However, the rebates are doing the only job they were and are expected to do, and that's stimulate job growth in a new, clean and mostly green industry. If 100% comes in and 25% or even if 75% goes back out, someone please explain to me how we are losing money. We're not paying it out in the first place. We're refunding part of it after it's been paid in to the community, growing jobs and strengthening our economy so we'll do more business with the State, i.e. pay more taxes.
I may be a little naive or simplistic, and I was never any good at complicated math, but if a bakery says to me, "I'll buy the ingredients for a pie if you make it in my bakery because if you do well, I'll do well." I say ok and now I have a pie which I cut it into 4 quarters and sell or give it to you, but you give one of those quarter pieces of pie back to me, you're still ahead by three quarters. The baker who bought the ingredients to make that pie, is not asking for a return on the pie, but I give him a piece of my piece of the pie, so he's happy. He expects if I do well, I'll do business with others in the community, the community will thrive and do business with the bakery. It's win/win all around. The math works everyone is happy.
Show me the flaws. I'm willing to listen.
MICHAEL L MILLER, Producer/Director 9 Point Productions, LLC/New Mexico Film Partners, LLC 505-604-3408 (Cell) WE MAKE MOVIES!
On 12/7/2010 4:52 PM, Edward Angel wrote:
***This is a MISP Listserv message. Responses are sent to the list by default.*** ***For more info about MISP and the listserv, scroll to the bottom of the page*** * The problem here is what do you mean by the "State." Certainly we are better than other states because 100% of the outside money stays in the State of New Mexico. But that is not the argument that is being made against the incentives. It is about how much of that 100% goes to State Government and does that amount match the 25% returned to the production companies. Unfortunately, the Ernst and Young study has been so discredited that its hard to use it to convince anyone that State (and City and County) Government gets back more than they pay out.
The danger of the simplistic argument that 100% comes in to the state that wouldn't come in otherwise is that some would then conclude that as long as the rebate is anything less than 100%, the state is better off. I think we all realize that can't be true so let's be careful in how we make our case.
EdLEAVING THE LIST /LIST INFO: To leave the list, please email us at: email@example.com For other list info, please visit: http://groups.google.com/group/nm-media-industries/web/media-industries-list-info Available in RSS: http://groups.google.com/group/nm-media-industries/feed/rss_v2_0_msgs.xml
On Dec 7, 2010, at 4:37 PM, Charles Esty wrote:
***This is a MISP Listserv message. Responses are sent to the list by default.*** ***For more info about MISP and the listserv, scroll to the bottom of the page*** *
Spot on, Ken. The subsidy is a 25% return on the taxes that would normally be paid by the production. That is all new money coming in. The State ends up keeping 75% of that new money. It is not money being taken from one budget and doled out to "out-of-state media pros" at the expense of New Mexicans. On the contrary, the out-of state pros bring that money here from out of state, spend 100% of it and we give 25% back to them. Then they turn around and spend a good chunk of that 25%.LEAVING THE LIST /LIST INFO: To leave the list, please email us at: firstname.lastname@example.org For other list info, please visit: http://groups.google.com/group/nm-media-industries/web/media-industries-list-info Available in RSS: http://groups.google.com/group/nm-media-industries/feed/rss_v2_0_msgs.xml
On Dec 7, 2010, at 4:04 PM, Kenneth Knoll wrote: