U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Connecticut
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
 
Old 06-17-2011, 02:29 PM
 
Location: Fairfield County, CT
7,223 posts, read 5,139,964 times
Reputation: 3886

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tin Knocker View Post
I's so tired of people not adressing the FACT that most every other state costs less to live in. Even if everything else were equal, you'd still be better off almost everyplace else. I dont want to leave CT because theres no jobs, I want to leave so I can actually keep a reasonable amount of whats mine.
I think this needs to be addressed to... however even if this state had lower costs, if other changes were not made it still would not attract new and innovative business.

My point is (again) that people blame high taxes and an expensive environment for all of our ills and failure to attract new business ventures, when there are other (likely MORE important) road blocks to Connecticut's future economic success that are ostensibly ignored...
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-17-2011, 02:49 PM
 
462 posts, read 360,969 times
Reputation: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by mlassoff View Post
LIved there for almost 17 years. Worked in the tech/ venture capital investment world for a total of 13 years. How long did you live there? Did you work in tech? Perhaps I know what I am talking about?

I lived there while it was being built as a tech center... which had everything to do with an entrepreneurial population, university support, educated populace, technology incubator programs and community. Never did I hear a start-up say they choose Austin because of the low tax structure.
No, they chose it for all the other reasons I mentioned.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2011, 03:14 PM
 
Location: Fairfield County, CT
7,223 posts, read 5,139,964 times
Reputation: 3886
Quote:
Originally Posted by SVTJayC View Post
No, they chose it for all the other reasons I mentioned.
While I agree with your reasoning to some degree, I think you're conflating the reasons that a corporation would set up shop somewhere, and the reasons an individual or family would choose to live somewhere.

The fact that you claim Austin is like Disneyland 9 months a year (although I disagree) is more about why individuals would choose a location versus a company gearing to grow. To grow a company needs qualified employees, support services and a multitude of other things. Corporate founders don't give a rip about the weather or how "cool" the scene is... They are looking to grow and make money... Period.

Very early stage companies with potential to grow need a corporate community that supports that growth which includes incubation, ties with University communities, and qualified angel investors, venture capital firms and m & a firms don't hurt either. Austin has all of this. Connecticut doe not.

I've never seen the weather, or the ability to eat breakfast tacos in a business plan.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2011, 03:36 PM
 
17,085 posts, read 7,691,763 times
Reputation: 6333
mlassoff:"My point is (again) that people blame high taxes and an expensive environment for all of our ills and failure to attract new business".

That is the most important reason corps locate elsewhere. There is a State Competitiveness handbook most corps know like the back of their hand, ranks all cost factors , all states, 1 to 50. On a major manufacturing friendly state scorecard just published (link is on CBIA), Ct got a C plus. Not a GPA that would get anyone in a good college.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2011, 03:42 PM
 
Location: Fairfield County, CT
7,223 posts, read 5,139,964 times
Reputation: 3886
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobtn View Post
mlassoff:"My point is (again) that people blame high taxes and an expensive environment for all of our ills and failure to attract new business".

That is the most important reason corps locate elsewhere. There is a State Competitiveness handbook most corps know like the back of their hand, ranks all cost factors , all states, 1 to 50. On a major manufacturing friendly state scorecard just published (link is on CBIA), Ct got a C plus. Not a GPA that would get anyone in a good college.
No doubt that Connecticut has to be more competitive in ALL areas! However, I think you are exaggerating the importance of the State Competitiveness Handbook. In my experience, companies certainly don't "know it like the back of their hand..."

However, again, if people think that by some magic COL and corporate expenses could be lowered significantly, COnnecticut would STILL not be competitive for all all the reasons the CT Technology Council listed.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2011, 03:49 PM
 
17,085 posts, read 7,691,763 times
Reputation: 6333
Wrong, mlassoff, Corps do know it, and/or the main stats, relocation experts do too, and that's why auto plants (to name one industry) have put all their new plants in states that rank low in cost, high in bang for buck. Getting Ct's costs down would do wonders to move them up the business-friendly list. Ask UTC. Ask AETNA, whose statements mirrored UTC. Ask the CBIA members.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2011, 03:57 PM
 
Location: Fairfield County, CT
7,223 posts, read 5,139,964 times
Reputation: 3886
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobtn View Post
Wrong, mlassoff, Corps do know it, and/or the main stats, relocation experts do too, and that's why auto plants (to name one industry) have put all their new plants in states that rank low in cost, high in bang for buck. Getting Ct's costs down would do wonders to move them up the business-friendly list. Ask UTC. Ask AETNA, whose statements mirrored UTC. Ask the CBIA members.
Ok... I don't know the auto industry, so I can't speak in an educated way about that. I do know tech and investment for early-stage tech companies very well. My comments are limited to that. I don't believe that we SHOULD be trying to attract manufacturing. Like I have said before the plant isn't reopening. Connecticut has to join the new economy if it is too thrive.

The south, Mexico, India, China, will certainly beat us in the race to the bottom for the cheapest manufacturing center. The only way to win that race is not to participate and instead gear our economy in Connecticut to the 21st century.

Almost nothing is manufactured in Austin... and that (very) liberal city does quite well.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2011, 04:00 PM
 
Location: Fairfield, CT
4,196 posts, read 4,522,583 times
Reputation: 3671
Quote:
Originally Posted by mlassoff View Post
Ok... I don't know the auto industry, so I can't speak in an educated way about that. I do know tech and investment for early-stage tech companies very well. My comments are limited to that. I don't believe that we SHOULD be trying to attract manufacturing. Like I have said before the plant isn't reopening. Connecticut has to join the new economy if it is too thrive.

The south, Mexico, India, China, will certainly beat us in the race to the bottom for the cheapest manufacturing center. The only way to win that race is not to participate and instead gear our economy in Connecticut to the 21st century.

Almost nothing is manufactured in Austin... and that (very) liberal city does quite well.
It's a liberal city within a conservative state.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2011, 05:06 PM
 
17,085 posts, read 7,691,763 times
Reputation: 6333
Mlassoff, Ct is foolish to give up on new manufacturing. If it could bring its taxation and utility costs under control, it would get some new manufacturing. Labor is bending everywhere; Michigan has gotten new auto plants by the UAW accepting an almost 100% Tier 2 $14 an hour Ford plant right outside Detroit. They brought the unemployment rate down from 14.3% at its peak to 10.1% a month ago statewide (KUDOS!!).

Only mass manufacturing can create enough jobs; tech is, at a macro level, a relatively low headcount absorber. I witnessed Ct go down the tragic path of thinking new age stuff could employ enough. That played a huge role in 22 years of net job losses, while 49 states gained.

The so called race to the 21st century is a public relations strategy to attempt to ignore the political fallout from the 22 year jobless streak. One need not ignore the 21st century and also add or mitigate mfg job losses. Nashville just announed a NYC technology corp relocating to its downtown, adding 900 jobs initially. We have also relocated some mfg. There is only imaginary exclusivity.

Last edited by bobtn; 06-17-2011 at 05:30 PM..
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2011, 08:52 PM
 
Location: Connecticut
14,604 posts, read 23,277,714 times
Reputation: 3252
That is your opinion. Purhaps you want to see our dwindling countryside leveld for a massive auto plant (they don't build them in the city you know) but not many others do. We do not have the room for something like that. It is that simple. Jay
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2011 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $89,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Connecticut
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top