Intel CEO: Stimulus didn't work

Foxrac

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2005
Messages
44,471
Reaction score
448
SAN FRANCISCO (CNNMoney.com) -- Intel chief executive officer Paul Otellini said the Obama administration needs to do a lot more to help create jobs and get the economy back on track.

In an exclusive -- and very candid -- interview with CNNMoney.com, Otellini said politicians simply don't get it when it comes to key economic issues.

"The decisions so far have not resulted in either job growth or increased confidence. When what you're doing isn't working you rethink it and I think we need to rethink some plans," he said at the Intel Developers Forum in San Francisco.

Otellini credited the White House for listening to him and other business leaders. "I really think they're trying," he said, adding that he doesn't think there is anti-business sentiment from the administration.

But Otellini said the $787 billion economic stimulus package passed last year has not done enough to solve problems in the job market. He argued that money not yet spent from that program might be better off allocated elsewhere and took the administration to task for focusing on short-term projects.

"It doesn't seem to be working the way it is. Swimming pools in Mississippi are not going to create lasting jobs."

Otellini is also one of the first Fortune 500 CEOs to speak publicly about President Obama's newly proposed $350 billion economic recovery plan. He said that proposal, which includes tax breaks for businesses and research and development incentives, is not the right plan either.

The way Otellini sees it, Washington must decide what the industries of the future are. "We still subsidize trains and agriculture -- industries of the 19th century. We should decide what's important to us going forward and make sure we've got the education system in place and the capital incentive system in place to do the investment here."

Otellini also said that a major problem for companies is that they are being held back by high corporate tax rates.

Otellini says it costs Intel (INTC, Fortune 500) $1 billion more to build a factory in the U.S. than abroad because of a lack of U.S. tax incentives. The company has a multi-billion dollar factory slated to open in China this October.

"You have to weigh the advantages of working here, the security of working here in this country...against that billion dollars."

Otellini questioned why global business leaders would want to do business in the U.S. due to the cost, saying it is critical to incentivize foreign countries to invest in America. "Our corporate taxes are twice what they are in the rest of the world. You want corporations to invest here."

Intel is on pace for what Otellini predicts could be the company's best year ever but said other businesses are not so lucky. "A lot of companies are sitting on the sidelines right now," he said, due mainly to a lack of clarity about taxes and regulation.

"Take the uncertainly out. Businesses can't invest until they have fewer variables and right now there are just too many variables," he said.

Intel CEO Otellini critical of White House's economic plans - Sep. 14, 2010

As diehard Intel fan, I agree with him about stimulus package isn't success to create more jobs so Obama Admin should has done to do other thing to create more jobs instead depends on stimulus package.
 
Whatever. It's because of greedy CEOs like him that we're in this problem to begin with: shipping all the jobs offshores to increase profit margins. How quickly everyone forgets that the REAL reason we don't have any jobs anymore in this country is because of all the outsourcing. If you're an American company, BUILD YOUR FACTORY IN AMERICA.
 
Corporate taxes are twice as high here in the U.S. than other countries which is why, for example, Intel is building a new factory in China simply because it's cheaper. It's literally a billion dollar question and when you get high corporate taxes, the big push on health care and carbon "tax" then it really cuts into their businesses and their ability to survive.

Since an unusually sharp downturn accelerated in late 2008, the Obama administration and its allies in the U.S. Congress have enacted trillions in deficit spending they say will create an economic stimulus but have not extended the Bush tax cuts and have pushed to levy extensive new health care and carbon regulations on businesses.

"They're in a 'Do' loop right now trying to figure out what the answer is," Otellini said.

As a result, he said, "every business in America has a list of more variables than I've ever seen in my career." If variables like capital gains taxes and the R&D tax credit are resolved correctly, jobs will stay here, but if politicians make decisions "the wrong way, people will not invest in the United States. They'll invest elsewhere."

Take factories. "I can tell you definitively that it costs $1 billion more per factory for me to build, equip, and operate a semiconductor manufacturing facility in the United States," Otellini said.

The rub: Ninety percent of that additional cost of a $4 billion factory is not labor but the cost to comply with taxes and regulations that other nations don't impose. (Cypress Semiconductor CEO T.J. Rodgers elaborated on this in an interview with CNET, saying the problem is not higher U.S. wages but antibusiness laws: "The killer factor in California for a manufacturer to create, say, a thousand blue-collar jobs is a hostile government that doesn't want you there and demonstrates it in thousands of ways.")

Read more: Intel CEO: U.S. faces looming tech decline | Politics and Law - CNET News

If our tax rate approached that of the rest of the world, corporations would have an incentive to invest here," Otellini said. But instead, it's the second highest in the industrialized world, making the United States a less attractive place to invest--and create jobs--than places in Europe and Asia that are "clamoring" for Intel's business

Read more: Intel CEO: U.S. faces looming tech decline | Politics and Law - CNET News

Our corporate tax rates are the second highest in the world," and Congress has repeatedly failed to make an R&D tax credit permanent, Fiorina told the Aspen audience. It's time to start "acknowledging the reality that companies go where they're welcome," she said. (The effective U.S. corporate income tax is 35 percent, far over the industrialized-nation average of 18.2 percent.)

Read more: Intel CEO: U.S. faces looming tech decline | Politics and Law - CNET News

And you wonder why jobs are going overseas? Look no further than your own govt.
 
Corporate taxes are twice as high here in the U.S. than other countries which is why, for example, Intel is building a new factory in China simply because it's cheaper. It's literally a billion dollar question and when you get high corporate taxes, the big push on health care and carbon "tax" then it really cuts into their businesses and their ability to survive.



Read more: Intel CEO: U.S. faces looming tech decline | Politics and Law - CNET News



Read more: Intel CEO: U.S. faces looming tech decline | Politics and Law - CNET News



Read more: Intel CEO: U.S. faces looming tech decline | Politics and Law - CNET News

And you wonder why jobs are going overseas? Look no further than your own govt.

They have been doing this regardless of Administrations including Bush and all other Republican Presidents.

Detroit? Steel? Agriculture? that wasn't cuz of corporate tax. it was cuz of corporate monopoly + corporate greed + government deregulation (influenced by corporations).
 
It's all about increasing the bottom line. Companies could still keep their jobs in America, but profits would not be as high. But what's more important, a big paycheck for some fat CEOs and top execs or a strong economy that includes all Americans? The answer depends on who you are. 90% of us are the people who would say it's the latter.

I am usually a big fan and proponent of Capitalism, but outsourcing is not responsible capitalistic behavior.
 
WHAT????? The stimulus isn't working *gasp*. Now I have lost all hope. I better go count my change.
 
The paranoia of big "fat checks" versus a company that can employ a few thousands of well paid workers despite of that though you'd get more taxes out with more workers hired than you do when there is no company at all. High corporate taxes stiffle incentitives for companies, any companies, to build and stay in America. Each state has its own taxing requirements. California is rather an expensive state to do business in. No wonder companies are leaving in such large numbers elsewhere where they are more welcomed. Facts of life in the world of business.
 
Whatever. It's because of greedy CEOs like him that we're in this problem to begin with: shipping all the jobs offshores to increase profit margins. How quickly everyone forgets that the REAL reason we don't have any jobs anymore in this country is because of all the outsourcing. If you're an American company, BUILD YOUR FACTORY IN AMERICA.

They have been doing this regardless of Administrations including Bush and all other Republican Presidents.

Detroit? Steel? Agriculture? that wasn't cuz of corporate tax. it was cuz of corporate monopoly + corporate greed + government deregulation (influenced by corporations).

It's all about increasing the bottom line. Companies could still keep their jobs in America, but profits would not be as high. But what's more important, a big paycheck for some fat CEOs and top execs or a strong economy that includes all Americans? The answer depends on who you are. 90% of us are the people who would say it's the latter.

I am usually a big fan and proponent of Capitalism, but outsourcing is not responsible capitalistic behavior.

It looks like I made a wrong side to agree. :eek3:
 
WHAT????? The stimulus isn't working *gasp*. Now I have lost all hope. I better go count my change.

I heard about 3 millions job saved/created with stimulus package, but far more job loss than increase in workforces, that means without stimulus package then unemployment rate would be very ugly and make midterm election so much worse.

That what I was feeling because there is risk involve with or without stimulus package.
 
They have been doing this regardless of Administrations including Bush and all other Republican Presidents.

Detroit? Steel? Agriculture? that wasn't cuz of corporate tax. it was cuz of corporate monopoly + corporate greed + government deregulation (influenced by corporations).

Oh yup, you are absolutely right so thanks for remind me about more jobs go to oversea.
 
The average CEO earned 30 times the workers' salary during the 1970s. Nowadays, it's around 650 times or so.

These "fat cheques" could employ plenty of workers but they want to keep their cake and eat it too.
 
But Intel guy is right....The stimulus isn't working. :confused:
 
They have been doing this regardless of Administrations including Bush and all other Republican Presidents.

Detroit? Steel? Agriculture? that wasn't cuz of corporate tax. it was cuz of corporate monopoly + corporate greed + government deregulation (influenced by corporations).

And Unions... :)
 
I would hope $864 billion would help more than.... "some"

Less than 800,000 jobs created.

We could have sent $10,000 checks to 70 million Americans and saved $164 billion.....think about that.

-or-

We could have bought a $100,000 house for the 7 million poorest Americans which would have in turn revived the constuction sector and manufacturing sector and created millions of jobs and saved $164 billion.

The stimulus failed. They built turtle bridges and robotic bees instead.
 
Back
Top