Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
P.S. This article is a good case in point on some of these issues: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/14/us...idents.html?hp. Non-native Vermonters are opposing a new store in Chester. But the picture is complicated by the fact that for many businesses Vermont is a "brand" that has to maintain a certain appearance in order to keep drawing customers. Either way, a new Dollar General store isn't going to have much of an impact on the employment opportunities in Chester.
Many of the 'non-native' Vermonters who are opposed to the new store are people just like you -- who moved here from elsewhere. Many native Chester residents are also in opposition. (And slightly off topic -- the fight against the DG is being waged in NH, too.)
The Dollar General will negatively impact several small, locally-owned stores. Remember a dollar spent locally stays local, whereas only a small portion of a dollar spent in a national chain stays. As sales are siphoned from the local stores, jobs will be lost. In the end there will be no net gain of jobs.
Dollar General has been reluctant to answer the local board on a number of issues, or has flat out ignored them. In the case of a DG built further south in the state, DG representatives falsified the statistics where employment was concerned. They stated 15 new jobs when the reality was 7 -- all low-paid jobs that a person couldn't support themselves on, much less a family.
Let's not forget that there are TWO dollar stores -- one of them a Dollar General -- 8 miles away in Springfield.
In all fairness, I will disclose that I am a 2nd homeowner who sought out Chester because it was a scenic community with amenities I liked. My purchase was partially in anticipation of retirement when I sell my home in NY and purchase another home in the Carolinas and become a snowbird. I deliberately did not consider communities with dollar stores. Seeing as I pay taxes in the community, I would like to have some say in the manner to which my town is developed. Not being a resident of the State of Vermont I can not vote but only make my voice heard through letters of opposition and financial support of the group seeking to preserve the Chester I came to love.
I deliberately did not consider communities with dollar stores. Seeing as I pay taxes in the community, I would like to have some say in the manner to which my town is developed. Not being a resident of the State of Vermont I can not vote but only make my voice heard through letters of opposition and financial support of the group seeking to preserve the Chester I came to love.
If you own property there you have a right to express your opinion. As long as all the stakeholders in Chester have an equal voice, there should be a fair outcome. In any case, it doesn't sound as if it would have much of a visual impact. I used to live in a town that had such strict codes that the McDonald's and Burger King were almost invisible. The problem is that over a long period of time those kinds of restrictions tend to make a neighborhood more expensive, which eventually forces out lower-income people when property values rise and all the stores become upscale. I think a healthy neighborhood needs a balance of rich and poor, young and old, etc.
The Dollar General will negatively impact several small, locally-owned stores. Remember a dollar spent locally stays local, whereas only a small portion of a dollar spent in a national chain stays. As sales are siphoned from the local stores, jobs will be lost. In the end there will be no net gain of jobs.
.
Kinda sorta maybe.
The problem with any chains of stores no matter what size, region or scope is that when they open up new ones it is not as if ALL employees are new. No retailer in their right mind would do that because it is so much of a risk. Chances are management would come from other stores or might actually be people close to the area. Other people would be local although again it might be some that already live near the area. Retail should not really be used as a way of expanding employment in the long term. Where I live there is one dollar store (dollar tree I think). It is in the corner of a strip mall and kinda a good thing because it is away from housing units and their lighting actually adds a tad to security at night. Having said that though I've seen another strip mall in a city near me that had two dollar stores and a pawn shop in a row! Not that good of an image. For me what kinda ticks me off is barbershops/hair salons. What happens is someone learns the trade, banks some money and opens up their own shop. I was involved with a local government that easily had eight places to get your hair done within a two mile radius! I'm not putting them down but seriously how many do you really need.
It can be said that dollars spent localy stay locally but that also depends as who owns what. I was involved in some local government where some businesses appeared local but the owners actually lived a half hour away. A franchise on the other hand might be said to have a local owner but it is still the mother corporation that calls the shots.
Sometimes there is a tendency to put down the internet. This can be a bit misleading. There are plenty of small businesses that sell using the internet because they simply don't have the capital to be open all the time or might not be located near plenty of people. I know a small business in a rough part of a town. They sell herbal products, teas, soaps. Not exactly what I would call big sellers. There is hardly any parking but when I asked the owner how things were she said they are great. They market with twitter and facebook and have their own site. Physically they are open for half the week. But they constantly make sales online.
Town governments have to have some form of a tax base. Without it then there are no funds to do anything. Nevada built itself up out of simply legalizing things that were illegal elseware. Marriage, divorce, gambling, prostitution (some counties). It probably went too far and made a bubble which then popped. The trouble is as more states push to legalize things the gains will be marginal. I'm from Mass and I don't think a casino is going to be a huge cash crop..but hey short term it might do something
I find this thread very interesting as I am in the process of moving my family to Grand Isle and will be raising my 3 children in what I've come to know as a peaceful, rural, beautiful environment with helpful neighbors and strong community spirit. Challenging local politics and annual fights over school budgets notwithstanding.
After camping in the islands for the past 6 years, I spent the last 3 weeks camping and looking for housing in between attending Chicken Pie suppers at our local church, speaking with countless young people and recent college grads who've returned to the islands and can't imagine living anywhere else (even after seeing the lights of the big cities) and meeting snowbirds and full timers alike who were some of the most welcoming, engaging and considerate people I've ever encountered, I am convinced that this is where I want to see my children grow. They've been after us for 3 years to move up here, but it's taken us a while to see the light.
My children may go away to college and never return. They may not. Life is full of unknowns and the uncertaintly would exist no matter where we lived. What I do know is that the sense of community and open spaces they'll grow up in cannot be found in the crowded suburbs of Boston or Providence. Jobs may be more plentiful and more lucrative elsewhere, but that 75k you earn in Boston isn't going to help you buy a home in the Boston area any easier than the 50k in VT will help you there. In fact, I'd venture to say that 50k in VT will go a lot further than 75k will in greater Boston.
Can VT legislators do a better job of attracting good paying jobs. I'm sure they can. Then again, most state legislators can. That's where we come in to put the pressure on them to improve things.
We hope to be settled in for the start of the school year. Will report back after our first winter!
I find this thread very interesting as I am in the process of moving my family to Grand Isle and will be raising my 3 children in what I've come to know as a peaceful, rural, beautiful environment with helpful neighbors and strong community spirit. Challenging local politics and annual fights over school budgets notwithstanding.
After camping in the islands for the past 6 years, I spent the last 3 weeks camping and looking for housing in between attending Chicken Pie suppers at our local church, speaking with countless young people and recent college grads who've returned to the islands and can't imagine living anywhere else (even after seeing the lights of the big cities) and meeting snowbirds and full timers alike who were some of the most welcoming, engaging and considerate people I've ever encountered, I am convinced that this is where I want to see my children grow. They've been after us for 3 years to move up here, but it's taken us a while to see the light.
My children may go away to college and never return. They may not. Life is full of unknowns and the uncertaintly would exist no matter where we lived. What I do know is that the sense of community and open spaces they'll grow up in cannot be found in the crowded suburbs of Boston or Providence. Jobs may be more plentiful and more lucrative elsewhere, but that 75k you earn in Boston isn't going to help you buy a home in the Boston area any easier than the 50k in VT will help you there. In fact, I'd venture to say that 50k in VT will go a lot further than 75k will in greater Boston.
Can VT legislators do a better job of attracting good paying jobs. I'm sure they can. Then again, most state legislators can. That's where we come in to put the pressure on them to improve things.
We hope to be settled in for the start of the school year. Will report back after our first winter!
I think you make some good points, but one issue Vermont has that most other states do not have is a small population. That small population also has a small income. There is only so much money that can be spent and as of now we have a very large deficit for a state our size.
There needs to be a balance on how much to develop, how much to spend on social programs, tax rates on businesses, etc. Politicians talk about these things every year, but nothing is ever done. The state knew it wasn't business friendly two decades ago, but nothing or very little has been done to change that. We are getting to a difficult fork in the road to navigate. Do we give big tax benefits to businesses to attract them, now to only have the citizens of the state absorb more of the costs? Or do we reduce or not raise taxes on the citizens and figure a way to offer incentives for businesses to relocate here? I understand these decisions can't be made overnight. The implications can be long lasting. This article sums it up. Vermonters growing older faster - WCAX.COM Local Vermont News, Weather and Sports- funding can't stay at the same level at the current pace. If most of the state is at or close to retirement age in a few decades, who will pay the states bill? There are some very tough decisions that have to be made soon.
This article sums it up. Vermonters growing older faster - WCAX.COM Local Vermont News, Weather and Sports- funding can't stay at the same level at the current pace. If most of the state is at or close to retirement age in a few decades, who will pay the states bill? There are some very tough decisions that have to be made soon.
It all depends on whether retirees have health insurance and pay their way. If all of them do, they may not have much of an impact on the state budget. Health care inflation might be the only problem, and that is solvable. And if everyone were old, there would be no need to shell out hundreds of millions of dollars every year to educate children.
It all depends on whether retirees have health insurance and pay their way. If all of them do, they may not have much of an impact on the state budget. Health care inflation might be the only problem, and that is solvable. And if everyone were old, there would be no need to shell out hundreds of millions of dollars every year to educate children.
I wasn't just thinking of health insurance. My concern is the number of people that rely on the state or federal government to survive (outside of healthcare). In the US 22 percent rely on the government for housing, food, income, or other assistance once considered to be the responsibility of individuals or families. That's nearly 1/4 of our population. I haven't seen numbers for Vermont, but I suspect those numbers are much higher. Some 200,000 Vermonters (nearly one third of our population) rely on DCF alone for assistance. Granted, if the numbers of families and children decrease those numbers would drop, but how could the state afford to give tax breaks to older citizens if most of the state is older. We already know few Vermonters are putting money away for retirement, or no where near enough for retirement. Those same people are going to need housing assistance, food assistance, income assistance, etc to get by. The one catch to government run health insurance is how it's funded. This is not a concern for states with a large number of working young people. They work and pay into the system to help fund it. Granted there will be Federal money to help offset some of the costs for states like Vermont. We still have little knowledge of how the federal plan is going to be completely funded. If they leave each state to fund the majority of the cost themselves, Vermont could be in trouble with an older population. Older Americans use more health services than any other age group. Vermont will be ahead of all other states to provide coverage for everyone. At our current standing, the state needs the fed help fund this coverage, we can't do it with the money the state generates now.
My opinion (I know, opinions are like ********, everyone has one) is the state needs to revise many of it's laws/taxes to not only attract business, but to attract younger people or keep them here. Maine (barely ahead of Vermont as the oldest state in the union) has already taken steps to help resolve this issue. Realize Maine Network
It's not just tax rates on businesses, it's the attitude of the bureaucrats in Montpelier and in the municipalities, a mendset of many in the citizenry that is hostile to science and technology, and utter ignorance of what businesses need to start up. There seems to be this fantasy that Vermont is a place where entrpeneurs will come to create businesses doing things like knitting organic teddybears, or that the so-called Vermont "brand" is an attraction. The state is also in denial about the importance of manufacturing in the US or Vermont ecomony. Mention the word and out come all the bohos and ex-hippies who declare that manufacturing is dead and that we should seriously focus on growing our own food in our own back yards because after all, this is where the global economy is headed. Oh and we also get the usual litany about how things are tough everywhere so it's not a problem specific to Vermont.
Vermont needs to get down off its high horse and accept that anyone starting a business here is doing the state a huge favor and treat them accordingly. Instead as a small business owner, the state regards you as evil at worst and at best as a golden goose to be cut open. I would suggest that the Governor appoint an ombudsman to deal with inconstistencies in application of state policies (read: overeager Montpelier bureaucrats stick it to businesses because they can get away with it, unless of course the business owner is friends with the "right" pollitician) except that Shumlin also has no clue how manufacturing, particularly technology-based manufacturing works.
The populace has what it wants: fewer people getting their hands dirty, more rich people coming for the Vermont way of life who are willing to fund a system that funnels money to career welfare recipients. Both camps appear to be happy with that. The only group that is unhappy is the middle class who wants to work, but they do not count here.
It's not just tax rates on businesses, it's the attitude of the bureaucrats in Montpelier and in the municipalities, a mendset of many in the citizenry that is hostile to science and technology, and utter ignorance of what businesses need to start up. There seems to be this fantasy that Vermont is a place where entrpeneurs will come to create businesses doing things like knitting organic teddybears, or that the so-called Vermont "brand" is an attraction. The state is also in denial about the importance of manufacturing in the US or Vermont ecomony. Mention the word and out come all the bohos and ex-hippies who declare that manufacturing is dead and that we should seriously focus on growing our own food in our own back yards because after all, this is where the global economy is headed. Oh and we also get the usual litany about how things are tough everywhere so it's not a problem specific to Vermont.
Vermont needs to get down off its high horse and accept that anyone starting a business here is doing the state a huge favor and treat them accordingly. Instead as a small business owner, the state regards you as evil at worst and at best as a golden goose to be cut open. I would suggest that the Governor appoint an ombudsman to deal with inconstistencies in application of state policies (read: overeager Montpelier bureaucrats stick it to businesses because they can get away with it, unless of course the business owner is friends with the "right" pollitician) except that Shumlin also has no clue how manufacturing, particularly technology-based manufacturing works.
The populace has what it wants: fewer people getting their hands dirty, more rich people coming for the Vermont way of life who are willing to fund a system that funnels money to career welfare recipients. Both camps appear to be happy with that. The only group that is unhappy is the middle class who wants to work, but they do not count here.
With respect to economic development, there are so many things working against Vermont that I think it would take an exceptionally talented group in Montpelier to make significant improvements: 1) low population; 2) uncompetitive higher education; 3) poor location for distribution of goods and services; 4) weak manufacturing base; 5) dependence on tourism; 6) dependence on low-profit agriculture; 7) smaller budget for attracting and developing businesses than most states; 8) limited natural resources compared to larger states.
If you compared Vermont to countries, it's a little like the U.K. The U.K. has lots more people and a much larger economy than Vermont, but it is also highly dependent on tourism. There are large pockets of low-income people who are basically screwed for life, and there are small pockets of wealthy people who live in a different world. Unfortunately much of the wealth in the U.K. comes from the London-based financial services industry, which in many ways is a wealth-redistribution industry that provide no long-term benefits to the country.
It would be nice if Vermont could attract a few high-paying, high-tech businesses, but it doesn't have much to offer competitively. Tourism may not be very sexy, but it's sustainable as long as the state doesn't get trashed. You seem to have an ax to grind based on your experience, but how many Vermonters are there who could do well for the state economically if it wasn't for the red tape? My guess is not many.
Paul it doesn't have to be Vermonters. As my status says, I cross the river twice a day. My business is also one that has customers on both sides of the river. I've also talked to a community in NH about moving my VT business to NH as so many other have done. I also interviewed about 30 companies as part of a USDA RBEG project several years ago.
There is a surprising number of small to medium business owners who are looking to come to northern New England from places like NJ or CT. Sometimes it is to escape high taxes. Sometimes it's for the same reasons that individuals seek to come to places like VT, namely quality of life. Sometimes it's to be near an elderly relative who lives in the area. They have the choice of relocating their business to VT or NH and VT doesn't even get a passing glance. And it's not as if NH communities are overflowing with ugly smokestack industries there are some out of the way locations that are zoned for this type of activity so it is far from residences or downtowns. What I see happening are small high tech companies quietly prospering in NH, where state agencies are not in the habit of trying to actively find some reason to fine or otherwise harass them. Word about this kind of thing gets out because we all talk to each other. What also seems to happen in VT is that citizens object to businesses setting up for manufacturing even in industrial parks, so the state deservingly gets the reputation of being hostile to business.
Tourism is not only not sexy, the jobs do not even come close to paying a living wage.
I agree that Vermont has a lot working against it, but that doesn't mean it can't be done. If you want an example from overseas, look at Bavaria. Bavaria used to be a state that held its hand out to the Feds for money. Poor, pretty, and agricultural. Strauss turned it around with a deliberate three-step plan, first by putting an infrastructure in place, then by strengthening key players in acedamia and industry, and finally by providing incentives for those key players to work together. Now Bavaria is an economic powerhouse in Germany. I'm not saying that Vermont could embark on such a program or take it anywhere near as far, but it is possible to take away some lessons learned as to what works and what does not.
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 register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
Not that good of an image. For me what kinda ticks me off is barbershops/hair salons. What happens is someone learns the trade, banks some money and opens up their own shop. I was involved with a local government that easily had eight places to get your hair done within a two mile radius! I'm not putting them down but seriously how many do you really need.
Coming to Grand Isle
) is the state needs to revise many of it's laws/taxes to not only attract business, but to attract younger people or keep them here. Maine (barely ahead of Vermont as the oldest state in the union) has already taken steps to help resolve this issue. 
