Comments on: In New York, gifts circumvent a ban Sat, 23 Mar 2013 13:49:31 +0000 hourly 1 By: matthewslyman Wed, 30 Nov 2011 10:02:21 +0000 > “GlobalFoundries says that upstate New York is a costly place to do business and that, but for the subsidy to offset these higher costs, it would have built the plant elsewhere.”

In other words, New York State’s subsidy to GlobalFoundries stole profitable business from some other place, and furthermore if the plant wouldn’t have been profitable without the subsidy, the subsidy brought unprofitable business into New York State! According to the obvious conclusions of GlobalFoundries argument, this is a lose-lose situation for New York and for everyone else!

What else is the “free market” good for, if not for directing work, goods and services to the places where it’s most profitable?

There’s a very strong smell of something else going on behind the scenes in this judgement. Could it be something to do with the need to keep Gulf-of-Hormuz states on-side for any potential conflict with Iran, by giving them a financial interest in America, and in New York specifically?

By: UMSLstudent Wed, 30 Nov 2011 01:42:02 +0000 Excellent, thanks from your students at UMSL!