We are an immediate loan specialist in Ohio, and we are quicker and more advantageous than run of the mill retail facade banks since we're based on the web and are open constantly. No compelling reason to sit tight for "ordinary business hours" or invest energy flying out to the store — our short application can be finished in not more than minutes. You can even apply from a cell phone while you're in a hurry!
We can loan up to $500 to Ohio occupants, in view of qualifying elements. On the off chance that endorsed, your credit will be expected on your next payday that falls in the vicinity of 10 and 31 days after you get your advance. As you consider whether an advance is proper for your prompt needs, you ought to likewise investigate other subsidizing alternatives. A payday credit is a genuine budgetary duty, and not an answer for long haul issues. Getting from a companion of relative may be a superior alternative.
Alabama, Tennessee, Mississippi, South Carolina etc. all gave billions in tax breaks lasting for years, provided worker training, built roads, utilities, etc. in order to lure foreign auto makers to their states. It has been estimated that the state of Alabama spent $220,000 per job in incentives and special expenditures just to get the Mercedes Benz plant to be built in their state. These are things the Big 3 auto makers have not received. In view of the position of southern GOP Senators where they are pretending to be standing on principle while in reality are helping those with whom their states have deals, will they now stand on principle regarding the foreign auto makers in their own states and urge cancellation of the deals and incentives lavished upon them?
They are pretending that 'good business models' and no unions are the reasons for the foreign auto maker's success, when in reality their cost advantages are directly traceable to the tax breaks and special expenditures lavished upon them by mostly southern states. In addition, many of the foreign car makers receive financial assistance from their home governments. Are people like Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama blowing a lot of smoke and failing to disclose their interest in helping the foreign auto companies?
Tax break incentives, infrastructure construction and special expenditures are all governmental assistance. The foreign auto makers have recevied governmental assistance that is just as real as loans. The big 3 were asking for loans. There are millions of jobs at stake, yet we have the Republicans 'standing on principle' when in reality their aim is to break the UAW and to help the foreign auto makers with whom their home states are enmeshed in deals. Wall street got much more without strings attached. What's wrong with this picture?
Ritch: The Dems had the votes to pass it but not enough to overcome the filabuster which the Republicans stated they would mount. You don't seem to understand how the Senate works? In addition, you claim it is due to their business model but your mere assertion that it is doesn't eliminate billions in tax incentives and other advantages. It is still governmental assistance no matter how you slice it.
Ritch: I suggest you read up on it. Of course a filabuster threat was made and if the Dems had try to bring it to the floor and pass the legislation it was a certainty. Really, get a grip. Secondly, the business model is a 'success' because of the billions in long term tax incentives and the provision of infrastructure and other special expenditures. You seem to be putting the chicken before the egg. Get it now?
The Republicans only stand for their own interest,they have been trying to break all unions since the Regan Administration.The actions of the Senate have had a impact on the world stock market.
Nope. Sorry. But good try. Your associating the tax breaks to jobs is irrelevant and inaccurate given the revenue these businesses brought into the area. And their success can, in fact, be directly associated with a better business model, building a superior vehicle that the public wants and lower labor costs. You see, Detroit has several problems. First, their management is short sighted and grossly over compensated. Secondly, their labor costs are excessive beyond reason and thirdly, their product doesn't sell. And you think we should just say that these factors do not matter and believe that pumping more money into these companies will fix anything? As to this being a 'Republican' thing, you're wrong there too. The democrats are standing on principle too. You've got a majority, remember? You can't blame this on Republicans, but I admire you for trying. UPDATE: Sorry, kiddo, but I see no threat of filibuster here. What this means is that Harry didn't even have enough democrat votes to pass it. You guys can not keep blaming democratic failures...even failures that I support, like this one...on Republicans. Those tax breaks went to support viable, profitable businesses, not to inviable, unprofitable businesses who showed no signs of changing. Good investment versus bad investment. Get it now? Probably not.
I think you will find that most states give industries that build manufacturing plants in their area give incentives to get the jobs and plants. That would apply to American and foreign manufacturing plants (the Saturn plant in ohio got much the same deal). I will also say that the tax breaks and incentives by those states have nothing to do with taxpayers from outside that state-the money is not being taken from taxpayers across the country to help those plants be built and jobs created but the Taxes are not being collected by that state. So if Tennessee wants to get a new plant and not get Tennessee tax revenue then Tennessee is not getting the money; we are not taking money from the taxpayers in Michigan or California but out of our pocket. So have Michigan bail out the plants in Michigan and not use federal money; the breaks and incentives you talk about are not federal and have nothing to do with Senators but state money or the state not collecting money but the federal money(taxes) are still paid. I buy my daughter a car and your daughter wants one but you don't want to pay for it-You think I should pay for your daughter's car and it should cost more then the one I bought for mine? Same comparison-TN did not spend or give a break to plants with your money but with the state money. You are playing apples and oranges and should know it. If a car is made in the US but has a foreign name (Toyota, Nissan, Kia, and so on) is it not more of an American made car then a GM, Ford, Dodge made in Mexico or the parts made overseas and then assembled in the US? My Dodge is over half made in Canada but the parts are shipped to a US plant and put together but it is American while my Nissan truck built in ohio and using over half US made parts is an import? Explain that to me without saying so the UAW workers can make more money then the US citizens (non-UAW) make at a plant less then 100 miles away. The difference in pay is minimal and the huge cost of the UAW workers is in the lifetime health care and retirement/lay off benefits which exceed about anything anyone else gets. Average hourly wage at Toyota in ohio is $25.00 with another $24.00 in benefits while the GM plant in ohio averages $28.00 per hour with $50.00 in benefits. Of course the average for Toyota is based on people making different amounts based on experience, job performance and seniority while the GM average is more of a flat rate for everyone. If the Big Three wants those breaks then have then move the plants....the UAW won't like that since those states are Right To Work and the UAW does not own the state government and legislature but they can be unemployed if the UAW is more important then the workers.
Then the 'Big 3' need to call on their states for help. There are plenty of companies in the US that have foreign headquarters and have received tax breaks. Alabama spending 220k is really pennies compared to 15 million. And they were not paying for a companies bad decisions, they were paying to add jobs to their state not saving them for a few months. Providing tax breaks to profitable businesses moving into your state is good business. Providing federal money for a failing business where its workers are not willing to take a pay cut is bad business. Anyhow for your comparison to halfway work the big 3 need to be asking the people of their own state for the money
That's very interesting. Even scarier was that the foreign auto companies did a better job in our system than we did! And Ford turns a profit in Europe every year! And NOT in America! Figure that one out?
Why should they? The workers are paid a fair wage and spend the money in the local economies. All state and local governments give tax incentives to get major companies to build facilities in their communities and states. $220,000 per job for a $50,000 per year average wage is not a bad pay out. It sounds a lot better than a $25+ billion dollar loan with no visible chance of a pay back. Get real!
No they will not, you're right.Even scarier was that the foreign auto companies did a better job in our system than we did! And Ford turns a profit in Europe every year! And NOT in America!
Most cities and states are willing to make concessions for a period of time on taxes to get large companies to come to their town or state. That is not uncommon. It is away of getting them to establish there and create jobs. most city and states have a development group that do just that to bring industry in to the area. It isn't the same as the bailout. They give them a tax break and general split cost of infrastructure improvements so they will come to the area and create jobs. These companies generally do way more than there share in providing for the community they come to with donations to public projects along with the jobs created.
The big 3 are American in name only. They suck. They take jobs over seas, and they don't even want to bring the 64 mpg car to the US. They aren't really our friends. The people who bring jobs here are our friends.
I think these Senators should be commended for making a good financial decision to help their state. Notice they chose to work with companies that had good business models? If the "Big 3" chose to change their business model (to one that's actually profitable) then I'm sure these Southern Congressmen would be more inclined to support them. It isn't my state vs. your state - it's about what makes sense, and isn't a waste of tax payer dollars.