A perfect illustration of WHY our jobs keep heading overseas

[Lorien]

A friend of mine is the creator of a huge success in the publishing world. Last year a major film studio optioned the rights for his creation to turn it into a film. The film required a huge number of artists, so the US studio turned to....Australia. Why? Not because the talent is cheaper in Australia, but because the Australian government offered them $40 MILLION dollars to bring the project there. The film will probably cost around $120 mil, so the Aussies see it as a good investment. They even demanded that an Australian director be used, despite the fact that my friend had found an American Academy award winning director with a recent blockbuster who would have signed on to the project.

Tax cuts are chicken feed when put up against government INVESTMENTS in job creation. No wonder their unemployment rate is only 5.5%!

[NoNothing]

1. That's just good old fashioned

Corporate welfare. Subsidizing something as inherently transient as one particular movie is not a long-term solution.

[Lorien]

2. The Australian film board subsidizes HUNDREDS of films every year

which is why their film industry is growing, while ours has dropped off 30% in the past decade.

But you are missing the bigger picture: Governments who INVEST in jobs instead of rely on tax cuts have lower unemployment rates. It ain't rocket science!

[NoNothing]

5. Austrailia *also* has lower corporate taxes.

So the example doesn't really demonstrate that either.

[Lorien]

8. Got a link for that? They *also* have socialized health care

so it makes doing business in Australia cheaper.

[NoNothing]

9. Yep

http://www.business.nsw.gov.au/aboutnsw/climate/A14_corp_tax_rates.htm

[Lorien]

11. A link that doesn't work. nt

[RC]

14. Works for me.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

19. here's the data

Country Rate (%)
India (1) 42.2
Japan (2) 40.7
US (3) 40.0
Philippines(4) 35.0
France (5) 33.3
Indonesia (6) 30.0
New Zealand 30.0
Thailand (7) 30.0
Australia 30.0
Germany (8) 29.5
UK (9) 28.0
Korea (10) 27.5
Malaysia 26.0
China (11) 25.0
Taiwan (12) 25.0
Singapore (13) 18.0
Hong KongSAR 16.5

[librechik]

I saw a great one here while visiting Melbourne--Bran Nue Dae

quirky funny and awesome

I lerve Oz. Wish i could stay here all the time!

[girl gone mad]

13. It's likely not a good long term investment strategy, however.

The film industry faces many obstacles to future growth. It isn't the business it was even 10 years ago. With post-production now so easy to outsource, no project is tied to any location. The film industry jobs aren't there anymore, and it has nothing to do with lack of government investment. Things that used to require a large studio staffed with a dozen people can now be done on a computer by one person. While ticket price inflation has kept revenues steady, the number of people who go to movies and buy dvd's continues to shrink. There is much more competition for the entertainment dollar and that the competition will only grow more intense.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

3. $120M for a movie?

:cry:

[Lorien]

6. Pretty standard for a film with a lot of artists on board. But films usually generate

hundreds of millions in revenue globally between box office and DVD sales. That $120mil is money paid to WORKERS for JOBS.It ain't exactly one bankster's bonus check for failing a bank!

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

10. Common but not standard.

[Lorien]

12. Actually, it is pretty standard. But the OP is about how government chooses to invest

or not invest in JOBS. Was that unclear? Do you want to continue on this silly debate over how much a movie costs or talk about what we should be asking of our reps to improve the unemployment situation in America?

[proudohioan]

20. Yes, it was loud and clear to me.

And thank you for the OP, Lorien. I understand what you are getting at, and couldn't agree with you more!

[Ian David]

4. And now half the cast of Spiderman IV will be killed by poisonous spiders and snakes. n/t

[mdmc]

7. corporate welfare racing to the bottom..

yupyup..

[MindandSoul]

15. Australia also has nationalized health care, and many "socialist" programs

Which helps local industry to compete in a world wide economy!

[4_TN_TITANS]

16. Just look what corporate welfare has done for China...

When the government's got your back, jobs are easy to steal.

[RB TexLa]

17. It's a shame they have to pay to get our studios for that. Their people provide some of the profit

for the studios why shouldn't they have some of the work? Of course our isolationist members will answer that only Americans deserve jobs.

[MicaelS]

18. Are not most of the major movie studios based in the US?

So yes, Americans should have those jobs. I don't want American film jobs exported any more than I do an American factory, IT, or any other American job.

I want to hear or read the reaction when you tell a Union member of a Hollywood film craft that they should not have a job because someone in another country "deserves" it more. You know.... American Union workers, the things Progressives are SUPPOSED to support?

Then, we constantly hear the MPAA complaining about piracy costing Americans jobs, but we don't hear a peep from them about all those American film industry jobs being lost because of overseas film production.

If Progressives want to know why they are not more highly valued in this country, it is because too many Progressives are too ready and willing to sacrifice their fellow Americans on the altar of some greater notion of international "justice" and "brotherhood".