[jane_sm1th73]

I do not have JD Powers (?) data to back my comment, so I should have prefaced it by saying "YMMV" or some such. Your comment is fair enough.

Went back to CT for a HS graduation few weeks back, and engaged in catch up with the mom, my friend from way back. She said she was paying the same for food items at Big Y this year as last year. Therefore has been no inflation in CT this past year.

Like I said, mileages can always vary.

[Beeker2211]

Originally Posted by bobtn

Beeker, Cost is an area Ct loses in. Bad mgmt is national. But cost is the main reason Ct fails to gain new manufacturing plants, while in RTW states, new ones open on a regular basis. (PS, I focus on lack of NEW mfg in CT, plants close all over. The difference is healthy states gain NEW plants every single year.)

Have you seen the state of the manufacturing industry in the US? "New" plants are rare to pop up, for good reason and its' mostly mortgage underwriting at that. Besides that, it's not only about total cost (which varies widely) but PER UNIT cost. At that, the already industrial states have a HUGE advantage.

Furthermore, let's not forget that for 100 years CT manufacturing had only one place to go, down. for 100 years manufacturing in many states had only one place to go, up. Does not mean that CT doesn't have any advantages, or that those states have all the answers, a fact that Boeing and several other manufacturing giants have readily admitted in the last 4 years. CT (alongside MA, NY, OH, MI) still is a manufacturing powerhouse in terms of production value, many states still can't compare.

Originally Posted by bobtn

Its the 3 fold issue of excessive taxation, utilities, and yes wages. No manufacturer is going to open where costs are higher, and pay more, simply to let workers be able to get by better. Hence the UTC ABC strategy.

If policy doesn't allow workers to better themselves then where's the economic point for everyone else? A better paid employee eats out more, buys more teles, can buy a car etc.

Originally Posted by bobtn

PS, Yes, I love relos, as they are enhancing shareholder value, by maximizing ROI. If the states they fled were logical, they'd attack the root causes of why they left. Since they are not logical, relos are like an annuity in RTW states. We know as long as we keep their ROI potential up, we'll keep getting them. But the corrective action awaits the states they flee, not the states that gain them.

Except the cases where it has hurt ROI significantly, which unfortunately is way more often then not. There is no such thing as a free lunch. And being RTW has not had a significant effect in relos. A few cases here and there does not mount against the huge face of the problems these companies have been facing: low productivity, high turnover, etc. The lower sticker costs have not been making up for the issues it causes. This is the reality as small mid and now finally large manufacturing outfits have been complaining about, and for all your support of manufacturing you're espousing a line that only benefits the small number of huge corps at the direct expense of smaller operations.

Originally Posted by bobtn

Yes, relos create job losses for the states mfg flee, but you ignored job gains where they go . Hence, jobs are zero sum game, while shareholder ROI increases. That's a net gain.

I'm supposed to bow down to the all important shareholder ROI when if they don't get what they want they'll shaft my community in a blink?? My vote is important, so why should I cast it for something that further concentrates wealth (in this case shareholder payments) and punishes someone trying to make an honest living?? Honestly you sound like those annoying kids that so desperately want to be vindicated as an attractive person they "fix" themselves and are ignored anyway.

Expanding on what 7 Wishes said, basically you're gunning for a system where huge corps are a community that constantly takes from us (employees that can't afford bills), adds little to the economy, while enriching itself. See, I can support welfare and all that because most of the people on it are actually in need (not all, and some abuse the system but the vast vast vast vast vast f'n vast majority use it as it should be used) whereas you see the poor shareholders not having quite enough. You know what? Mess that noise. The sad thing is the promises of jobs forever if a) taxes were low b) regs are minimal and c) labour is cheap hasn't been even been reached where it was tried. We here in CT are doing better than we were 10, 20, or even 30 years ago in most sectors of the economy (our manufacturing jobs pay way better now than they used to). The same can't be said for TX, TN, or SC.

~Cheers

[HeadedWest]

Originally Posted by Beeker2211

We here in CT are doing better than we were 10, 20, or even 30 years ago in most sectors of the economy (our manufacturing jobs pay way better now than they used to). The same can't be said for TX, TN, or SC.

What CT is tending toward is a society of extremes; rich and poor. The middle is hollowed out.

[andthentherewere3]

Originally Posted by jane_sm1th73

Went back to CT for a HS graduation few weeks back, and engaged in catch up with the mom, my friend from way back. She said she was paying the same for food items at Big Y this year as last year. Therefore has been no inflation in CT this past year.

I haven't been following all of the posts in this thread, but this one jumped out at me. I often shop at the Big Y, and I've noticed that prices have indeed risen over the past year. I'm not sure I'd agree that Ct. has had no inflation.

[Beeker2211]

Originally Posted by HeadedWest

What CT is tending toward is a society of extremes; rich and poor. The middle is hollowed out.

What?? Almost everywhere in the US the middle has been thrown to the wolves. Studies have shown this, and its' worse in many other places, especially for natives to those areas. The narrative of the grass is greener outside of New England, the greater Megapolis, and the Mid-West has been an illusion and the just about the entire country has been faced with this issue.

~Cheers

[Stratford, Ct. Resident]

Originally Posted by andthentherewere3

I haven't been following all of the posts in this thread, but this one jumped out at me. I often shop at the Big Y, and I've noticed that prices have indeed risen over the past year. I'm not sure I'd agree that Ct. has had no inflation.

Believe it or not, sometimes when a competitor comes in, the prices end up increasing. I think that's what you're experiencing at your local store. They saw the prices of their new competitor across the street and figured out that there was room to bump their prices a bit.

[HeadedWest]

Originally Posted by Beeker2211

What?? Almost everywhere in the US the middle has been thrown to the wolves. Studies have shown this, and its' worse in many other places, especially for natives to those areas. The narrative of the grass is greener outside of New England, the greater Megapolis, and the Mid-West has been an illusion and the just about the entire country has been faced with this issue.

~Cheers

Got data?

[Beeker2211]

Originally Posted by andthentherewere3

I haven't been following all of the posts in this thread, but this one jumped out at me. I often shop at the Big Y, and I've noticed that prices have indeed risen over the past year. I'm not sure I'd agree that Ct. has had no inflation.

Food prices are only one indicator of inflationary pressures, at least when it comes to price inflation. There could be two reasons for this of either a shortening of supply and a growth in demand. Demand has grown, but probably not enough to cause as much of a rise as been expierienced. Food prices have risen worldwide: floods in Southeast Asia along with Brazil and Australia, droughts and fires in Russia, rust in Africa (and some in the US), and the issue of huge rolling future markets for grain have all significantly increased the food cost.

Hope that helped a little bit.

~Cheers

[Beeker2211]

Originally Posted by HeadedWest

Got data?

Give me a few hours and I'll dig up what I read earlier this year, I gotta go to the cafe though haha.

~Cheers

[7 Wishes]

Originally Posted by Beeker2211

Expanding on what 7 Wishes said, basically you're gunning for a system where huge corps are a community that constantly takes from us (employees that can't afford bills), adds little to the economy, while enriching itself. See, I can support welfare and all that because most of the people on it are actually in need (not all, and some abuse the system but the vast vast vast vast vast f'n vast majority use it as it should be used) whereas you see the poor shareholders not having quite enough. You know what? Mess that noise. The sad thing is the promises of jobs forever if a) taxes were low b) regs are minimal and c) labour is cheap hasn't been even been reached where it was tried. We here in CT are doing better than we were 10, 20, or even 30 years ago in most sectors of the economy (our manufacturing jobs pay way better now than they used to). The same can't be said for TX, TN, or SC.

~Cheers

Exactly! I don't see most of the job gains in TX as a "win". And who knows if 10 or 20 or 30 years from now the conditions change where it's not so good for a company to be in TX anymore and they move. There has to be a better way......