Sunday, December 04, 2016

Not Good for Anyone: Businesses Making Decisions to Please Politicians

But more broadly, this [Trump/Carrier type deals] is all terrible for a nation's economic vitality if businesses make decisions to please politicians rather than customers and shareholders. Yet America's private sector has just been sent a strong signal that playing ball with Trump might be part of what it now means to run an American company. Imagine business after business, year after year, making decisions based partly on pleasing the Trump White House. In addition, Trump's hectoring on trade and offshoring distracts from the economic reality that automation poses the critical challenge for the American workforce going forward.
The real political divide in the country is between those who look to the past and state power keeping basic features of the past intact for the good life and those who look to new forms and change in the future for the good life.
In her 1998 book, The Future and Its Enemies, Virginia Postrel saw the major dividing line in American politics as less left vs. right than the "dynamists" vs. the "stasists." The former values change and experimentation, as messy as those things can be. Dynamists live in anticipation of the future because they just know it will be a great place. The stasists often are nostalgia-ridden and willing to use top-down control to keep things as they are or try to shape them into familiar forms. Today they fight globalization, tomorrow it might be robots and artificial intelligence in order to "save jobs."

6 comments:

MAX Redline said...

That's an interesting perspective, although I suspect that the employees and their families may have a somewhat different view. The fact of the matter is that Carrier is still going to build in Mexico, but by retaining some production here, the parent company retains its defense contracts.

Ferret has a lot of bad ideas, although I believe that Pantsuit's were even worse.

T. D. said...

Right! Apparently, by retaining 1,100 people and losing $650 million over 10 years in projected savings (though gaining $7 million over 10 years from Indiana in tax credits), the parent company is safeguarding $6.7 billion in federal contracts. (http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/indiana-carrier-deal-federal-contracts-trump-232021) Certainly not a bad business decision given that presidencies last only four or eight years. And Trump policies might last a lot less than four years.

As to employees and their families, what they feel about the prolongation of the job isn't solving the basic problem they have (except those who will retire in four years or less). Whatever you feel, the sooner you start making needed changes the better off you'll be. With every year that passes you're older, less flexible, and usually less attractive as a new hire. The smart ones will be planning for a future without Carrier.

MAX Redline said...

Absolutely! Planning is essential, and Carrier is one of the companies that likely won't be around much longer. Also, ageism is a thing, though usually not discussed much.

T. D. said...

I liked your observation that Trump's policies will probably last as long as some other idea hasn't taken it's place. We're in for quite a roller coaster what with the expanded executive power the Dems have supported under Obama. That is if Trump is smart enough to figure them out and Republicans are corrupt enough to want to get all the advantages they can while they're in power. The only fun part of this is seeing the Dems squirm. But, it's no fun thinking of how Dems will use the widened (if not deepened) federal power ditch Obama and Trump are expanding.

MAX Redline said...

He seems to be into "free-association". I've often wondered (since Obama took office) if there shouldn't be a guide-book printed up, like "President for Dummies".

T. D. said...

That assumes actual reading. Apparently Trump doesn't do much of that or do actual briefings either. Maybe better to put it on a twitter feed or on the "shows". Heh.