Georgia's Job Recovery Still Years Away (Atlanta: fit in, real estate, hotel)

[bdawk]

Georgia will not return to pre-recession employment levels until 2020, partly because the state has lost its competitive edge, according to a University of Georgia economic forecast released Tuesday.

Georgia employment peaked in February 2008 at 4,157,500. Since then, the state has lost 357,400 jobs, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. That includes about 25,000 jobs this year, Sumichrast said.
The UGA forecast projects the addition of 18,000 jobs next year -- not enough to lower the state’s jobless rate, currently 10.2 percent

The state can no longer expect heavy in-migration of retirees as in the past, he said. Nor can the Georgia economy depend only on luring large numbers of companies from elsewhere -- although the state should have a larger fund to help close deals.

UGA: Georgia's job recovery still years away *| ajc.com

[Mishap]

So the plan is to hand over a few hundred million in tax incentives every time a distressed CEO needs a short term fix until his golden parachute vests? We've been shafted every time we try to bring in an automaker and it seems we're just in the competition every time to ensure companies get the absolute fattest incentives. I'd venture many of our largest employers pay almost nothing into state coffers w/ the constant threat of taking jobs elsewhere. Our ultra pro-business state gov't has been quick to hand over the farm anytime a company w/ more than a dozen jobs (often just taken from elsewhere) comes calling.

What precisely are other states doing correctly in growing these days? Buying jobs w/ tax incentives just strips our ability to provide our already minimal services. It also invites more poaching of companies within our borders. Look at how First Data left and came back (I'm sure hefty incentives were part of the discussion both ways). What would we do if Texas came in w/ 500M to move Home Depot out. Or if Florida got Coca Cola for 1B? Would we be able to counter? For that matter, why would we hand $130M+ to NCR when we can't even convince the CEO to move down here when it's his job we saved w/ that huge incentive. We need to only look at how little real estate NCR's purchased in GA to understand their long-term plan. I realize there's benefits to not being in the real estate biz when you're in "technology" but they're keeping their bags packed. They had 120yrs+ in Dayton and even owned the country club there but left for 1yr's net profit in tax benefits. Once they've finished collecting their bribe, what will keep them here?

[readyset]

True to some degree but would you rather be like Baltimore? They're losing companies and not getting any to replace them. The high taxes in the state of Maryland guarantees non-consideration of the state when companies are looking for a new home, Maryland is constantly on the defensive to keep companies from leaving and pays a hefty price just to make them stay.

I still think both needs to be done, you need lure companies from outside the state but also grow the ones at home. It's a dual strategy that needs to be executed. Certain states like California with their anti-business climate are easier to poach than others.

Keep in mind not all companies are created equal too. Some are worth the incentive and some are not. I do not believe Chiquita for example was worth the incentive, the company is loosing money and the tax incentives Charlotte gave basically kept them afloat, that's not the kind of company you want for bragging rights, not to mention their shady violent history in South America. People are saying the same thing about Sears too, the company has been mismanged for so long and many states are questioning whether they even want them if they leave Illinois.

Overall I still think Tax incentives for corporations and jobs makes more sense than giving it to a developer to finish a residential/retail project or build some hotel a la Baltimore and D.C.

That being said a company like Chiquita would have brought some diversity to Atlanta but I think at this point the State of Georgia needs to target companies that will build a critical mass. Atlanta already has a pretty diverse economy but its time to lure some similar companies and build a critical mass. Is it going to be financial, biotech, internet, or even a specialization within them?

[BobKovacs]

Originally Posted by readyset

That being said a company like Chiquita would have brought some diversity to Atlanta but I think at this point the State of Georgia needs to target companies that will build a critical mass. Atlanta already has a pretty diverse economy but its time to lure some similar companies and build a critical mass. Is it going to be financial, biotech, internet, or even a specialization within them?

Ugh....diversity....

At this point, we need to lure companies that will create jobs for people who are white, black, green, or purple- it really doesn't matter.

[cityfilms]

The more cities that successfully succeed from Atlanta City, the better the region will be.

However, the suburban county regions (unincorporated counties) that are dependent on sprawled development are doomed. The housing slump seen in the last years will look like a cake walk compared to what's going to happen when gas prices spike. Those houses are going to be worthless when transportation is not feasable.

I honestly believe that large swaths of suburban land will become ghost towns within 10 years. I estimate there will be 1 million empty houses in atlanta by the end of the decade.

[K-SawDude]

I take some issue with the article's insistence that any sort of recovery is easily disruptible by some crisis, e.g. the Eurozone collapse. What state in our country ISN'T going to be affected by something that catastrophic? I hardly think Georgia is uniquely positioned for unstable growth.

I agree a lot with Mishap's perspective. While I think it's important to make a case to these large companies about why they'd want to move here, I'm not persuaded that all of the incentives lavished upon them are necessarily worth it in the long run. And there's nothing wrong with trying to build up more of the small and medium businesses we've already got here.

To my mind, there's all too often an oversimplistic understanding of growth, as if growth is always a good thing for an economy. They cite those 90s and 00s numbers, but housing growth here (like many other places) was totally out of control. We'd still be overbuilding if not for the past recession; we needed something to slow us down.

1.5% growth a year ain't bad for now. I'd much rather see steady yearly increases so that we can grow SMARTER rather than just grow for "growth's" sake. Atlanta and Georgia still have a lot to go for them in terms of education, climate, and major transit (airport) to attract businesses. We'll keep improving.

[muxBuppie]

Originally Posted by BobKovacs

Ugh....diversity....

At this point, we need to lure companies that will create jobs for people who are white, black, green, or purple- it really doesn't matter.

He meant diversity as in the type of business. Not the race of people.

[readyset]

Originally Posted by K-SawDude

I take some issue with the article's insistence that any sort of recovery is easily disruptible by some crisis, e.g. the Eurozone collapse. What state in our country ISN'T going to be affected by something that catastrophic? I hardly think Georgia is uniquely positioned for unstable growth.

I agree a lot with Mishap's perspective. While I think it's important to make a case to these large companies about why they'd want to move here, I'm not persuaded that all of the incentives lavished upon them are necessarily worth it in the long run. And there's nothing wrong with trying to build up more of the small and medium businesses we've already got here.

To my mind, there's all too often an oversimplistic understanding of growth, as if growth is always a good thing for an economy. They cite those 90s and 00s numbers, but housing growth here (like many other places) was totally out of control. We'd still be overbuilding if not for the past recession; we needed something to slow us down.

1.5% growth a year ain't bad for now. I'd much rather see steady yearly increases so that we can grow SMARTER rather than just grow for "growth's" sake. Atlanta and Georgia still have a lot to go for them in terms of education, climate, and major transit (airport) to attract businesses. We'll keep improving.

While it's important to do that people have to remember that there's risk involved there as well. What's to say the company doesn't leave after years of "nurturing"? Or better yet gets bought out when it's only a mid-cap size company? All those years waiting, all that effort and all that money... you will not be getting a return on your investment.

You can try do build incubators which builds a sense of loyalty or spinning out companies from Universities helps too.

It just takes too long to grow companies that will be able to hire people on a significant scale that's why you have to lure in bigger names at the same time.

It's about balance, the city that offers the best value wins. There are counties and states with the best schools in the country but companies aren't lining up to move there cause their taxes are too high and they wanna be a nanny state creating laws and regulations for every little thing.

[MathmanMathman]

Originally Posted by cityfilms

The more cities that successfully succeed from Atlanta City, the better the region will be.

However, the suburban county regions (unincorporated counties) that are dependent on sprawled development are doomed. The housing slump seen in the last years will look like a cake walk compared to what's going to happen when gas prices spike. Those houses are going to be worthless when transportation is not feasable.

I honestly believe that large swaths of suburban land will become ghost towns within 10 years. I estimate there will be 1 million empty houses in atlanta by the end of the decade.

Wait...let me guess...you think we need to build up dense housing centers and build a network of public transportation? I really think personal transportation is here to stay. Even if it means we go to hybrid and/or totally electric cars. And both Canada and Venezuela have the equivalent of hundreds of billions of barrels of oil in oil sands. Just got to work on finding an efficient way to get it out.

[MathmanMathman]

Originally Posted by readyset

While it's important to do that people have to remember that there's risk involved there as well. What's to say the company doesn't leave after years of "nurturing"? Or better yet gets bought out when it's only a mid-cap size company? All those years waiting, all that effort and all that money... you will not be getting a return on your investment.

You can try do build incubators which builds a sense of loyalty or spinning out companies from Universities helps too.

It just takes too long to grow companies that will be able to hire people on a significant scale that's why you have to lure in bigger names at the same time.

It's about balance, the city that offers the best value wins. There are counties and states with the best schools in the country but companies aren't lining up to move there cause their taxes are too high and they wanna be a nanny state creating laws and regulations for every little thing.

It's often been said that small businesses employ most of the people. Maybe our universities should work a bit less on theoretical research and put more emphasis on applied research to launch more companies. Attracting companies seems more like a zero sum game. We win...they lose. I'd rather grow new companies or expand existing smaller ones. We all know Home Depot but even Target and Best Buy are older companies that went into expansion. Georgia Tech and Emory should be pushing more development and transfer of technology to existing or start-up companies. I mean think how Google and Facebook exploded in such a short time. I guess it helps if you don't rely as much on bricks and mortar.