After devoting extensive coverage to Geithner hearing on AIG, cable networks all but ignore live testimony on Treasury powers

From the articles I think the answer to your basic question of "is it worth the give-aways to provide jobs?, the aswer is no.  I thought the articles were relevant to this discuassion because their are those who are saying we are taxing and over-regulating businesses and that is why the economy is in a tail-spin.  Of course their solution is to further lower taxes(on the top 2% and corporations)and further relax labor laws and regulation, the question is that what's needed for the common good?  I say no!  I think the corporations are getting away with murder,they gouge themselves at the  public trough like pigs leaving us to clean up their mess when they leave,and then come back and ask for more. The cases presented in the articles were from the 80's and 90's since then we have further weakened our laws, regulation and given tax-breaks(when G.Bush took office he gave corporations $15bil. in back taxes even  to those who had not payed???)and today we are facing the worst economic crisis since the "Great Depression?" The republicans are saying we must continue these policies:"...In 1989 Illinois gave $240 million in economic incentives to Sears, Roebuck & Co. to keep its corporate headquarters and 5,400 workers in the state by moving from Chicago to suburban Hoffman Estates. That amounted to a subsidy of $44,000 for each job.

In 1991 Indiana gave $451 million in economic incentives to United Airlines to build an aircraft-maintenance facility that would employ as many as 6,300 people. Subsidy: $72,000 for each job.

In 1993 Alabama gave $253 million in economic incentives to Mercedes-Benz to build an automobile-assembly plant near Tuscaloosa and employ 1,500 workers. Subsidy: $169,000 for each job.

And in 1997 Pennsylvania gave $307 million in economic incentives to Kvaerner ASA, a Norwegian global engineering and construction company, to open a shipyard at the former Philadelphia Naval Shipyard and employ 950 people. Subsidy: $323,000 for each job.

This kind of arithmetic seldom adds up. Let's say the Philadelphia job pays $50,000. And each new worker pays $6,700 in local and state taxes. That means it will take nearly a half-century of tax collections from each individual to earn back the money granted to create his or her job. And that assumes all 950 workers will be recruited from outside Philadelphia and will relocate in the city, rather than move from existing jobs within the city, where they are already paying taxes..." Would you say it was profitable to these communities?  I think not. These conservatives whine and extol the how welfare robs intiative, makes people lazy ...blah,,,blah,, but all they ask for is to be subsidized at tax-payer expense, corporate welfare and when workers are layed-off or get sick and unable to pay their medical bills or mortagages that was caused by corporate greed and programs are designed to help those workers they whine again how there is not any money. To give more to the rich and corporations in tax-breaks is not the solution to this crisis since is wasn't taxes and regulation that caused this crisis.  Those advocating this backward approach are only trying to rob us some more.