[mlassoff]

I don't know if anyone else caught "Where We Live" this morning on WNPR, but there was a very interesting discussion regarding technology innovation (or lack of it) in Connecticut.

As someone who lived in a tech hub (Austin) for 15 years, I can tell you that Connecticut could be a hub of technological innovation-- however it seems that the state government is intent on trying to revive old-economy manufacturing jobs. The problem is that these jobs represent what was-- not what is going to be.

Should the state's focus be on moving new economy jobs here and encouraging tech innovation and investment versus trying to revive jobs that really don't have a long-term future?

This is NOT a discussion about the tax environment on small business here in Connecticut. Tech havens exists in Texas as well as California, so should be a tax environment neutral discussion, please.

[Tin Knocker]

I dont see how CT is doing anything to attract or retain manufacturing here. Marlin firearms recently closed up shop here after some 140 years because the state refused to help out the new owners by creating a competitive atmosphere.
Another long term manufacturer, US repeating arms hit the road a few years ago. Ruger no longer makes guns here. True my knowledge is mostly based on firearms manufacture but I think the things pushing them out effect manufacturing across the board. This will be a tough one to discus without bringing taxation into it since thats whats driving out manufactureing.

I think it much more important to retain a solid manufacturing base. Technology is a new and untried thing and doesn't seem to be doing much for California. Making things people need is a much more secure thing than throwing in with the latest craze. But, I am conservative by nature & honestly think our current dependence on technology is akin to a house of cards stability wise.
I'd rather make things people need & buy things I like than make things they like & buy what I need. Seems more secure.

[mlassoff]

Originally Posted by Tin Knocker

I dont see how CT is doing anything to attract or retain manufacturing here. Marlin firearms recently closed up shop here after some 140 years because the state refused to help out the new owners by creating a competitive atmosphere.
Another long term manufacturer, US repeating arms hit the road a few years ago. Ruger no longer makes guns here. True my knowledge is mostly based on firearms manufacture but I think the things pushing them out effect manufacturing across the board. This will be a tough one to discus without bringing taxation into it since thats whats driving out manufactureing.

I think it much more important to retain a solid manufacturing base. Technology is a new and untried thing and doesn't seem to be doing much for California. Making things people need is a much more secure thing than throwing in with the latest craze. But, I am conservative by nature & honestly think our current dependence on technology is akin to a house of cards stability wise.
I'd rather make things people need & buy things I like than make things they like & buy what I need. Seems more secure.

While were on the subject it would seem to me that a lot more than taxes is driving out manufacturing...

To just blame taxes alone and ignore upward wage pressure by unions and very cheap available overseas labor is silly. There are multiple reasons that manufacturing is leaving not just Connecticut but the country as a whole.

It seems this would be an even bigger argument to focus on the recruitment of knowledge workers and companies in the tech sector. Even though a lot of programming has gone overseas (there is still LOTS here-- It's what my company is based on!), innovation has stayed on-shore.

[Leilani Vasquez]

Times are changing. From a real estate point of view, the industrial industry has steadily been doing bad in this region for the last several years and it's a trend that continues in many other parts of the country as well.

[Tetto]

While I think cheap labor is a big part of the equation, insatiable appetite for ever larger profits = larger bonus. Drive down costs to virtually nothing, use all of the tools available, rake in the dough. There is no loyalty to the American worker at all, and vice versa.

[HeadedWest]

Originally Posted by mlassoff

To just blame taxes alone and ignore upward wage pressure by unions and very cheap available overseas labor is silly.

It's not just overseas labor; it is labor in states where the cost of living is lower so semi-skilled wage levels go further.

Then on top of that is the union factor (union wage rates alone are not normally the major problem; it's the 'work rules' that kill productivity).

[stewarthaas]

Originally Posted by mlassoff

While were on the subject it would seem to me that a lot more than taxes is driving out manufacturing...

To just blame taxes alone and ignore upward wage pressure by unions and very cheap available overseas labor is silly. There are multiple reasons that manufacturing is leaving not just Connecticut but the country as a whole.

It seems this would be an even bigger argument to focus on the recruitment of knowledge workers and companies in the tech sector. Even though a lot of programming has gone overseas (there is still LOTS here-- It's what my company is based on!), innovation has stayed on-shore.

This state never thinks long term. Instead of risking money in making Connecticut a business friendly state, they just implement more taxes and regulations. Sure that gets you the money, but if you cut taxes and attracted business and growth, it would pay it self off in the long run.

There's a lot of factories, warehouses, etc that are going up in the south due to the business friendly atmosphere in those states.....not just taxes but other regulations.

I am no expert on this, but I think I got the basics down. I'm not looking to prove anyone wrong. I could be wrong and would love some feedback.

[blakesq]

The state's focus should be getting out of the way of business. Hence TAXES are an inssue. California gets away with having high taxes because it is in a beautiful part of the world with year round great weather. Austin is a haven because of low taxes and a pro-business environment. Look at Michigan to see how to screw up an economy with high taxes and horrible government and bowing down to government unions.

[mlassoff]

Originally Posted by stewarthaas

This state never thinks long term. Instead of risking money in making Connecticut a business friendly state, they just implement more taxes and regulations. Sure that gets you the money, but if you cut taxes and attracted business and growth, it would pay it self off in the long run.

There's a lot of factories, warehouses, etc that are going up in the south due to the business friendly atmosphere in those states.....not just taxes but other regulations.

I am no expert on this, but I think I got the basics down. I'm not looking to prove anyone wrong. I could be wrong and would love some feedback.

The report produced by the Connecticut Technology Council noted that taxes were not among the reasons entrepreneurs do not choose to start technology business here. The reasons have more to do with the lack of supportive tech/start up community, little integration between university (Yale and UCONN) tech communities and the entrepreneur community, etc.

The report also noted (anecdotally) that the state itself makes little effort to reach out to business personally. A person with a business here said he heard more from Governor Schartzenegger than Governor Rell. There is no effort at all to reach out to business that are considering Connecticut.

While the tax environment is somewhat hostile here in Connecticut it is no more hostile than in California which has the ultimate startup/tech community in the bay area. To say that taxation is the reasons businesses stay away here, but they still flourish in an area with similar levels of taxation is not logical.

[mlassoff]

Originally Posted by blakesq

The state's focus should be getting out of the way of business. Hence TAXES are an inssue. California gets away with having high taxes because it is in a beautiful part of the world with year round great weather. Austin is a haven because of low taxes and a pro-business environment. Look at Michigan to see how to screw up an economy with high taxes and horrible government and bowing down to government unions.

I don't think entrepreneurs make their decision as to where to place their startups based on weather. Sorry. Just don't buy it. When I worked with a vc fund in Austin the decision to start in Austin was usually based on the University and a strong support system for entrepreneurs. Taxation was never a consideration in any business plan I read or any tech based company I vetted.

By the way, did you ever make your move to Texas?