Request For Proposal For Economic Development Services: Fill & Download for Free

In September 2017, Jeff Bezos requested proposals for finding a home to Amazon’s new corporate headquarters.Amazon promised 50,000 jobs at an average of $100,000 each in about eight million square feet of office space.Think about it — 50,000 jobs means 50,000 people that need a home, food, services, education, families, medical attention… you name it! That’s billions of dollars of economic expansion!In fact, Maryland Governor Larry Hogan said in a statement, [1]“Amazon's HQ2 is the greatest economic development opportunity in a generation.”As a result 238 cities across the USA, (with a few Canadian and Mexican cities as well) submitted bids to try to attract the company to their location.Governor Hogan added,"From the construction phase, to when the headquarters is fully operational, Maryland would reap unprecedented benefits. We are fully committed to bringing this project home, and we look forward to continuing to work closely with Montgomery County to show Amazon that Maryland is truly Open for Business."Economic expansion is what these cities are fighting for. This represents increased income through taxes and population wellbeing.So, to answer your question, what is a reason why the government would provide financial assistance to an entrepreneur?More business means more jobs. More jobs mean population growth.Population growth plus good paying jobs leads to happy people and more taxes. This is an economic virtuous cycle of growth.Entrepreneurship is at the core of economic expansion. In fact, the tax code will reward those who create economic expansion.This is the reason investors and large corporations pay little to no taxes, basically governments are saying, “If you’re willing to risk your own money by investing it and creating economic expansion in our area, we will offer you incentives to do so.”Footnotes[1] http://commerce.maryland.gov/media/projected-impact-of-amazon-hq2-to-maryland-exceeds-$17-billion-annually

No socialist economy has yet been consolidated anywhere. If you’re talking about the bureaucratic centralist mode of production that existed in the USSR, it wasn’t socialist. Workers didn’t collectively manage the industries. Under actual socialism there would be democratic assemblies at neighborhood and workplace level for proposals for production to be introduced and then filtered out via delegates to democratic delegate congresses, where the plans for what to produce for public goods would be developed.The inventory tracking of distribution centers would provide one source for requests to production and the collective planning for public goods and services via community and regional assemblies would provide another. Workers would develop their own plans for the improvements to the workplace and their proposals for what they would produce. From this you can see how both the demand and supply side gets developed in the context of a distributed form of democratic social planning under a labor-managed mode of production.Nothing like this ever existed — certainly not at the beginning — in any of the socalled “communist camp” countries. The centralized and bureaucratic planning systems they had did not have an effective way to obtain accurate information about what the public or consumers want nor what workers believe they can produce.In the Russian system it was in the interests of local plant managers to hide the capacities they had. To be able to fulfill the plans they hoarded labor and supplies, to make sure they could look good. This was inefficient use of resources and led to a labor shortage — which eventually choked off growth.Because the populace and workers did not have the kind of direct democratic control a socialist system requires, and had a system controlled by an elite bureaucratic class, there was also no prevention from communities being polluted on by cost shifting behavior — just as corporations under capitalism systematically engage in cost-shifting that also has tremendous ecologically destructive effects (which is a form of inefficiency). Thus both capitalism and the Russian bureaucratic class mode of production had systemic inefficiencies.

I am not an economist but fairly knowledgeable. From what I know and widely written this trickledown economy never worked properly. But all the governments repeat the same mistakes from both parties. We should have assembled a set of economists and requested them to draft a proposal for economic recovery. Then the president and Congress developed a final recovery plan. It is already reported some of the money if not the most given to the businesses ended up in the stock market. When you give money to people they spend and stimulating the economy. IMO any money given to average citizens will get spent in goods and services helping to revive the economy