Connecticut rates 44th best state for business

[beerbeer]

I have to say that I think that Curry is spot on in this op ed piece. There is a lot at stake but I am much more optimistic now than in the past.

Hartford Courant

We should pray the General Assembly says yes. The Malloy plan represents the wisest investment of public funds for economic development in the modern history of our state. That's a sweeping claim and I'll elaborate in a moment — but first, a personal qualification.

For years I have fought attempts to dump tax dollars into bloated projects that fly the flag of economic development. Best were the ones that never got off the ground; the Kraft stadium, Bridgeport casino and New Haven mall cost millions, but less than if they'd actually been built.

New London tore itself apart over development, only to be left at the altar by the intended beneficiary, the Pfizer Corp. Hartford thought it hit the jackpot 16 years ago when the state bestowed $1 billion on Adriaen's Landing. If it makes it to a 20th anniversary without even a dress shop or diner on Front Street, someone should apologize.

Dimbulb Democrats in action. If the Bridgeport Casino was built before Foxwoods untold billions would have come from New York to Connecticut by now. If we had gotten the Patriots, the city of Hartford would have flowered beyond imagining, Pfizer would have blossomed as well if not for the idiotic tax laws iin Conecticut that punish success.

The industrial park at UConn is a good idea, public/private partnerships have been shown to work.

But the idea that the medical center is a good idea because of construction jobs is foolish and short term, Isn't that exactly what happened at Dempsey?

[drc72]

Dimbulb Democrats in action. If the Bridgeport Casino was built before Foxwoods untold billions would have come from New York to Connecticut by now. If we had gotten the Patriots, the city of Hartford would have flowered beyond imagining, Pfizer would have blossomed as well if not for the idiotic tax laws iin Conecticut that punish success.

The industrial park at UConn is a good idea, public/private partnerships have been shown to work.

But the idea that the medical center is a good idea because of construction jobs is foolish and short term, Isn't that exactly what happened at Dempsey?

The sad reality is CT has a very talented work force, but yet are tax system is killing business and job creation. I hate to beat a dead horse as well, but a lot of you guys got to admit this. We need to become more business friendly or are economy will remain stagnant for many years to come.

[HartfordTycoon]

It shouldn't be a partisan issue. Taxes is an area of concern but so is public investment. There needs to be a balance. It should not just be a black and white ideological issue. That is why people can't work together.

[beerbeer]

Government creates no jobs, all jobs are created by profits. Anything that reduces profits reduces jobs.

[The Voice of Reason]

Government creates no jobs, all jobs are created by profits. Anything that reduces profits reduces jobs.

Yawn...

without destroying his world view, I will simply taunt the partisan parrot with a much more accurate reply.

Jobs are not created by profits. in fact the persuit of profit at all cost is what has cost our country so many jobs over the last 50 years. announced layoffs cause stock price pops. capitulation to shareholder demand for profit caused off shoring of jobs, not unions, SHAREHOLDERS.... and executives unwilling to see that their company benefits by the health of its HQ city, its home state, and its own country of orgin..... public companies without any soul are the problem, and the CEO who moves on in 3 years with no true ties to the city/state etc....

so, in a word

Greed

Government enforces regulations on companies so they are "encouraged" to do things they once deemed their obligation to humanity.

Government discourages firms from leaving their ancesteral homes for "greener pastures"

so, maybe government does not create jobs perse, but it encourages companies to create those jobs in our state or our city rather than in India.

thats all I have to say about the subject really

but this hospital thing should be good for the area. I wish it were more centralized around the HH campus therefore creating a better biosciences cluster... Houston did that right... its like its own city in Houston now

[beerbeer]

Gibberish.

No profits, no company, no shareholders, no jobs.

All jobs are created by profits because without profits companies go belly up and everyone loses their job. It ain't rocket science.

Giving money to governments though taxes is like giving heroin to junkies. They won't use that money to balance budgets, they will spend it, a governments version of shooting up.

[drc72]

Yawn...

without destroying his world view, I will simply taunt the partisan parrot with a much more accurate reply.

Jobs are not created by profits.

Please tell me you are joking with this post??????? You need to come back down to earth there son. Any company that is not making money, will also not have employees to pay. There is really no rocket science involved in understanding that. Economics 101 is your friend.

[The Voice of Reason]

I stand by my statements.

the reckless persuit of profits has cost this country MILLIONS of jobs

companies make money and they do not neccessarily hire more people,

Also for those who never made it past 101, revenues are what create jobs, as revenue grows, companies hire, as revenues drop, they lay off. Profit is SOMETIMES a result of increased revenues, but it is in fact completely independent. There are hundreds and thousands of companies that are not or have not been profitable for years, but they are hiring like mad due to increasing revenues.

increasing revenues is a result of sales, or any form of new business and represents actual growth in a business.

this profit myth you are attempting to perpetuate is not new and is a long time mantra of the conservative political sphere. However there are countless examples of companies making record profits and laying off thousands at the same time.

Profits do NOT create jobs

Revenues creates jobs!

[beerbeer]

http://chiefexecutiv...es-for-business

Actually better than I thought. All the low tax, right-to-work states are near the top. California and its green initiatives are #50. Interesting stuff.

[beerbeer]

I stand by my statements.

the reckless persuit of profits has cost this country MILLIONS of jobs

]The jobs follow the profits, the profits are stll producing jobs, just not in America, if America had policies that helped business make profits here, the jobs would be here.

companies make money and they do not neccessarily hire more people,

Not always, but they buy goods and services which produce profits and jobs, and the people they do employ spend mone which produces profits elsewhere which keeps people employed and produces jobs.On the other hand companies that do NOT make money absolutely produce zero jobs

Also for those who never made it past 101, revenues are what create jobs, as revenue grows, companies hire, as revenues drop, they lay off. Profit is SOMETIMES a result of increased revenues, but it is in fact completely independent. There are hundreds and thousands of companies that are not or have not been profitable for years, but they are hiring like mad due to increasing revenues.

Revenues must be higher than expenses to create jobs. When revenue exceeds expenses it is called "profit."

increasing revenues is a result of sales, or any form of new business and represents actual growth in a business.

A company can increase revenue but if expenses outrun revenue, it will go out of business. That's just Economics 101.

this profit myth you are attempting to perpetuate is not new and is a long time mantra of the conservative political sphere. However there are countless examples of companies making record profits and laying off thousands at the same time.

That is actually possible, but it not relevant to the conversation.

Profits do NOT create jobs

Profits are the only way to create jobs.

Revenues creates jobs!

Not if expenses out pace revenues. Revenue is half the battle. Revenue doesn't create a single job if expenses outpace revenue. Please get yourself a dictionary.

[drc72]

I stand by my statements.

the reckless persuit of profits has cost this country MILLIONS of jobs

companies make money and they do not neccessarily hire more people,

Also for those who never made it past 101, revenues are what create jobs, as revenue grows, companies hire, as revenues drop, they lay off. Profit is SOMETIMES a result of increased revenues, but it is in fact completely independent. There are hundreds and thousands of companies that are not or have not been profitable for years, but they are hiring like mad due to increasing revenues.

increasing revenues is a result of sales, or any form of new business and represents actual growth in a business.

this profit myth you are attempting to perpetuate is not new and is a long time mantra of the conservative political sphere. However there are countless examples of companies making record profits and laying off thousands at the same time.

Profits do NOT create jobs

Revenues creates jobs!

No government intervention is what caused all these problems......... Had they not tinkered with the economy with the likes of fannie mae and freddie mac, including regulations forcing banks to lend to people that had no business getting loans, we would not be in the mess that we are now in. Now you are right, there are companies that do layoff people even when their making profit, but your not gonna find a company hiring when revenue is neutral or coming in at a loss. Well of course if you work for the State of CT, then that's an exception, as the taxpayer has become an endless trough of revenue.

[drc72]

What a surprise!!! CT is almost at the bottom of the list. Malloy is certainly working hard to get us at number 50.

[MichaelQReilly]

http://chiefexecutiv...es-for-business

Actually better than I thought. All the low tax, right-to-work states are near the top. California and its green initiatives are #50. Interesting stuff.

You mean all the low-tax, right to work states that are hell-holes to actually live in? My link

[beerbeer]

the reckless persuit of profits has cost this country MILLIONS of jobs

The pursuit of profits built this country. It's called free enterprise.

companies make money and they do not neccessarily hire more people,

That true, but companies that do not make a profit CAN NOT hire anyone.

Also for those who never made it past 101, revenues are what create jobs, as revenue grows, companies hire, as revenues drop, they lay off. Profit is SOMETIMES a result of increased revenues, but it is in fact completely independent. There are hundreds and thousands of companies that are not or have not been profitable for years, but they are hiring like mad due to increasing revenues.

This is where you are off the rails. Yes you need revenue to make a profit. But if your expenses are greater than your revenue and you fail to make a profit, your company ceases to exist.

BTW, There are no companies that have NOT been profitable for years that exist. They go out of business.

increasing revenues is a result of sales, or any form of new business and represents actual growth in a business.

Yes, this is true.

this profit myth you are attempting to perpetuate is not new and is a long time mantra of the conservative political sphere. However there are countless examples of companies making record profits and laying off thousands at the same time.

This is nonsense. it is economics not politics. Plus I have already conceded that profitable companies can lay people off. But only profitable companies have the working capital to hire people. Both statements are true.

Profits do NOT create jobs

ONLY profits create jobs. Unfortunately, you need to hear this from someone besides me. You will just deny anything I say. However, what I am stating is economically irrefutable.

Revenues creates jobs!

Not if expenses outrun revenue.

[HartfordTycoon]

You mean all the low-tax, right to work states that are hell-holes to actually live in? My link

Exactly, there are trade offs for everything and I would not want to live in any of those states at the top of the business competitiveness lists. They all have terrible educational systems, scary health care statistics, high rates of crime and the lowest quality of life in the nation. That's why business loves them. They are damn near third world. Maybe that is a good thing. I've seen recent reports of jobs coming back from China because the overall labor costs in the South are not much higher taking everything into account. Maybe the country should have our own little third world bastion where we can manufacture our own stuff inexpensively. That doesn't mean I would want to live in those places but they may have a place in our nation's overall economy and people can choose what type of place they want to live in.

[The Voice of Reason]

sorry HT,

but if these guys are going to keep posting rediculous crap, eventually someone has to point out the lack of facts.

the reckless persuit of profits has cost this country MILLIONS of jobs

The pursuit of profits built this country. It's called free enterprise.

Free enterprise might be PART of what built this country, but I can assure you it was not the beotchized version we adhere to today. It is this reckless persuit of profits that is the problem, not the interest in earning a buck.... I feel the need to add that at one point in our countries history, the wealthy took it upon themselves to take care of the less fortunate. as the walthy becore more greedy social programs were developed to handle this important need, and this is why we are where we are today... and now the burden is on the middle class. you seem to forget that as a culture we have made huge shifts away from the altruistic ideal that founded this nation and made it great. I study history, I read and I remind myself regularly what is amazing about America. We do not live in a country that Washington, or his ideological advisary Jefferson would even recognize.

companies make money and they do not neccessarily hire more people,

That true, but companies that do not make a profit CAN NOT hire anyone.

Wrong. most companies that are growing are loosing money year after year, but they are hiring, and they are borrowing from private equity groups, or they are borrowing from the parent company. Oakleaf and FM Facilityu management are two examples, UTC Fire is an excelent example, it happens everywhere where a growing unit feeds off of investors or off of a parent company, and that is where jobs come from.

Also for those who never made it past 101, revenues are what create jobs, as revenue grows, companies hire, as revenues drop, they lay off. Profit is SOMETIMES a result of increased revenues, but it is in fact completely independent. There are hundreds and thousands of companies that are not or have not been profitable for years, but they are hiring like mad due to increasing revenues.

This is where you are off the rails. Yes you need revenue to make a profit. But if your expenses are greater than your revenue and you fail to make a profit, your company ceases to exist.

BTW, There are no companies that have NOT been profitable for years that exist. They go out of business.

I gave examples before, your average resturant looses money the first several years before it can begin to make a niche and a profit. I am not making this crap up, I am not off the rails, I am speaking about the real world, not on paper. most business is done through investments, be it the founder of the company or outside investors, or banks or private equity. at some point after a while growing a business, there are usually layoffs, and a tightening of the purse trings.... jobs lost like crazy, and that is when profits happen.

increasing revenues is a result of sales, or any form of new business and represents actual growth in a business.

Yes, this is true.

this profit myth you are attempting to perpetuate is not new and is a long time mantra of the conservative political sphere. However there are countless examples of companies making record profits and laying off thousands at the same time.

This is nonsense. it is economics not politics. Plus I have already conceded that profitable companies can lay people off. But only profitable companies have the working capital to hire people. Both statements are true.

growing companies almost never add jobs with the monies made from profits, they add jobs by borrowing, going public, or gaining investors. it is extremely hard to grow and be profitable. in those rare instances there is usually investors to help fuel the growth as well.

Profits do NOT create jobs

ONLY profits create jobs. Unfortunately, you need to hear this from someone besides me. You will just deny anything I say. However, what I am stating is economically irrefutable.

you may think that buddy, but I am open to reason. unfortunately you made a bad premis, and you forgot entirely about investors, revenues, debt etc... you also wrote that loosing money means you will go out of business. thats is an over simplified understanding of todays business climate. Amazon lost money for AGES before ever making a profit it was founded in 1994, and made its first profit in 2003. this company should not exist by your standards, but it employs over 33K people!

Revenues creates jobs!

Not if expenses outrun revenue.

see above

and the moral of the story is that again we must agree to disagree, and that is fine with me. but lets make a deal. you keep the political crap out a perfectly good thread about development and Il will do my best not to rise to your political trolling.

avoid statements like this

"Government creates no jobs, all jobs are created by profits. Anything that reduces profits reduces jobs."

in a thread about a hospital that you know as well as anyone will be a positive for the region. you may disagree with the politics behind it, but this is a development issue not a political one... post that crap on the courant forums please.

[beerbeer]

Get real, Austin Texas is one of the best places in the country to live.

You want to see a hellhole, go to Prospect Street in Enfield or some sections of Hartford.

Every state has good and bad places to live. That is not a very good defense of Connecticut's terrible record on job creation and it doesn't excuse the business unfriendly practices of the state government that drive jobs out of Connecticut.

[HartfordTycoon]

Get real, Austin Texas is one of the best places in the country to live.

You want to see a hellhole, go to Prospect Street in Enfield or some sections of Hartford.

Every state has good and bad places to live. That is not a very good defense of Connecticut's terrible record on job creation and it doesn't excuse the business unfriendly practices of the state government that drive jobs out of Connecticut.

The poor parts of CT are heaven compared to poor parts of the south.

[beerbeer]

sorry HT,

but if these guys are going to keep posting rediculous crap, eventually someone has to point out the lack of facts.

and the moral of the story is that again we must agree to disagree, and that is fine with me. but lets make a deal. you keep the political crap out a perfectly good thread about development and Il will do my best not to rise to your political trolling.

avoid statements like this

"Government creates no jobs, all jobs are created by profits. Anything that reduces profits reduces jobs."

in a thread about a hospital that you know as well as anyone will be a positive for the region. you may disagree with the politics behind it, but this is a development issue not a political one... post that crap on the courant forums please.

[MichaelQReilly]

Get real, Austin Texas is one of the best places in the country to live.

you mean the same Austin, Texas regularly referred to as "a dark blue island in a sea of red?" I wonder why it's a great place to live.

You want to see a hellhole, go to Prospect Street in Enfield or some sections of Hartford.

Every state has good and bad places to live....

The difference is that in Mississippi, Alabama, or Texas the hellholes are massive swaths of the state. All of those states have the lowest high school graduation rates, highest levels of incarceration, most teenage pregnancies,etc. On the other hand, places like Connecticut and Massachusetts with their high tax rates are regularly at the other end of all of those statistics. Taxes are the price of civilization. The American South wants to be Brazil or some other place with massive levels of inequality. I, for one, would rather not engage in a race to the bottom with those places. Call me crazy.

[beerbeer]

The poor parts of CT are heaven compared to poor parts of the south.

I lived in both places and that's just not true. There is more land in the south and they have a rural poverty that is rare in the north. But the poor parts of the cities are the same, there is nowhere in Georgia worse than places like Detroit and Bridgeport. And the south is growing it's way out of poverty, that's where the jobs are headed.

That argument is silly on off topic. The question is how does Connecticut move up that list?

[HartfordTycoon]

I lived in both places and that's just not true. There is more land in the south and they have a rural poverty that is rare in the north. But the poor parts of the cities are the same, there is nowhere in Georgia worse than places like Detroit and Bridgeport. And the south is growing it's way out of poverty, that's where the jobs are headed.

That argument is silly on off topic. The question is how does Connecticut move up that list?

I lived in Atlanta for 5 years and was raised in Hartford. The Ghettos there are much bigger and worse than anything we have in CT. Trust me on that. The murder rate and the number of police officers who get shot is crazy. It's not really off topic in my opinion because I think there is a direct correlation between the economic and social policies enacted in a state and the economic results and social results that are produced by them. People will never be able to work together when they continue to demonize each other. Germany is the top economy of Europe and they have higher taxes and much more of a socialist state than we do yet they still are a manufacturing powerhouse. I'm not saying that we should be just like them but I think we can learn some things from them.

[Bill Mocarsky]

The question is how does Connecticut move up that list?

I was thinking that CT could move up that list if the standard of living in some of the southern states went up.

[beerbeer]

I lived in Atlanta for 5 years and was raised in Hartford. The Ghettos there are much bigger and worse than anything we have in CT. Trust me on that. The murder rate and the number of police officers who get shot is crazy. It's not really off topic in my opinion because I think there is a direct correlation between the economic and social policies enacted in a state and the economic results and social results that are produced by them. People will never be able to work together when they continue to demonize each other. Germany is the top economy of Europe and they have higher taxes and much more of a socialist state than we do yet they still are a manufacturing powerhouse. I'm not saying that we should be just like them but I think we can learn some things from them.

I ived in Atlanta for six years. Grew up in Enfield, went to school in Hartford and Storrs.

When I moved to Washington, DC, it had the highest murder rate in the country. But Detroit is now out pacing everyone. Northern cities like Cinny, Baltimore and Cleveland usually have higher rates than Atlanta.

There is no question that politics and development are intertwined. And I understand that government must play a role. I moved from Atlanta in 1987. If you look at the growth and skyline of that city since I left, it's phenomenal.

[beerbeer]

I lived in Atlanta for 5 years and was raised in Hartford. The Ghettos there are much bigger and worse than anything we have in CT. Trust me on that. The murder rate and the number of police officers who get shot is crazy. It's not really off topic in my opinion because I think there is a direct correlation between the economic and social policies enacted in a state and the economic results and social results that are produced by them. People will never be able to work together when they continue to demonize each other. Germany is the top economy of Europe and they have higher taxes and much more of a socialist state than we do yet they still are a manufacturing powerhouse. I'm not saying that we should be just like them but I think we can learn some things from them.

I ived in Atlanta for six years. Grew up in Enfield, went to school in Hartford and Storrs.

When I moved to Washington, DC, it had the highest murder rate in the country. But Detroit is now out pacing everyone. Northern cities like Cinny, Baltimore and Cleveland usually have higher rates than Atlanta.

There is no question that politics and development are intertwined. And I understand that government must play a role. I moved from Atlanta in 1987. If you look at the growth and skyline of that city since I left, it's phenomenal.