In one of the Presidential debates, Senator Kerry claims that President Bush is wrong to provide a tax break for companies who outsource their jobs. If a company is going to be successful, they must control costs. If it is advantageous for the company to employ people in another company, why should we stop them? I'm not so sure about a tax break, but a U.S. company that becomes successful, regardless of outsourcing, will still contribute to our economy and make all of us better off.
3 comments:
Although I believe that Kerry is wrong in beleving that he can stop companies from outsourcing through manipulating the tax laws, the issue is a very potent one for union workers and manufacturing line workers. There is just know way in a election year that you can say to a manufacturing worker that his losing his job is a good thing for America, because they are worried about their own bottom line.
Outsourcing should not be looked at negatively. When Kerry does so, he is insulting the American public's intelligence.
Here's a more basic point: is the tax system for raising revenue, or punishing practices we don't like?
We'd have a lot more clarity in our political process/thinking if we just focused on one of those and made the whole thing more up front.
Post a Comment