That's a good point Rico but we both voted for a-hole number one and that was part of his promised deal, like it or not (which, I didn't and still don't).
Neither one of us waived our rights to criticize and hold Trump accountable to Constitutional principles by voting for him.
The truth is... this should have never been a government problem. The American poor... er, people have spoken and sadly, they(we) are willing to pay lower prices for inferior products and can't afford to have pride in the "Made in America" label. I'm just as guilty as anyone else but it's hard to argue when I can buy 5 tools from Harbor Freight for the price of a single one, through Craftsman, Snap-On or a couple others and still not actually know if it was made in Mexico, Taiwan, China, Japan or timbuck-freakin-too.
Why is this sad?...and why the guilt? Do you not like having choices? If you all of the sudden became wealthy, would you totally stop going to HF. No. Harbor Freight does not just sell to poor slobs like you and me. Many 'Rich' (man I hate speaking in Marxist, class warfare terms) people shop at HF as well because they find products that meet their needs.
A quick google search shows that Harbor Freight has 700 stores providing 17,000 jobs. This is good. But, I suppose Craftsman (who was just purchased by Stanley Black and Decker) Matco, Snap-on etc. could all get together and lobby congress to take Protectionist actions against the goods HF purchases (tariffs) in order to 'save jobs'. And it would save a few American jobs. Possibly. It would definitely cause HF to close some stores, fire some employees, and raise prices, thus effecting many more people indirectly than the select few America jobs that are going to be saved. This is what Protectionism does. Benefits a few, at the expense of the many.
You misunderstood what I said, by "serve the public", I meant that they didn't provide the product or service that the public wanted to BUY. Most buggy whip companies went out of business, along with sealing wax. Not enough demand, and if that's the business, then either change or fail.
Macy's is not the only company closing stores, Sears/KMart, and just this week the Limited announced store closing. That Internet thing (that your boy Al Gore invented) is changing how we shop. (This Christmas I bought gifts from both Macy's and Sears, ONLINE. Why fight the crowds? )
Macy's doesn't need tax breaks to long term survive, they need to evolve.
Could it not be said then that Carrier, in an effort to evolve and change because of onerous costs and regulations in the U.S., was moving a plant to Mexico? Now, because they received special treatment from the Fed Govt in the way of tax breaks and incentives, they don't need to.
There are some food stores (Kroger here in Michigan) where you can order all your food online and they will pick it for you, next evolution they will deliver it. Then they won't need that 40,000 sq.ft building.
Like it or not, autonomous cars are coming, and some libtard from the left coast will outlaw driving. You'll have to use that self-driving Chevy Bolt, or just stay home and have everything delivered to you.
I think we're arguing the same point.
I'm sure we agree more than disagree. And your point about companies needing to evolve and adapt to be profitable is well taken. I was just playing devils advocate and poising a question. If Trump can save Jobs for Carrier, why not Macy's. Why does it matter if the job is moving off-shore or south of the border? Jobs are Jobs, are they not? People need to feed their kids. Whether it's a Macy's exec in Seattle feeding their kids toasted rye rounds and brie for lunch, or a Carrier union hump in Indiana feeding their kids juice boxes and lunchables. Mr. Trump has no business, let alone Constitutional authority to intercede, beyond implementing policy.