[JayCT]

Originally Posted by kidyankee764

I agree that it's riddled with opinion/slant and paints a doom and gloom picture. I agree with some of it/disagree with some of it, but can definitely separate fact from opinion.

Unfortunately not everyone can. And some people are using the opinion parts to promote their beliefs and interests. Jay

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by bobtn

BTW, I'm glad one new mfg is big enough to offset Bassett today. I looked at 2012 WARN reports, and there were several 3 digit job loss reports, which added up to a few thousand jobs. So 200 is a start. (And we know Pfizer is -1,100 within a year, Bassett -200, plus casinos most likely 4 figures due to Ma, and the 2 hospital mergers (Waterbury & NH) are most likely a 4 figure toll.which hopefully is delayed at least 1 year. A for profit hospital mgmt firm is buying the Waterbury duo, and even a Free market person like me is not a fan of what these piranhas often do)

But yes, Self employment is not worth much without selling to others, and some customers need to be large, in order to sustain far more mom and pops. That's a national, not local thing. The little fish serve the big fish, and they best have them around to feed.

UTC's announced ABC policy was Anywhere But Ct due to cost, Beeker (Hartford Courant detailed it well). Its been adding in several states, while Ct has seen a headcount drop. Should that not be worked on? Do you expect the Ga land to not end up 100% developed for UTC facilities?

By the way, the article JViello cited here has fabulous data, and the Hartford Business Journal is a well respected subset of dozens of business journals nationally run by the same parent corp. (Your wikipedia source made me chuckle.anyone can edit wiki at any time, making up whatever they wish. Not saying it was false, but its not protected from being falsified.) Business journals and magazines never have that problem. Their stats are trustworthy.

Your buddy, Malloy, btw, on job creation dearth used the BLS as the source-that same thing Obama uses to tout falling unemployment. Same source the government, NY Times, Washington Post, and all the trade journals use.

The Hartford Business Journal is well respected but it is also try to sell itself and like most media enterprises will do what it has to to get peoples interest. And that includes publishing some questionable articles/opinion pieces. Also I would not call the data in the article "fabulous". IT is the same data available elsewhere only slanted more to one way of thinking.

As I have said here before, Molloy was right not to come in and slash thousands of jobs. That would have just put more people out of work at a time of high unemployment. It still would have cost the state a lot to support the unemployment payments of all those workers. Jay

[kidyankee764]

Originally Posted by JayCT

And some people are using the opinion parts to promote their beliefs and interests. Jay

That's the way I see it too.

[bobtn]

Jay,

Slanted? Please clarify, with examples of statements in the article that can be refuted with empirical data countering them.

I know its not a pretty picture, but that alone does not create a reason for posters to be dismissive, reflexively, of the data.

Its not as if I sourced wikipedia.which would not be credible, due to lack of controls on their part regarding input.

[blakesq]

Bobtn, what is the latest ranking from the National Association of Manufacturers?

Originally Posted by bobtn

The reality is, those race to the bottom states Beeker talks of, will likely host the majority of UTC jobs in the near future. They bought $21 million worth of Georgia land during the UTC strike. I'm sure it was not for the view. States are not taking austerity cuts for the fun of it; there is a National Association of Mfg Red Book which ranks states annually on business climate, on dozens of attributes. Relo corps, who advise the movers and shakers what other states can do for their bottom line, swear by it and similar rating systems. 100% mathematical, that's the key, they use ZERO emotional attachment to notions of what government should do. That is what the shareholders properly demand, and that is the reason UTC measures and reports to analysts the percentage of jobs it has based in low vs high-cost states.

[kidyankee764]

Originally Posted by bobtn

Jay,

Slanted? Please clarify, with examples of statements in the article that can be refuted with empirical data countering them.

I know its not a pretty picture, but that alone does not create a reason for posters to be dismissive, reflexively, of the data.

Its not as if I sourced wikipedia.which would not be credible, due to lack of controls on their part regarding input.

Bob, the entire article (actually, it's not even an article, it's an editorial), is riddled with opinions. Sure, a few facts are presented (while others are left out), but the entire thing is an opinion piece. How can you people not see this?

Some people are so blind to reality that it's scary. This is a perfect example of media influence.

[bobtn]

blakesq, I'll have to look that up. I have had several prior year copies, and in recent years, Ct ranked in the 40s, with 1 being most favorable to mfg environment. But I am away from home for extended period hopefully ending soon, and do not have my latest copy with me. When back in the office, I'll post the latest ranking, with detail by major category. They do rate each state by dozens of factors, a few of which are most heavily weighted.

Below is a ranking in 2010 done by CNBC, with some input from NAM. The ranking of 35th is the best I have seen yet, so at least hopefully, its progress, and not other states regressing. I'll post NAMs when I'm back home.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/37516043/ (broken link)

[bobtn]

kidyankee, Its chock full of data, with sentences in between analyzing their meaning, but as always I am focused on the data points. I used color below to highlight some of the most important data points contained in the article:

"In 1991, when the income tax squeaked through the legislature and was enthusiastically signed by Gov. Lowell Weicker, the state budget was $7.7 billion. Sixteen years later, when the Great Recession struck, expenditures had soared to $16.5 billion — an inflation-adjusted increase of 41 percent.
At 7 percent, population growth didn’t spur the spending surge. (Bobtn:Spending up 41 pct, pop up 7, means per capita inflation adjusted up 141/107 or 32%) The state, as well as the 169 municipalities that Hartford heavily subsidizes, went on a hiring binge. Government employment rose by 28 percent (Bobtn-with pop up 7 pct, so per capita gov't employees went up), while private-sector job creation was negligible.

And those positions in “public service” are lavishly compensated. A March 2011 analysis by the Bureau of Labor Statistics documented that in the Hartford region, nongovernment wages averaged $23.23 per hour. Public employees received $34.47. Service workers in the real world earned less half their counterparts in the bureaucracy. Even in management and professional occupations, government sinecures had the edge: $40.03 versus $35.46.

. The Institute for Truth in Accounting has named Connecticut the top “sinkhole state,” because of the $29.4 billion it has in assets, “$10.1 billion are available to pay $63.4 billion” in unfunded liabilities — primarily pension and healthcare obligations. (Bobtn-I have read elsewhere Ct pension is amongst the closest to failing in terms of year it will happen, w/o significant modification)

[kidyankee764]

Originally Posted by bobtn

kidyankee, Its chock full of data, with sentences in between analyzing their meaning, but as always I am focused on the data points. I used color below to highlight some of the most important data points contained in the article:

This is where I think you're having trouble separating fact from opinion.

[bobtn]

Nope, kidyankee. That is why above I used color to isolate data points, like spending vs pop growth, pension underfunding, and comparison private/public wages, and the sections I left uncolored I do view as analyzing the data. But I do not need the analysis, as I simply need access to data, and can extrapolate well once provided it.

The most alarming is budget up 41 pct adjusted for inflation, state headcount up 28 pct, but pop just up 7 pct. That means each citizen is paying for MORE government workers than was the case 20 years ago. I'm sure the OP, JViello, can tell us that by viewing the large tax bills associated with his business he has previously discussed.