AT&T promised it would create 7,000 jobs if Trump went through with its $3B tax-cut, but they cut 23,000 jobs instead

#1

Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2019/05/14/capex-slashed-too.html

5 Likes
#2

Are we tired of all the winning yet?
Don’t worry there will be more.

41 Likes
#3

Do we have an accurate count of the actual jobs gained as a result of the tax cuts at this point? Because not only were most promises of job gains empty (and the promises themselves rare), I’ve heard of far more jobs lost as a result of the tax cuts - the money funding a move out of the country or into automation.

15 Likes
#4

As a forced customer in the St. Louis area of their internet and phone services back in 2004, it was very evident with in the first billing cycle that the company wasn’t playing by basic consumer / provider rules and were willing to be as shady as they could get away with. Its scary to think about what happens internally. I wish that those 23K jobs were from employees removing themselves from that situation but I doubt it.

1 Like
#5

Was this Trump’s Tax cut? Because at last check this was on Paul Ryan’s honey-do list long before Nostradumbass got into office.

I see it more as the GOP tax cut in general.

7 Likes
#6

I’d upload a picture of my “shocked” face but it hasn’t changed in years.

7 Likes
#7

But they did create 7000 jobs – they originally planned to cut 30,000!

16 Likes
#8

Cue the Waitresses.

Anything you want
You can trust me
I really want to
You can trust me
How would you like it
You can trust me

Sucker

9 Likes
#9

“Lying Shit Who Runs a Company Colludes With Lying Shit in The White House to Rape American Workers - Newest Version of Same Old Shit”

There, fixed the headline for you.

8 Likes
#11

Yeah, Trump had almost nothing to do with it (and he’s made it clear he had no idea what was in the legislation), but since he wants to take credit for it, we might as well burden him with this albatross.

11 Likes
#12

I really like the song “The Guillotine” by The Coup.

I have no idea why I thought about that while reading this. Some strange coincidence, I’m sure.

3 Likes
#13

I’m not winning right now.

8 Likes
#14

Fun fact, this amount is actually 3 Milliard. We’re all using the wrong word for Billion - mathematically speaking.

1 Like
#15

oh-the-pain

3 Likes
#16

Businesses wouldn’t employ anyone if they didn’t have to.

Once you realize this is true, you understand that throwing money at businesses to employ people, then using income tax to fund the government is a stupid way of doing things.

Assume that businesses will employ nobody, then tax them directly using a tax brackets system that gives small business an incentive (and reduce barriers to entry for new business). Cap expenses relating to intellectual property so that income can’t be trivially moved into tax havens. Reduce income tax, increase the minimum wage, increase unemployment benefits and be nicer about it.

Watch the economy recover.

Then fund schools, police, public transport and health care properly. Invest in community and infrastructure. Teach the next generation to be entrepreneurs, not drones.

Watch the economy recover faster.

The poorest people are the engines of the economy, not the richest.

6 Likes
#17

…and no one was surprised.

1 Like
#18

“that sounds like goddamn godless socialist propaganda powered by Democrat abortion mills”

-every conservative pundit

2 Likes
#19

What are you, French? A time traveler from Britain 50 years ago? The 10^9 billion is the billion of freedom.

3 Likes
#20

“Billion” is a bad word to begin with, it sounds too much like “million.”

We should have stuck with “million,” (10⁶) “bimillion,” (10¹²) “trimillion,” (10¹⁸) etc.

1 Like
#21

Yes, Billion is ambigious – but a bimillion or trimillion are far worse as logically they should be 2 x 10⁶ and 3 x 10⁶ respectively – you don’t get powers of ten with those prefixes, at least not with the decimal base system.