I don't blame business for going offshore. Through the various laws created by the federal and state governments Companies have been highly motivated to go off shore. A CEOs responsibility is to earn ROI for his stockholders and stake holders. If that means laying people off to get the desired earnings...then that is the decision he gets paid for.

For my retirement income stream we put together a string of rental homes. Mostly from the properties walked away from and thrown away by banks in the 2007-2008 housing collapse. In most of those properties we found one or two bedrooms with the door locks on backwards. That doesn't happen by accident. How many times does an interior lock wear out and need to be replaced by the owner. The only benefit we could see in setting the locks in this fashion is to send the children to their rooms, and make them stay. The neighborhood we're invested in isn't a bad area, but I would guess there are a lot of "low information" voters. Is that the way progressives discipline and motivate their children? To me it makes sense because they seem to know a lot more about punishment and less about incentives. Just look at what we've seen of the healthcare law. A penalty for this, a fee for that. A medical device tax, a Cadillac plan tax.

It seems to me the health care bill had nothing to do with health care and everything about sending the cash to Washington so they can best decide how to spend it. If they really wanted to impact the cost and availability they would open the gates at medical schools across the Nation and keep them open until there are more Hospitals and clinics than there are barber shops. You see, in Columbus, Ohio you can get a hair cut for $8.95 at Saturday's. While grooming a toy poodle is $50. Pet groomers are hard to find and barbers are like Santa Claus, they are everywhere. My point is more Doctors and Clinics would have a downward pricing pressure on their system. To limit Doctors, limit hospitals, limit access...all of that leads to scarcity because those bright minded Doctors will find something else to do or someplace else to be a Doctor.

Nixon tried to work his way through the first OPEC oil embargo by fixing prices. I remember long lines around the corner on odd and even days to purchase our 8 gallons of regular. Since then, we have come to realize it's not an oil shortage, it's a money shortage. The last 5 years proves that as long as we have the money to purchase gasoline there is almost an unlimited supply. So, in both cases the government has had their heavy hand in the mix, fixing things for us, as Walter Williams would say, "fixing things for people that are too damned dumb to fix it for themselves!"

My point is without setting up an economic model that offers incentive at every level some will be left behind, or take their marbles and play somewhere else. Our benevolent government has built artificial economic walls around our Nation, keeping investment dollars out, mostly. Capital follows ROI (return on investment) CEOs are charged with the responsibility of earning ROI for the stockholders. If the corp. tax and capital gains tax is lower somewhere else in the world, other things roughly equal, the investment goes to the other country. We have these taxes (the world's highest corp tax) because there are millions of people in the USA that must be fed, sheltered, and given money simply because they exist. My point is we have a choice, we can continue the path we're on. Most on this forum are sickened by the path we're on. We can cut those millions off and let them fend for themselves. That would be more productive than the current approach, because even if they steal for a living someone would have to produce to replace the stolen goods. Or, and I admit this is a stretch, create an economic model that has a niche for all who wish to participate.

We can sit here and say we already have it! I think that is a pompous statement. Some of us already have it. Some of us have it very well indeed. My theory is that if our benevolent government lowered the corp tax to the lowest in the free world. Then lowered the capital gains tax in a similar manner, investment capital would flood into the US at record speed.

If you were laid off at the GM plant, because you were a non union worker, does it matter if your new employer is a foreign Corporation? By lowering these economic obstacles we would be hanging the welcome sign up for the world to see. It would instantly make our domestics more competitive as exports, because part of the selling price was taxes. Foreign investment would follow the ROI. First thing, they buy land or buildings. Then they would build or renovate their properties to meet the needs of their plan. Then they would hire workers of all sorts. White collar and blue. This would impact construction immediately, but temporarily and then permanent staffing would finally start putting displaced people back to work.

What's the hold up? In my opinion, our Benevolent Government can't see that a smaller percentage of a much larger pie is a bigger number than the faltering and failing situation they now have. In salesman's parlance, "The fear of loss is greater than the desire for gain." And, if your a cynic, politicians really don't want to solve a problem, they want to run on the issue the problem creates.

Facts? I can't give facts on a business plan. It is speculative by nature. There are too many what ifs. You can make very accurate suppositions about human behavior when they are incentivised. For selfish reasons people will do what is best for their self interests. Example? From 1983 to 2000 was a pretty good run. That 1983 administration had some pretty good minds working to create economic incentives. Art Laffer and John Rutledge designed a model that worked very well until world competition on tax rates changed the flow of capital.

In my little business I own a string of rental homes. We recently had to raise the late fee. Why? Because it was cheaper to make me wait than use the guys at the check cashing store. That's how far away from the inside the beltway mentality the recipient class are. Their motivation hinges on which is the better deal, paying my $50 late fee, or paying the check cashing store 10%. If those people had a better alternative, most would surely take it. An Example of that: Detroit and Chicago were built by migrating families moving to where the opportunity was in the late 40s and 50s. What has happened in those cities since then has nothing to do with the incentives that beckoned people to move there. If my lower middle income clients could find a place where opportunities were better, they would break their backs getting there. Right now, the incentives are just not strong enough. Once again, the fear of loss is greater than the desire for gain.

I appreciate the conversation about the economy. I always learn something from talking to people. In my life I have seen the magic of growing a larger pie several times. It is the answer to turning a failing business. Growth! I believe it is the answer to our failing government. Our present government cannot see what could be, they can only see what is and then divide it.