Sounds more like a conservative than a liberal...libs love the welfare
checks, don't they?.

Does not compute.

Take my neighborhood in Seattle.
There were 10-15 "No Iraq War" signs for every "Pro War" sign displayed before
we invaded Iraq. Kerry signs are popping up all over, (even though he's not a
liberal, he's more liberal than Bush), and a Bush sign is really hard to find.
50 year old 2-bedroom houses without views sell for $500-600k, and on streets
with any sort of view at all the (normally larger) houses sell in the high six
to low seven figure numbers. I don't think most of my neighbors are on welfare,
unless they're in cahoots with John H's supposedly "welfare" neighbors buying
$600k houses back in DC.

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Sounds more like a conservative than a liberal...libs love the welfare
checks, don't they?.

Does not compute.

Take my neighborhood in Seattle.

Since you mentioned Seattle, here's an interesting thing I read about
something happening in your neck of the woods:

"Not to be outdone politically, the Association for Washington Business is
taking an unusual step. For the first time in its 100 year history, the AWB
has announced it will endorse many incumbent state lawmakers in the Nov. 2
election. The criteria: the voting record of each lawmaker in making the
state competitive.

On its Web site, the AWB supports re-election for 13 state Senators and 35
members of the House of Representatives. There isn't a Democrat on the
list."

------------------------------------------------------

Did you catch that, Chuck? "There isn't a Democrat on the list"...of
lawmakers who are making the state competitive for business and job
creation.

Here's the link:

http://www.king5.com/sharedcontent/n...S.5dd9b82.html

"Not to be outdone politically, the Association for Washington Business is
taking an unusual step. For the first time in its 100 year history, the AWB
has announced it will endorse many incumbent state lawmakers in the Nov. 2
election. The criteria: the voting record of each lawmaker in making the
state competitive.

On its Web site, the AWB supports re-election for 13 state Senators and 35
members of the House of Representatives. There isn't a Democrat on the
list."

------------------------------------------------------

Did you catch that, Chuck? "There isn't a Democrat on the list"...of
lawmakers who are making the state competitive for business and job
creation.

Here's the link:


http://www.king5.com/sharedcontent/n...es/NW_072004TB
CsmallbizDS.5dd9b82.htmlhttp://www.king5.com/sharedcontent/northwest/bizco
ach/stories/NW_072004TBCsmallbizDS.5dd9b82.html

Shows how easily you can be confused by
a snapshot of a tiny portion of a broad landscape.

When Boeing was blackmailing several states simultaneously, our sell-out
Democratic Governor and state legislators panicked and reduced Boeing's taxes
with a package worth over $3 billion over the next few years. The payoff to the
state?
We just heard that Boeing is going to hire 2000 people here, at probably $50k a
year average apiece. In other words, if the rest of the taxpayers in the state
will pay more money or forego enough services to subsidize Boeing for $3
billion, Boeing will see that we get a tiny fraction of that money back in
wages.

The lawmakers who supported granting the corporate welfare to Boeing are
probably high on the list of people working to make the state "favorable" for
business. :-(

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
"Not to be outdone politically, the Association for Washington Business
is
taking an unusual step. For the first time in its 100 year history, the
AWB
has announced it will endorse many incumbent state lawmakers in the Nov.
2
election. The criteria: the voting record of each lawmaker in making the
state competitive.

On its Web site, the AWB supports re-election for 13 state Senators and
35
members of the House of Representatives. There isn't a Democrat on the
list."

------------------------------------------------------

Did you catch that, Chuck? "There isn't a Democrat on the list"...of
lawmakers who are making the state competitive for business and job
creation.

Here's the link:


http://www.king5.com/sharedcontent/n...es/NW_072004TB
CsmallbizDS.5dd9b82.htmlhttp://www.king5.com/sharedcontent/northwest/bizco
ach/stories/NW_072004TBCsmallbizDS.5dd9b82.html

Shows how easily you can be confused by
a snapshot of a tiny portion of a broad landscape.

When Boeing was blackmailing several states simultaneously, our sell-out
Democratic Governor and state legislators panicked and reduced Boeing's
taxes
with a package worth over $3 billion over the next few years. The payoff
to the
state?
We just heard that Boeing is going to hire 2000 people here, at probably
$50k a
year average apiece. In other words, if the rest of the taxpayers in the
state
will pay more money or forego enough services to subsidize Boeing for $3
billion, Boeing will see that we get a tiny fraction of that money back in
wages.

You're kidding, right? You think that the only money Boeing gives back to
the community is the $100 million in wages given to new hires? What about
the people already working for Boeing who would have left the area if Boeing
moved? Also, have you ever looked at a P&L? Wages make up about 1/5 of
total expenses. On top of that, there is a trickle down effect of the
people who work in jobs that service those 2000 people *and* the people
already working for Boeing.

That $3 billion saved your community. Without it, Everett/Mukilteo would
look like Allentown, PA when they were (to quote Billy Joel) "closing all
the factories down".


When are elected officials--most of whom are attorneys or other people who
never held an honest job--going to realize that they don't know as much
about what's good for a business, as the business men and women running
those businesses? The Association for Washington Business represents those
businesses.

You're kidding, right? You think that the only money Boeing gives back to
the community is the $100 million in wages given to new hires? What about
the people already working for Boeing who would have left the area if Boeing
moved?

Uh, they're already gone. Boeing moved to Chicago, and the "new hires" are
about 1/30th of the number of folks that Boeing laid off here in the last few
years.

Also, have you ever looked at a P&L? Wages make up about 1/5 of
total expenses.

Less than that, if you're got a clever Republican running the company. :-)

On top of that, there is a trickle down effect of the
people who work in jobs that service those 2000 people *and* the people
already working for Boeing.

That $3 billion saved your community. Without it, Everett/Mukilteo would
look like Allentown, PA when they were (to quote Billy Joel) "closing all
the factories down".

Bullshirt.

Take 1.5 billion of the same money, give it (don't even loan it) as matching
capital grants to people who have presented a *qualified* business plan for an
enterprise that will create jobs in the community and you will see far more
than 2000 jobs result, plus all the spin off jobs from suppliers, retailers,
service workers, etc.

Figure half of the enterprises go TU within
2-3 years. Still way, way, ahead of buying jobs from Boeing at $1.5mm apiece.

In a few years, when it's time to build the next plane, Boeing will come around
once again with the tin cup and demand even more concessions.

We ought to just get in bed with the Mafia.
At least they are obvious when shaking a victim down.

Everytime I bust my suspension on a pothole in the road or watch them close a
fire station or a library I can be ever so grateful that your cronies in the
Center for Business Supremacy, or whatever, think that government services
should be withheld from common people, but provided to their companies at a
newly reduced charge.

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
You're kidding, right? You think that the only money Boeing gives back
to
the community is the $100 million in wages given to new hires? What about
the people already working for Boeing who would have left the area if
Boeing
moved?

Uh, they're already gone. Boeing moved to Chicago, and the "new hires" are
about 1/30th of the number of folks that Boeing laid off here in the last
few
years.

Also, have you ever looked at a P&L? Wages make up about 1/5 of
total expenses.

Less than that, if you're got a clever Republican running the company. :-)

On top of that, there is a trickle down effect of the
people who work in jobs that service those 2000 people *and* the people
already working for Boeing.

That $3 billion saved your community. Without it, Everett/Mukilteo would
look like Allentown, PA when they were (to quote Billy Joel) "closing all
the factories down".

Bullshirt.

Take 1.5 billion of the same money,

How do you "take the 1.5 billion"? You don't have the 1.5 billion if Boeing
isn't there. It was in the form of tax incentives (ie--money they *would*
collect *if* Boeing stayed *and* they were taxed at the pre-negotiated
rates). If Boeing is not there, they don't pay the money anyhow...*AND* you
lose the benefit that you gain from having such a large employer in the
community.


You're putting me on here, right?

You're putting me on here, right?

Nope.

Boeing wasn't really "going" anywhere.
The question was "where will we put together the few parts of the 7E7 that will
be built in the US"

I guess they decided it will be here, since we forgave $1.5mm in taxes for
every middle class job they restored. Woo hoo.

You would be surprised to know that a lot of the opposition to the Boeing
shakedown came from *very* conservative interests here.

Boeing: We're leaving unless you make radical improvements to the roads and
other infrastructure in the state, especially those we haul parts over. We're
leaving unless you do something to establish workable public transportation in
the Puget Sound coridor so that our employees are not spending so many hours
every day stuck in traffic. We're leaving unless you upgrade the quality of
your education system so that we can hire a greater number of literate and
qualified trainees."

"Oh, by the way, if you expect *us* to participate in paying for any of our
demands, we're leaving anyway."

Yeah? Don't let the door hit you on the stabilizer.

On 28 Jul 2004 04:06:43 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

You're kidding, right? You think that the only money Boeing gives back to
the community is the $100 million in wages given to new hires? What about
the people already working for Boeing who would have left the area if Boeing
moved?

Uh, they're already gone. Boeing moved to Chicago, and the "new hires" are
about 1/30th of the number of folks that Boeing laid off here in the last few
years.

Also, have you ever looked at a P&L? Wages make up about 1/5 of
total expenses.

Less than that, if you're got a clever Republican running the company. :-)

On top of that, there is a trickle down effect of the
people who work in jobs that service those 2000 people *and* the people
already working for Boeing.

That $3 billion saved your community. Without it, Everett/Mukilteo would
look like Allentown, PA when they were (to quote Billy Joel) "closing all
the factories down".

Bullshirt.

Take 1.5 billion of the same money, give it (don't even loan it) as matching
capital grants to people who have presented a *qualified* business plan for an
enterprise that will create jobs in the community and you will see far more
than 2000 jobs result, plus all the spin off jobs from suppliers, retailers,
service workers, etc.

Figure half of the enterprises go TU within
2-3 years. Still way, way, ahead of buying jobs from Boeing at $1.5mm apiece.

In a few years, when it's time to build the next plane, Boeing will come around
once again with the tin cup and demand even more concessions.

We ought to just get in bed with the Mafia.
At least they are obvious when shaking a victim down.

Everytime I bust my suspension on a pothole in the road or watch them close a
fire station or a library I can be ever so grateful that your cronies in the
Center for Business Supremacy, or whatever, think that government services
should be withheld from common people, but provided to their companies at a
newly reduced charge.


The bottom line: Those big businesses provide the lifeblood to provide
many community services. Local governments are motivated to do
whatever they can to retain those bigger businesses as they are all
too cognizant of the fact that if those businesses leave, the loss in
tax revenue will have to be made up for by the residents, in the form
of higher property and income taxes. Since politicians are always to
blame, any one who has to raise taxes might as well say good-bye to
his office.

Dave

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...

Since politicians are always to
blame, any one who has to raise taxes might as well say good-bye to
his office.

I guess the answer is to eliminate all taxes on businesses. If every
community in this country imposed zero taxes (at the local level) on
businesses, then the playing field would be even, and businesses couldn't be
bribed to move.

On 28 Jul 2004 01:42:37 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:


Shows how easily you can be confused by
a snapshot of a tiny portion of a broad landscape.

When Boeing was blackmailing several states simultaneously, our sell-out
Democratic Governor and state legislators panicked and reduced Boeing's taxes
with a package worth over $3 billion over the next few years. The payoff to the
state?
We just heard that Boeing is going to hire 2000 people here, at probably $50k a
year average apiece. In other words, if the rest of the taxpayers in the state
will pay more money or forego enough services to subsidize Boeing for $3
billion, Boeing will see that we get a tiny fraction of that money back in
wages.

The lawmakers who supported granting the corporate welfare to Boeing are
probably high on the list of people working to make the state "favorable" for
business. :-(


I love to watch liberals spin. If your officials had told Boeing to
take some Heinz ketchup, and "shove it" instead, and Boeing then left
the area, you would be here right now bemoaning the loss of jobs, and
as an added touch, would probably blame it on Bush!

Dave