[BPt111]

Malloy on GE; “It would be nice to keep them here” | WTNH Connecticut News

[JayCT]

Kaman is expanding its Bloomfield operations and is adding jobs. I am attaching a link to the Hartford Courant's general website which I think everyone can access. If not, I am sorry. Jay

Kaman Says It Will Hire In Bloomfield For K-MAX Work - Hartford Courant

[JayCT]

Connecticut's latest Bond issue was give a AA rating by Fitch Ratings. AA is the second highest rating a state can get. Fitch notes improvement in the economy and changes Malloy is making to reduce taxes. Sounds promising. Jay

New Conn. debt rated

[JayCT]

Here is an interesting article on the state's business tax incentive plan. Except for one or two misses (most noticeably RBS in Stamford), the program looks to have done what it is set up to do, encourage businesses to expand in Connecticut. I know a lot of people don't like this but unfortunately it is what has to be done since many states also offer incentives. Jay

Tax incentives may see changes with two panel studies underway - Connecticut Post

[CT_Yank]

Expand in CT? Looks more like a bribe to keep minimum amount of jobs to get tax deal. Not what I call expanding. UBS is basically consolidating into RBS's empty space. It is tax payer scam and more short term slaps on back for politicians not to mention kickbacks from developers. All this money spent and businesses leaving in droves.

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by CT_Yank

Expand in CT? Looks more like a bribe to keep minimum amount of jobs to get tax deal. Not what I call expanding. UBS is basically consolidating into RBS's empty space. It is tax payer scam and more short term slaps on back for politicians not to mention kickbacks from developers. All this money spent and businesses leaving in droves.

Businesses aren't leaving in "droves". Our unemployment rate is going down. You can't do that if businesses are leaving. RBS and UBS are contracting their operations worldwide, not leaving Connecticut for other places. I don't like it either but this is what most states are doing these days to attract and keep business. Jay

[jane_sm1th73]

Originally Posted by JayCT

Businesses aren't leaving in "droves". Our unemployment rate is going down. You can't do that if businesses are leaving. RBS and UBS are contracting their operations worldwide, not leaving Connecticut for other places. I don't like it either but this is what most states are doing these days to attract and keep business. Jay

The UE stat has been beaten to death. Unless one has been living under a rock since 2009, one knows that after one falls off the unemployment rolls (as a long term unemployed person) he/she is no longer counted as unemployed.

I maintain a "whazzup" correspondence with eight former colleagues and neighbors, all in their fifties. Five of the eight left the state for TX, Atlanta and Huntsville (a terrific engineering town). I'll call them the emigres.

Three out of the five emigres left without jobs in hand (ca. 2010-2012), calculating that they could live on the bone longer "there" than "here". The other two emigres got jobs before they left by virtue of using relatives' local addresses, and partaking of relative's shared accommodations while dashing down for interviews. They are - all five colleagues - now gainfully employed. Don't know about spouses, and didn't ask. Longest job search was six months. Shortest was ten weeks. All five say they are better off having left. These five colleagues would have fallen off CT UE stats long before they left, thereby improving the CT UE stats.

The three remaining colleagues are - in fact - members of the LT unemployed cohort, stuck in CT. Thankfully for them, their spouses maintain income continuity via state employment. They will be in a world of hurt if the spouses get fed up. They, too, have fallen off the CT UE stats, thereby improving CT's numbers.

[MiaMia411]

Originally Posted by jane_sm1th73

The UE stat has been beaten to death. Unless one has been living under a rock since 2009, one knows that after one falls off the unemployment rolls (as a long term unemployed person) he/she is no longer counted as unemployed.

I maintain a "whazzup" correspondence with eight former colleagues and neighbors, all in their fifties. Five of the eight left the state for TX, Atlanta and Huntsville (a terrific engineering town). I'll call them the emigres.

Three out of the five emigres left without jobs in hand (ca. 2010-2012), calculating that they could live on the bone longer "there" than "here". The other two emigres got jobs before they left by virtue of using relatives' local addresses, and partaking of relative's shared accommodations while dashing down for interviews. They are - all five colleagues - now gainfully employed. Don't know about spouses, and didn't ask. Longest job search was six months. Shortest was ten weeks. All five say they are better off having left. These five colleagues would have fallen off CT UE stats long before they left, thereby improving the CT UE stats.

The three remaining colleagues are - in fact - members of the LT unemployed cohort, stuck in CT. Thankfully for them, their spouses maintain income continuity via state employment. They will be in a world of hurt if the spouses get fed up. They, too, have fallen off the CT UE stats, thereby improving CT's numbers.

Cant talk about CT in this way, you will get a lot of butt hurt members on here and strike a nerve with them since they are too blind to the truth.

[AtkinsonDan]

Originally Posted by JayCT

Businesses aren't leaving in "droves". Our unemployment rate is going down. You can't do that if businesses are leaving. RBS and UBS are contracting their operations worldwide, not leaving Connecticut for other places. I don't like it either but this is what most states are doing these days to attract and keep business. Jay

Originally Posted by jane_sm1th73

The UE stat has been beaten to death. Unless one has been living under a rock since 2009, one knows that after one falls off the unemployment rolls (as a long term unemployed person) he/she is no longer counted as unemployed.

I maintain a "whazzup" correspondence with eight former colleagues and neighbors, all in their fifties. Five of the eight left the state for TX, Atlanta and Huntsville (a terrific engineering town). I'll call them the emigres.

Three out of the five emigres left without jobs in hand (ca. 2010-2012), calculating that they could live on the bone longer "there" than "here". The other two emigres got jobs before they left by virtue of using relatives' local addresses, and partaking of relative's shared accommodations while dashing down for interviews. They are - all five colleagues - now gainfully employed. Don't know about spouses, and didn't ask. Longest job search was six months. Shortest was ten weeks. All five say they are better off having left. These five colleagues would have fallen off CT UE stats long before they left, thereby improving the CT UE stats.

The three remaining colleagues are - in fact - members of the LT unemployed cohort, stuck in CT. Thankfully for them, their spouses maintain income continuity via state employment. They will be in a world of hurt if the spouses get fed up. They, too, have fallen off the CT UE stats, thereby improving CT's numbers.

Great post Jane. I see no need to embellish on your UE and the long term unemployed comments. All I would like to add is that if the number of (no longer counted) long term unemployed plus the number of retirees/retired plus the number of people who leave the state for other reasons is greater than the number of jobs lost then it is entirely possible to have a declining job base while exhibiting a great UE stat. This is even more probable in New England where the general population skews older.

[BobNJ1960]

Originally Posted by AtkinsonDan

Great post Jane. I see no need to embellish on your UE and the long term unemployed comments. All I would like to add is that if the number of (no longer counted) long term unemployed plus the number of retirees/retired plus the number of people who leave the state for other reasons is greater than the number of jobs lost then it is entirely possible to have a declining job base while exhibiting a great UE stat. This is even more probable in New England where the general population skews older.

States that attract younger migrating populations actually appear to have more unemployment, when it is just a case where their opportunities attract far more people.

NE has a big edge there, as it is a net loser in the state to state migration game. Its population is long-term stagnant. But that issue also places more pressure on existing taxpayers, as new folks are not increasing gov't funding.

Excellent post by jane.