[refurb]

Exactly.

People this it’s a choice between: A) company moves here pays $0 in tax or B) company moves here and pays $5M in tax.

When in reality it’s a choice between: A) company comes here and pays $0 in tax or B) company doesn’t come here and net taxes are still $0

[eigen]

According to [1], its:

A) company comes here and pays $0 in tax. and city "took on hundreds of millions in debt that was supposed to be repaid by property taxes".

B) company doesn’t come here and net taxes are still $0. city doesnt take on more debt.

B looks better.

[1] https://www.theverge.com/21507966/foxconn-empty-factories-wi...

[refurb]

No offense but if a city can’t negotiate a decent agreement they kind of deserve to get screwed on it.

[acdha]

Or, company comes here, pays their employees less than expected, and leaves sooner than expected with the local taxpayers on the hook paying for more infrastructure than they need - and maybe some bonus pollution to deal with for decades.

These deals are always more complicated than the initial marquee numbers and that usually seems to make them less favorable for the area than hoped because companies have greater experience and can play desperate municipalities off against each other with little consequence for not delivering.

[cma]

We have a coordinating union of states though, we don't need states to be pitted against each other to subsidize existing wealthy owners.

[refurb]

That seems like a ridiculous idea. The very purpose of the states is “50 different experiments”. I want states pitted against each other.

[cma]

That's a later conception of Brandeis isn't it? Think of the early political cartoon of a snake cut into 13 pieces that needed to join to defeat the British, not experiment in competition against each other to win the war by subsidizing the largest existing concentrated owners to entice them to their state with corporate welfare.