days ago
|
|
|
> "Don't worry; you are going to stay unemployed because someone in California is doing that job, not someone overseas." I think I'd agree with you a lot as well but the problem with "moving" the job from California to Texas is that it is a net loss for us as a nation. No company will choose change if all else are the same. They picked Texas because they can get more for less. So, the Texan worker will get less than what the Californian was getting. I mean look at non-compete clauses. I think if you enforce a non-compete clause it is only fair that you have to pay them a certain amount of money (I think fair amount is market rate but I don't know how to calculate it) for NOT working. This to me is common sense and yet this is not the law in all fifty states. Worse is when we are talking about negotiated tax "discounts" or regulation "waivers" to companies. These do not hurt anybody directly so nobody feels the pain in the short term. However, we are all worse off because of it. |
|
|
To someone who thinks CA has an insane regulatory environment then TX getting the carrot part of the deal and CA getting the stick part of the deal is a net gain.