[JayCT]

Originally Posted by bobtn

To not pursue what is left of manufacturing is crazy, though. It will never be 1955 again when GE in Ct had what, a 5 figure headcount, but why not go after what is available in EVERY sector-including manufacturing? It would require Ct no longer having some of the nation's highest costs of doing business, such as ultra high electricity rates per kilowatt hour. But why not put forth some effort, instead of sounding defeatist in your posts towards mfg being a thing of the past in Ct?

The answer is not that easy because it is not that easy to change the things you say to change. how do you lower electricity costs? Build more power stations? Because of Federal air quality regulations, that is not easy or cheap. Lower labor costs? How do you do that when the cost of major things like housing is so high? Maybe the only thing you can do is lower taxes but that alone is not enough. Despite what everyone thinks Connecticut still has a very strong economy otherwise our state's income levels would not be so high. Jay

[HeadedWest]

Originally Posted by JayCT

The answer is not that easy because it is not that easy to change the things you say to change. how do you lower electricity costs? Build more power stations? Because of Federal air quality regulations, that is not easy or cheap. Lower labor costs? How do you do that when the cost of major things like housing is so high? Maybe the only thing you can do is lower taxes but that alone is not enough. Despite what everyone thinks Connecticut still has a very strong economy otherwise our state's income levels would not be so high. Jay

With electricity, it's not just power generation, it's delivery. The CT distribution system is undersized, but several attempts to add capacity were held up (maybe even killed) by NIMBY opposition. I'm not sure about the price, but I recall reading there's lots of hydro capability in Quebec that CT can't effectively use because of power line bottlenecks.

In CT it might be a little hard to get a clear picture on income in terms of the strength of the economy. What I'm thinking about is the great wealth accumulated over a long time in the state. What you'd like to know is how much of the high income level is due to legacy wealth effects versus the opportunity to create wealth now. The latter is a better measure of the strength of the economy going forward. When you think about the incremental effects, the statistics of few jobs created and few new corporations suggests the creation of new wealth is weaker in CT.

Just thinking out loud, so to speak. No idea how that could be researched.

[mlassoff]

Originally Posted by bobtn

To not pursue what is left of manufacturing is crazy, though. It will never be 1955 again when GE in Ct had what, a 5 figure headcount, but why not go after what is available in EVERY sector-including manufacturing? It would require Ct no longer having some of the nation's highest costs of doing business, such as ultra high electricity rates per kilowatt hour. But why not put forth some effort, instead of sounding defeatist in your posts towards mfg being a thing of the past in Ct?

Because you can't go after EVERYTHING. You can't be all things to all people (or sectors in this case). We have to pick a couple of sectors and build the best business destination for those, capitalizing on our strengths-- which is not the cheap infrastructure, land and electricity that manufacturing needs. We need to build CT on a well educated workforce in a high QOL area.

If everything is special-- nothing is special.

[bobtn]

Originally Posted by JayCT

The answer is not that easy because it is not that easy to change the things you say to change. how do you lower electricity costs? Build more power stations? Because of Federal air quality regulations, that is not easy or cheap. Lower labor costs? How do you do that when the cost of major things like housing is so high? Maybe the only thing you can do is lower taxes but that alone is not enough. Despite what everyone thinks Connecticut still has a very strong economy otherwise our state's income levels would not be so high. Jay

Examine what the 47 states with lower KW charges than Ct are doing. If I recall, didn't Blumenthal want the UI distributing more, producing less years ago. Adding another profit-seeker in a grid adds cost.

[bobtn]

Originally Posted by HeadedWest

. What you'd like to know is how much of the high income level is due to legacy wealth effects versus the opportunity to create wealth now. The latter is a better measure of the strength of the economy going forward. When you think about the incremental effects, the statistics of few jobs created and few new corporations suggests the creation of new wealth is weaker in CT.

Just thinking out loud, so to speak. No idea how that could be researched.

That is the $64,000 question.

[BPt111]

The Labor market CT report unemployed rate

1. Hartord 11.4 %
2. Waterbury 9.8%
3. Bridgeport 9.2%
4. New Haven 8.4%
5. New Britain 8.4%
6. New London 7.7%
7. East Hartford 7.5%
8. Windham 7.6%
9. Meriden 7.4%
10. Norwich 7.2%
11. Brooklyn, Killingly, Plainfield 7.1 %


Other cities

Stamford 4.8%, Norwalk 4.3%, Danbury 4.6%, Middletown 5.8%, Torrington 6.4%, Naugatuck 6.9%


http://www1.ctdol.state.ct.us/lmi/laus/laus.pdf

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by HeadedWest

With electricity, it's not just power generation, it's delivery. The CT distribution system is undersized, but several attempts to add capacity were held up (maybe even killed) by NIMBY opposition. I'm not sure about the price, but I recall reading there's lots of hydro capability in Quebec that CT can't effectively use because of power line bottlenecks.

In CT it might be a little hard to get a clear picture on income in terms of the strength of the economy. What I'm thinking about is the great wealth accumulated over a long time in the state. What you'd like to know is how much of the high income level is due to legacy wealth effects versus the opportunity to create wealth now. The latter is a better measure of the strength of the economy going forward. When you think about the incremental effects, the statistics of few jobs created and few new corporations suggests the creation of new wealth is weaker in CT.

Just thinking out loud, so to speak. No idea how that could be researched.

I am not sure why that matters. People can choose to live anywhere they want, especially if they have inherited wealth. Even so I doubt it would make a lot of difference since it is likely a small portion of overall state's median income. Many people with great wealth actually do have a large income. Their wealth is usually set in a trust which provides them with an income for spending money. They also get access to homes, cars, boats, etc. owned and maintained by the trust. So on the outside they look like they have all the money in the world to spend, they really have limited real income. Jay

[JayCT]

I must say I follow economic development news pretty closely so I was surprised to find this buried in the Hartford Business Jornual's website. Seems like something that should be well publicized and on the front page rather than buried in an online newspaper. Jay

New York medical school to launch CT research center | HartfordBusiness.com

[Mr_250]

Originally Posted by JayCT

I must say I follow economic development news pretty closely so I was surprised to find this buried in the Hartford Business Jornual's website. Seems like something that should be well publicized and on the front page rather than buried in an online newspaper. Jay

New York medical school to launch CT research center | HartfordBusiness.com

Why is that buried?

The creation of more well-paying jobs is something that the current Governor should be proud of. They are going to forgive $7.25m of a loan if they can create 142 jobs. While I think the backroom is going to have a hard time figuring the actually jobs created over a 5 year span, this type of business is what we should be looking to lure into Connecticut. I would support giving this company $9.5M over giving $1m to a taco stand (like they did already). Bring in the jobs that pay good wages well enough so people can buy property. Don't give loans to companies that only pay low wages i.e. call centers and taco stands.

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by Mr_250

Why is that buried?

The creation of more well-paying jobs is something that the current Governor should be proud of. They are going to forgive $7.25m of a loan if they can create 142 jobs. While I think the backroom is going to have a hard time figuring the actually jobs created over a 5 year span, this type of business is what we should be looking to lure into Connecticut. I would support giving this company $9.5M over giving $1m to a taco stand (like they did already). Bring in the jobs that pay good wages well enough so people can buy property. Don't give loans to companies that only pay low wages i.e. call centers and taco stands.

I did not see it in the papers or online anywhere until today. Like I said this is the exact kind of thing I look for all the time. I am not sure why it was not more prominately annouced. Seems good for the state and Molloy. Jay