This Isn't Protectionism Act [FAIL'D]

[Bacon King]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: Senator Bacon King
Bill Slot: Seven (PPT's discretion)

[k-onmmunist]

The Department of the Interior approves of this bill, though we're secretly dismayed that it isn't protectionism

[Bacon King]

The original title was, "This isn't what protectionism is you idiots act"; I took the liberty of modifying it to something less undignified when sponsoring it for Marokai.

[Bacon King]

For the record, though, I don't think I can support this bill in its present form. It seems far too extreme. Tax breaks of all types are ingrained in the American/Atlasian tax code to the extent that pretty much any company pays a significantly lower share than they "should". Removing tax exemptions, of course, means that they'll be paying higher taxes. And while I agree that we should limit incentives for outsourcing, this bill is just crazy.

Say the New York Times wants to moves a reporter from their main office to their office in London: BOOM! Higher taxes for the whole company forever.

Or what if a manager at Toyota's Huntsville, Alabama plant gets promoted to the Corporate Offices in Tokyo? BOOM! Higher taxes for the whole company forever.

Or how about if a San Diego security firm gets a job to do major upgrades to the surveillance systems of an office building in Tijuana, and do to the length of the job rents an apartment in the area for its employees? BOOM! Higher taxes for the whole company forever.

Those are just a few examples that demonstrate how excessive the bill is.

Also, I don't think there's any points in getting rid of tax breaks for companies that move their businesses overseas. If the company isn't going to be located in the US anymore, they won't be paying US taxes anyway! What's the point in that?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

A much better title would have been, "This is what piss poor policy is you idiots act".



What the hell does the word move mean? This bill will either be very counterproductive and damaging or entirely useless depending on how that word is defined. Most jobs aren't moved offshore. They are "eliminated" here, and then "created" there. So if defined narrowly, "move" would render this entirely ineffective. Plus if an Atlasian company were to leave the same number of jobs here, but create 50 in China, would they get hit by this? What about an entirely new company creating 15 jobs here and 75 in Mexico, would they get hit by this?

The best way would be to find the tax breaks which "encourage offshoring" (keep in mind that was an unintended consequence of a blanket tax break) and make them condition on a certain percentage of new job creation being done in the Atlasia.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

This is why going to get dinner in middle of writing a post may not be a good idea.

[Хahar 🤔]

The Department of the Interior approves of this bill, though we're secretly dismayed that it isn't protectionism

Fake communist.

[Franzl]

Nope...idiotic Bill that certainly won't get my support in its current form.

[Bacon King]

If anyone wants to try to amend this into something sensible, go for it, otherwise I'm pretty sure this bill is dead in the water.

[Marokai Backbeat]

I've lost all desire to even defend my own proposals anymore, so you're free to trash the thing.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

What on earth....?

[Franzl]

I've lost all desire to even defend my own proposals anymore, so you're free to trash the thing.

If the title of the bill were honest at least...

[Badger]

Hang on, hang on people. Yes, in its one sentence form the bill is undoubtedly, a tad lacking lets say.

Still, the theory and sentiment behind the bill is spot on. Lets work on it (you too, Mr. VP MB) before immediately and summarily relegating it to the trash can.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Hang on, hang on people. Yes, in its one sentence form the bill is undoubtedly, a tad lacking lets say.

Still, the theory and sentiment behind the bill is spot on. Lets work on it (you too, Mr. VP MB) before immediately and summarily relegating it to the trash can.

Hmph. I don't really know what to change to make it more likable to this predominantly right wing Senate.

[Badger]

Hang on, hang on people. Yes, in its one sentence form the bill is undoubtedly, a tad lacking lets say.

Still, the theory and sentiment behind the bill is spot on. Lets work on it (you too, Mr. VP MB) before immediately and summarily relegating it to the trash can.

Hmph. I don't really know what to change to make it more likable to this predominantly right wing Senate.

Be nice, Blue.

That said, while I think a measure reasonably limiting or discouraging offshoring jobs would pass the Senate, this would need a great deal of language added to address the legitimate issues BK raises. If anyone wants to essentially rewrite the bill from its current one sentence form as an amendment, I'm open to it. Otherwise maybe such a proposal should be introduced as an alltogether separate bill.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

This bill seems to make the assumption that tax breaks are given to companies who send their workers overseas. Is that really the case?

[k-onmmunist]

Guys, at least try and amend this bill.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Afleitch suggested in his paper to reverse the bill, instead of punishing for sending jobs overseas, reward them for staying or moving back here. I'm fine with changing the approach, but I can only imagine this will get a tidal wave of opposition as well.

[k-onmmunist]

Afleitch suggested in his paper to reverse the bill, instead of punishing for sending jobs overseas, reward them for staying or moving back here. I'm fine with changing the approach, but I can only imagine this will get a tidal wave of opposition as well.

Well of course, there are alot of free trade fundamentalists out there.

[Bacon King]

Afleitch suggested in his paper to reverse the bill, instead of punishing for sending jobs overseas, reward them for staying or moving back here. I'm fine with changing the approach, but I can only imagine this will get a tidal wave of opposition as well.

I like the idea, I'd just like to see implementable text for it. I think you're overestimating opposition here.

[Oakvale]

I'd just like to pop my head in here to say that I'd imagine alfeitch's suggestion would allow this bill to pass easily. Simply put, I think an incentive for a business to stay is a lot more palatable to, as Winston predictably puts it, "free trade fundamentalists" than the alternative.

*is dragged from Senate floor*

[Franzl]

I wouldn't necessarily mind an incentive to keep jobs in Atlasia. It would not have the counter-producitve effect that the legislation currently, as proposed, most definitely would.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Aflietch's proposal seems better than what we currently have on the table....just my opinion at least.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Afleitch suggested in his paper to reverse the bill, instead of punishing for sending jobs overseas, reward them for staying or moving back here. I'm fine with changing the approach, but I can only imagine this will get a tidal wave of opposition as well.

Hey, wait a minute, I am the depressed fatalist here.


I would need to see it.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

How about...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

?