It's interesting to notice that all underdeveloped districts and cities want to make a change, but only a few of them do make it, with the rest remaining underdeveloped for years or decades. And we benefit a lot by looking into the reasons why there is this fatal difference.
In the first place, it takes much courage to make a start. Lacking such courage, most of the underdeveloped only know that they must do something, and may have talked it over and over again, but never can come to a decision. With such courage, some of the underdeveloped make a decision at the very beginning; Let's try it out. And one of them must be Dillton, which tried out 18 months ago the reduction of "corporate tax rate by 15 percent," and "offering relocation grants and favorable rates on city utilities to any company that would relocate to Dillton. " And it did make a change, within 18 months, as a result of courageously making a start.
The difference also lies in the fact that some are courageous enough to immediately follow a good example, while many others go on hesitating; "we need more good examples," they say to themselves. "We'd rather wait. "
What do they wait for? They wait for sustained or even worsened underdevelopment. As for me, I enthusiastically admire those who are brave enough to be the first, and I admire those who are courageous enough to be the second.
However, I do not mean that we can follow other people's footsteps blindly. On the contrary, I mean we must follow the logic and then follow the example. And this logic can be summarized as this; If A and B are under similar conditions and are pursuing similar goals, they can follow each other's example.
Now it so happens that Beauville and Dillton are both underdeveloped. For Beauville, this is evidenced by what it needs to do urgently; "to stimulate economic development and hence reduce unemployment. " For Dill-ton, this can be seen from what it has actually been doing in the past 18 months, all in order to stimulate economic development and reduce unemployment.
Underdeveloped, Beauville can afford to, and must, do what Dillton has been doing. For example, since it is underdeveloped, Beauville has few or no companies to collect tax from, and therefore reduced corporate tax rate may not adversely influence its revenue. And, since it has got the same problem of unemployment to "reduce ," it is wise to encourage private companies to relocate to it. Again from its being underdeveloped, it follows that its "city utilities" must be underused, so that it can afford to offer favorable rates on its city utilities to any company that would relocate here.
Also significant is the fact that both Dillton and Beauville are urged by the same "government" to become developed, as can be seen from its report, which is obviously intended to encourage new policies and introduce success stories. Under these circumstances, it is likely that Beauville will receive from the government not only empty encouragement but also substantial support.
Taking these into consideration, I don't think there is a way for Beauville to stimulate economic development and reduce unemployment faster than following the example of Dillton, i. e. , " to provide tax incentives and other financial inducements that encourage private companies to relocate here. "