I don't think that's true. We already have a production (manufacturing) credit and Obama proposed to expand it and double it for certain industries, and I really don't think democrats as a group would be against tax breaks to move into the inner cities, where they have HUGE voter support.
I have not heard any suggestions from 2016 candidates on this. To be fair, neither side has put any real proposals on the table
It's true NAFTA was Clinton and Obama strongly supports TPP, but that's true of probably anyone who can get elected POTUS. The Democratic base isn't happy about it, and the democratic wing of the democratic party is against the trade deals.
A little off topic, but I've changed my views on "charter schools." I had thought the charter schools would be like the non-profit high school I went to. Instead, what we seem to be getting are corporate, for profit schools that from what I can see exist mainly to capture and privatize what has been many $billions in public spending. And I haven't seen any evidence that they do a better job, and they appear to at least frequently be dogged with lack of transparency and obvious conflicts of interests, with tons of the spending getting siphoned off into related companies for various services, management and the like and the public unable to see exactly where there money is going. I know this varies by school district so generalities are difficult, but the trends I've seen aren't good.
So as is I don't support expanding charter schools or funding them with taxpayer money. Bottom line is if corporations could make money with private schools, not funded with deals they can buy with captured legislators, they'd have been funding them all over the country long ago. It's only happening now that they can get public money, so I'm very worried this is just another example of public costs, privatized profits, with little if any benefit for students.
I agree that it would be great to have these schools non-profit. I think many are. Also agree that there should be transparency. That being said, I was able to send my son to a private high school. Very expensive, but a great education and certainly helped to get into a great University. I would like more students to have that opportunity even if their parents can't pick that type of tab.
I agree with the general ideas, but the specifics are very hard to implement. The deductions for plants overseas is part of income in those countries, not here, and I guess we could tax that income more heavily than we do now, but already the firms keep the profits offshore to avoid the U.S. tax. My preference is strongly to subsidize/incentivize domestic production. I'm generally not a big "tax cuts for the plutocrats will save us" crowd, but I'd be OK with far lower marginal tax rates on corporations in the U.S. accompanied with higher taxes on distributions to shareholders. Or not. Other countries heavily subsidize their domestic firms - I'm fine if we do the same however we can do it. Yes, perhaps it's going to mostly accrue to shareholders, but it's worth a try IMO. So little is actually collected from the corporate income tax that we could halve it and not do all that much damage to collections, especially with just a small increase in taxes on corporate distributions to shareholders.