Donald J. Boudreaux |
I'm all for cutting taxes. But I oppose
selective tax breaks given to a particular business in exchange for that
business agreeing to act in ways that it would not otherwise. Such
selective tax breaks are merely bribes to entice particular businesses
to do the government's bidding.
Such a bribe was negotiated by
President-elect Donald Trump and Vice-President-elect Mike Pence (still
governor of Indiana) to be paid by Indiana to Carrier's parent company,
United Technologies, in exchange for abandoning plans to move 1,000 jobs
to Mexico.
Unsurprisingly, politicians and Carrier's
workers are delighted. But even The New York Times was favorably
impressed. It reported that this deal “also signals that Mr. Trump is a
different kind of Republican, willing to take on big business, at least
in individual cases.” (I'll bet lots of big businesses are salivating at
the prospect of being “taken on” this way by President Trump!)
President Obama's press secretary, Josh Earnest, praised the deal as “good news.”
But there is no “win” or “good news” here
for anyone but Trump (who scored political points) and United
Technologies workers and shareholders (whose incomes now are subsidized
by taxpayers).
What this deal boils down to is Trump and
other politicians spending other people's money to bribe a corporation
to continue to operate in an economically inefficient manner. The total
of resources used to produce air conditioners will be greater than
necessary. This in turn means output of other goods and services will be
lower, and air-conditioner prices will be higher, than otherwise.
Yet Trump and Pence will point with pride
to the jobs they “saved,” wrongly claiming that helps to make America
great again. And the vast majority of Americans will swallow this claim.
They will not understand that these jobs were saved only by forcibly
transferring resources from them to United Technologies.
The reason for this misunderstanding isn't
hard to discover. The saved jobs are concentrated in one place. Those
workers are aware that, without Trump's intervention, they would have
had to find other jobs.
But the cost of saving these jobs is spread
over more than 6.5 million Indianans whose taxes are effectively raised
by this intervention, and by hundreds of millions of consumers who will
pay higher air-conditioner prices. Not realizing their loss, they
remain silent despite the total of these losses being greater than the
total gains to United Technologies and its workers.
Also among the losers, of course, are the
Mexican workers denied an opportunity to build better lives for
themselves and their families. Trump's crony-capitalist trade policy,
therefore, is at odds with his desire to keep poor Mexicans from
emigrating to the United States. Mexicans whose economic opportunities
improve through trade with Americans are less likely to emigrate
northward in search of higher-paying jobs.
Yet Trump would rather wall us Americans
off from our neighbors to the south — making both America and Mexico
poorer — than allow us all to be united by the peaceful and enriching
bonds of commerce.
Donald J. Boudreaux is a professor of economics
and Getchell Chair at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va. His column
appears twice monthly.
No comments:
Post a Comment