Another round of race to the bottom. Sacrifice infrastructure and education to
lure in companies with jobs. It's great in the short term, but is not a
good strategy for long-term economic stability. As a nation, such antics are
the opposite of helpful. No new jobs are created--they're only relocated.
Meanwhile, throughout the country essential services are cut or stripped to
bare-bones to support a CEO's ability to make a little extra coin.
Great idea governors. Dysfunctional California has ignored reality in their
governmental and tax policies. California has yet to learn that eventually you
run out of other peoples' money. The rust belt, Ohio is an example of a
state on the decline, decays while other areas prosper. Demonizing CEOs for
success in creating jobs is shooting the messenger and ignoring the message. As
JFK noted, all boats float in a rising tide.
OHBU,yep, I'd rather have 5.2% unemployment than 9+%. That's a
race to the bottom I'd rather win.I'd rather have a
balanced state budget than the fiscal mess CA has. It's too bad such a
beautiful state with such wealth in natural and human resourcess has been so
re: Hemlock and lostThink higher than the state level--where have
any jobs been created? There haven't been. Meanwhile, our infrastructure,
once the envy of the world, is in total decline. Tens of thousands of bridges
are unstable, our water supply is threatened, and our education standing has
steadily declined on the world stage. I'm not demonizing CEOs for creating
jobs. Research some of the companies that have moved from California to places
like Oklahoma. No jobs are created, the price of their product is not impacted.
The lower taxes goes directly into executive compensation. Again, congrats to
Utah on the low unemployment rate...for now. But if it's done at the
expense of education and clean air, good roads, it's not much of a place to
live.Hemlock, what does Ohio have to do with this? The decline of
the Rust Belt has nothing to do with taxes, but the decline in manufacturing.
Re: OHBUInteresting that you state things like bridges and declining
education, ect. Haven't Obama and the Democrats in Congress claimed to want
to fix those things? Didn't Obama borrow some trillion dollars to do so in
his first term? Notice the difference? Neither do I. Why didn't the
early spending of Obama lead to jobs? Where did all that money go? Inquiring
minds want to know. In the meantime, why is he still President? No Republican
could have withstood this bad record and gotten reelected.
The decline in manufacturing is due to protectionist policies, unions and bad
management in general. Free markets, low taxes, fewer regulations, etc., lead
to healthy economies and job creation. Unfortuntely, union propoganda has
misguided people for a lot of years. Freedom and free markets are
the key to productivity and prosperity. It has been proved over and over again,
but special interests always manage to convince lawmakers otherwise. I'm
so glad that Utah lawmakers have a little more common sense. That's why we
are doing better than most of the nation.
OHBU,this IS a state-level discussion.lack of infrastructure -
they just rebuilt I-15 through almost all of Utah county and building the
Mountain View corridor. Infrastructure is doing fineEducation -
according to the National Center for Education Statistics, Utah 8th graders are
above the naitonal average in math, reading, and science, though they do lag in
writing. CA 8th graders are BELOW national averages in all four measures.So much for all the "good" CA is doing with their oppressive
taxes and regulation.
Dear Lost in DC: You are a smart person and obvously have a lot of experience.
You do great posts.
To "OHBU" actually, your assesment is wrong. Giving the company tax
breaks will be a positive for Utah, even if you gave them exemptions to state
corporate income taxes.Imaging a company comes here with 20
employees, averaging $60,000/yr in salaries. Now, that means that $1.2 million
dollars in salaries per year are coming into the state. At 5% state income
taxes, and assuming their tax breaks give them a taxable income of $30,000 the
state will get $30,000 in income taxes, plus an additional $37,000 from sales
taxes, and probably another $30,000 from property taxes.So, giving a
company a tax break which gets them here nets $97,000 for the state directly for
the state from 20 employees. Indirectly the state gets even more money from the
businesses that the new residents shop at. This also does not include taxes
collected on office or manufacturing supplies, property taxes from their
offices, or the savings in unemployment because some locals will be hired.
re: LostI know we are discussing state-level issues. My post is intended
to ask us to step back and consider whether or not the infighting between states
might be doing more harm to us as a nation than good. Good for Utah that their
children are above national average, but they won't grow up and compete
merely on a national scale. We live in a global economy, and to wantonly ignore
that fact is incredibly counter-productive. By the way, it's
interesting that m.g. scott wonders where the stimulus for infrastructure went
while lost points out that I-15 was just rebuilt through Utah county.
Here's some news, the state used stimulus dollars to complete that
project.finally, cats, manufacturing went down because of labor
costs. The average manufacturing wage in China is $426/mo, in America,
$4,160/mo. In other words, it's not taxes.RedShirt: it's
still a net-loss on the national level.
Great idea. Maybe by the time California comes to its senses it will be too
late and we can give it back to Mexico.
To "OHBU" actually is isn't a net loss on the national level. The
same number of jobs are being maintained, and the Federal taxes collected will
remain the same. In some ways the federal government may end up collecting more
because the company can be more profitable.
Redshirt,You missed the point of my statement (and I'm afraid
this will be my last allowed response). The company is paying less taxes to the
state in which it resides. States are responsible for maintaining things that
are of national interest, like infrastructure. When states fall short, they
appeal to the Federal government (see: I15 reconstruction). Per The Economist
"America's fiscal union" states that tend to have the more lenient
tax laws are the ones that rely on receiving more federal tax dollars than they
contribute. In other words, states like California have been supporting states
like Utah. For example, Utah paid 187.6B and received 225.3B.And
your math is incorrect. The federal government takes its taxes first, on gross
earnings, so state taxes will not impact those. Unless the company merely lets
the profits sit there, they will not be taxed higher on a federal level. Once
it goes into executive compensation, it becomes yet one more expense, and the
federal government does not receive any increase in revenue.
I know you can't respond OHBU, but I hope that it didn't cost all 800
billion stimulius dollars to fix the I-15. The jobless rate didn't go down
in any case.
OHBU,the I-15 rebuild was planned LOOOONNNGGGG before the porkulus was
passed. cannot credit BO and the porkulus for that one.
To "OHBU" and what is preventing California from trying to keep
businesses there?Isn't it actually better for the California
infrastructure to get businesses out of there? For example, during the summer
they have brownouts. If you have fewer businesses, their power grid will be
able to better handle the diminished capacity, and the need for investing in
their infrastructure is decreased. So again I see a win-win situation.There is also a study out there that shows that the more economically free
states have less unemployment than the states that highly regulate their
I was wondering if Gov. Herbert is successful how it will change the political
face here in Utah. If too many liberals start showing up they will try to change
the conservative nature of Utah and its laws. If that were to happen kiss Utah
good-bye as it is happening in Arizona slowly. People from Calif (I grew up
there but got out) think too liberally and they will ruin Utah like they have
ruined Calif. Of course the Utah Mormon dems will like the change but they
don't follow the prophets anyways .....see Bentley's book "A