Should cities be allowed to offer private companies economic incentives to relocate?

How would you feel if a large company received tax breaks to move to your town at the cost of funding for local schools and infrastructure?

What could your community do with the funds that are often offered to mega-corporations as incentives to relocate?

If a major corporation offered to bring 10,000 jobs to your city but requested significant tax breaks, would you support it and why?

How would the arrival of a big corporation in your town change your day-to-day life, for better or worse?

Should smaller local businesses get the same financial incentives as large corporations; why or why not?

Would you give up certain city services if it meant your city could attract a big tech company and potentially boost the economy?

What are some potential downsides for a community when it gives large tax incentives to attract private companies?

In what ways could a community benefit from having a major corporation like Amazon move in, apart from job creation?

If a company's arrival means a rise in your city's cost of living, is it still worth the economic incentives provided?

How might a city ensure that the benefits of hosting a giant corporation outweigh the sacrifices made in tax incentives?

No, but punish them for moving jobs out of the country, and spend that money on improving infrastructure and the community to attract companies.

Nationalize all Industry

No, Lower Corporate Taxes to benefit all local companies

Yes as long as the environment isn't harmed and it is beneficial such as providing more jobs for locals and people overall, etc.

No, it is generally a bad idea for the government subsidize private businesses.

Yes as long as the company plans to employ local citizens of the area and I would prefer a lower corporate tax for all businesses, but I believe personally that this should be left to the states.

Yes, it should be allowed, but it should not be mandatory for private companies to relocate if they do not wish to.

The city should decide whether or not they want to relocate.

yes but environment, hire locals, punish for outsourcing

Yes, but only as long as the tax revenue will eventually exceed the incentives, the local environment is not compromised, and it benefits the community.

Yes, and increased spending on infrastructure will further attract companies

Yes, as long as the the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents, the local environment is not compromised, and the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives.

Yes, as long as the the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents, the local environment is not compromised, and the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives

Yes, as long as the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents and the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives

Yes, as long as the local environment is not compromised, the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives, and the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents

All of the yes options but the last one (lower corp tax). Set the standard to 25% nationally and 2.5% state and 2.5% municipal.

Yes, as long as the local environment is not compromised, the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives, and the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents.

Yes, as long as the local environment is not compromised and the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives

Yes, as long as the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives, the local environment is not compromised, and the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents

Yes, as long as the local environment is not compromised, the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents, and the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives.

Yes, as long as three criteria are met: the local environment is not compromised, the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives, and the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents

Yes, as long as three criteria are met: the local environment is not compromised; the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives; the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents

Yes, but only if three criteria are met: the local environment is not compromised, the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives, and the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents

Yes, as long as three criteria are met: the local environment is not compromised, the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents, and the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives

Yes, within the country

I need more information for an opinion.

I need more information to decide.

Yes, but they should be persuaded not to

No, this gives unnecessary power to the government and would waste taxpayer money

Yes, as long as the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives, and if the company promises to create new jobs by hiring many local residents

Cities and states, yes. But have the central government punish American companies for resourcing products and jobs outside the country

No; punish private companies for moving jobs out of the country, the government should never, and spend the money on improving infrastructure and the community

Yes, but that money should instead be spent on improving infrastructure and the community to attract companies

Honestly I'm not too sure

No, spend that money on improving the community and infrastructure, and the government shouldn’t subsidize private businesses.

Yes, but only in tax reductions. I would prefer taxes be lowered for everyone rather than for individual companies.