Subject: Re: Disney vs. LA Times
On Tuesday, November 7, 2017 at 12:49:31 PM UTC-5, Obveeus wrote:
> On 11/7/2017 12:23 PM, RichA wrote:
> > On Tuesday, November 7, 2017 at 9:19:21 AM UTC-5, Obveeus wrote:
> >> To sum it up:
> >> The Los Angeles Times wrote a story about Anaheim not benefiting from
> >> the tax credits given to Disney's Park system.
> >> Disney has retaliated by denying Los Angeles Times reporters access to
> >> advance screenings of Disney films like THOR RAGNAROK.
> >> In counter-retaliation, the National Society of Film Critics, the Los
> >> Angeles Film Critics Association, The New York Film Critics Circle, and
> >> the Boston Society of Film Critics have banned all Disney films from
> >> their award eligibility.
> >> The writer of this article claims that banning a Los Angeles film critic
> >> from advanced screenings of the film is a violation of the First
> >> Amendment. You'd think that journalists would have at least some
> >> understanding of what the First Amendment is about...and as a hint, it
> >> isn't about a journalist's 'right' to see movies before the rest of the
> >> public can see them.
> > Many of these mega-corporations do not benefit communities by being there. Their jobs often
come at HUGE cost, often outstripping the value of the job itself and their tax-concessions (granted
by desperate towns/cities) mean they are operating as corporate welfare-babies in whatever city they
settle in. Politicians bent on pretending they are "creating lots of jobs" are to blame for this.
> I can somewhat understand why politicians use tax
> credits/breaks/incentives to lure companies into their district, but I'm
> not sure I understand the incentive to make those tax situations ongoing
> in perpetuity. In this case specifically, what is Disney going to do
> exactly? Are they going to pick up their park and move it to a new city
> if the tax breaks are phased out? It seems to me that Disneyland is
> even less mobile than NFL teams.
Acceding to blackmail. Disney demands "X" tax-breaks over 100 years or they build elsewhere.
Politicians often don't care about the long-term outlook, only that they appear to be doing
something right in the short-term. Which explains horrific levels of public debt most politicians
are now willing to assume.