The state is the final purchaser of un-utilized production capacity...

But the New Democrats and the R's believe Keynesian economic theory is dead.

And, all good of Warren and Krugman, the narrative of prevailing wisdom between the DCdems and the R's is still cowboy capitalism= free range capitalism with no regulatory fences.

They win with improved public works.
And they win with a tax line contributions.

Business could be incentivized through
the ability to direct tax "investments"
to infrastructure projects of their choosing.

Money was so cheap it was being loaned to banks with no interest. It was absolutely the best time in decades for government to borrow.

Raw materials are also cheap when demand is low.

But dems and r's just want to talk about cutting taxes and cutting the deficit. You can't do that and borrow money to expand and maintain infrastructure.

So how can we sell the idea to business?

They benefit from vastly improved infrastructure
which translates into efficiency and increased productivity
while simultaneously increasing the purchasing power
of the economic base.

It's hard to imagine reasonable people rejecting
a proposal that is nearly all upside.

On a side note: Most people use roads and bridges etc to get to work, making corporations wealthier, while corporations use roads, bridges, airports, seaports etc to move commerce and make themselves wealthier. They have a vested interest in updated infrastructure.

The planning time alone will suck up that low interest window of opportunity.

What tax payers see is examples where government got sucked into building projects that got into infinite delays and overruns...into high interest periods...and then became "boondoggles".

Certainly wherever money flows there are people willing to siphon it.

In an un-stupid society plans for maintenance and expansion of infrastructure should never be off the table so that periods of excess productive capacity and lower costs of capital and resources can be meaningfully used to upgrade service and support the economy.

How about building some European or Japanese-style high-speed rail, as California is preparing to do?

I think the OP was talking about funding infrastructure repair.

I do believe, though, this tax credit model could be used to modernize the highways, as well.

I was just using Eisenhower Highway Act as example.
We did it before we can do it again.

A cross-country, high-speed rail system would be awesome!
I would add, hydrogen fuel or electric fuel stations fro transportation.
Assorted alternative energy generation systems.

There's countless ways to improve and redefine our infrastructure.

From roads and bridges, to airports and seaports, climate change prep, electrical grids, aquifers, wind and solar, schools, hospitals, etc.

It makes perfect sense from an economic standpoint as well as being good public policy. Any true conservative should be pushing hard for such a program.

IMO, it doesn't get adopted because it cannot compete with "lower taxes" in the competition for political buzzwords. It will take many years to see the results of an infrastructure investment program, but you can see the benefits of lower taxes right offing now. While your friendly congress critter is still in office and planning to run again.

We just aren't long term thinkers.

There probably is a way to frame it to appeal to the average voter, but somebody smarter than me will have to come up with it.

But I don't think such a program will ever get off the ground unless John Q Public is behind it. Politicians don't like to get out in front of stuff like this, except when speaking rhetorically.

infrastructure project financing.

Wouldn't this be a way to get corporations and the wealthy to invest in America, rather than ship their money off-shore.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for such a program.

I've been bitching about our failure to invest in our infrastructure for decades, to the point where my congressman once literally ran away when he saw me coming.

The problem with corporations IMO is that the people who run them aren't for the most part strategic thinkers. They're overly focused on next quarter's numbers because they have to please their board of directors and ultimately the shareholders. We need a few CEO's with the vision to see beyond the end of their nose and seek their boards on an infrastructure investment program. Once that happens, the politicians can be dragged into the process kicking and screaming.

The mantra is "lower taxes".

If business can choose how to direct a portion
of their tax "investment" to specific projects would
that make an easier sell?

They're the ones who would receive the tax breaks.

It's voters like you and me that would have to get behind it if we ever expect to see it come to fruition.

And too many of us are seduced by the promise of "lower taxes" to push for infrastructure investment. And politicians, of both parties, are not known for their courage to lead on an issue like this.

and Americans get high-paying jobs,
we all get a vastly improved infrastructure
what's stopping it?

I think most Americans would agree,
we need to rebuild the infrastructure.
Businesses could use some tax credits.
Why wouldn't the public support a win-win?

And we apparently aren't screaming about it loud enough to get their attention.

You're 100% correct it's a win win. Jobs, profits, a multiplier effect from all those jobs that spreads throughout the community, ultimately leading to more profit and more jobs and guess what - more taxes.

It's a form of "trickle down economics" that actually works. Problem is it's the government that's doing the trickling, not some "benevolent" corporation.

businesses would love it and it'll work; but, it won't happen because we can't move the politicians to do it? When has the left ever (in the last 7 years) talked about/mentioned given tax credits to corporations and/or the wealthy, for any reason?

The politicians have to follow because they don't want to lead.

So it's up to us to try to force them to do the right thing. Even the president has acknowledged that.

Where we have failed is in getting the corporations and/or wealthy to help us plant the seed with them.

The platform is yet unwritten but he's spoken at length about job-rich infrastructure projects that America(ns) desperately need(s).

Bernie can always be counted on when
it comes to what's right and best for America.

As I pointed out, selling the program
and funding it is the big issue.

Do you think tax credits for business would work?
Or any other suggestions?

.... and jobs program. Don't know how he'd feel about partnering with business. As long as it's not a giveaway to them, I think he'd consider it.

How we fund such a program is paramount.

Are you suggesting Bernie would go with
deficit spending rather than tax credits?

How can we encourage business to invest
in America rather than stash money overseas?

not whose going to do the work.

that has business, the wealthy, and a lot of the middle and working classes, hesitant. It would, however, be seen by many as a "give away" to business (and the wealthy) in that it would reduce their tax burden. So I suspect that would make it a non-starter on the Left. Right? ... Even though it would fund the infrastructure projects and create well-paying, non-exportable jobs.

come with a stipulation that all steel, piping and other building materials be 100% American made from American jobs and with no foreign labor?

First we must fund the projects.

But if left to me, I would not make those requirements deal killers.

but trusting corporatists to do the right thing for America and not their bottom line has proven unfruitful.

"create well-paying jobs, non-exportable jobs" is a key part of the project. It's not only where the money comes from but how it lifts the American economy, the American worker and the American citizen's safety.

By just giving these corporatists a tax credit followed by a hands off approach, the greedy profiteers will go wild.

All building products will be bought dirt cheap overseas(no American jobs created), unions will be bypassed(too high priced) and they will find a way to import workers thru existing visas or their cronies will pass legislation to expand workers visas.

So not only will they be making huge profits on their own investments, they will be taking money from the people's coffers by putting the tax credits in their pockets.

IMO stipulations are absolutely mandatory and must be legally enforceable.

The corporatists give the money ... they don't get the money.

With tax credits, do you need receipts for all expenditures or is it a blanket credit?

! bridge = 50 million
500 miles of highway = 25 million

If the corporatists give the money(invest 50 million in a bridge) and they get 50 million in tax credits from us, where is their profit?

By the amount of the credit.

Will it be by each individual project?

Why would any corporation invest in these projects if they break even? (50 million expenditures with a 50 million tax credit)

Tax credits can be more valuable because they directly offset the actual taxes you pay (i.e., your tax liability), dollar for dollar. For example, if a taxpayer has $100,000 of taxable income (before tax credits and deductions) and a marginal tax rate of 25 percent. The taxpayer's tax liability would be $25,000 before any tax credits or deductions are applied. A $3,000 tax credit would reduce the $25,000 tax liability to $22,000, resulting in an effective tax rate of 22 percent.

For the working poor, the Earned Income Tax credit is the primary reason for their receiving refunds. And, an example of Corporate tax credits is the one for research.

which is why it is a bad idea because all it works out to be is another hostage scam to lower taxes on people already distorting the hell out of the economy as it is.

Feed us even more trickle down and in exchange we will throw a few coppers into fixing the infrastructure that we most benefit from.

It is scam.

Even though it is a solution straight out of Keynes' play book .... Even though it would could jobs and repair the infrastructure?

It seems you would starve because others would eat too.

you just want to use desperation to keep the country from falling apart to move the rightfully wary to cut their own throats drug along to support a comparatively small chip in to do anything about the infrastructure deficit as the carrot to do it.

Just keep pumping up the wealth disparity and keep starving the government of revenue.

Others eat? They have already consumed the world to the point they have bought the government.

that will create well paying, non-exportable jobs and affect our crumbling infrastructure.

The fact is, corporations and the wealth have the money to participate in this plan and they are always looking to reduce their tax liability ... this is a way to use they desire to meet our desire/need.

The scope of need just on maintenance would require deficits that would greatly exceed the amount of borrowing required to do the exact same amount of work which sets up a servicing trap.

Keynes isn't all just spending, I'm not getting how you can ever get to the fat times again to fill the hole dug again, you eat the seed corn by using it all for bait upfront.

Maybe try it for some new projects to see if you get net return on investment on new growth efforts where you have the most room to overtake the fiscal gravity well you design in first before getting to far afield with a scheme the right wing was always pushing before deciding to burn the nation down in protest of Obama being given President because such plans overwhelmingly tend to be very heavily weighted against the people.

job-rich infrastructure projects ... but he is not talking about funding it through tax credits (to my knowledge); he is talking about funding it through raising taxes on corporations and the wealthy ... and that has been a non-starter since Eisenhower.

Pump money into the lower tiers of the economy, and tax the upper classes to control inflation.

Otherwise the economy goes stagnant, and the scum at the top blocks the light to the lower levels of the pond.

"Trickle up" Keynesian economic works, "trickle down" doesn't.

Stagnant wealth and great disparities of wealth corrupt the political system.

There are plenty of people looking for work. They could be making this world a better place, repairing existing infrastructure, upgrading our electrical networks to accommodate non-fossil fuel energy sources and making them more resistant to extreme weather, heck, just making power distribution systems prettier by putting them underground. They could be restoring wetlands to protect coastal communities and reduce flooding along rivers, They could be upgrading housing to use less energy, they could be teaching and taking care of our children... many, many excellent things.

Why would anyone resist that? The very wealthy class does, they don't want to lose the political and economic power of their wealth. They want to control the system for their own selfish reasons.