Tag Archives: Economics

News

What happened to Illinois businesses when Democrats raised taxes?

Leave a comment
Central United States
Central United States

How do Illinois businesses respond to Democrat Governor Quinn’s tax increases?

From CBS News. (H/T Marathon Pundit)

Excerpt:

The Chicago area will soon have a few hundred fewer jobs, while Northwest Indiana will have a few hundred more.

As CBS 2’s Susanna Song reports, sources say Modern Forge is moving from Blue Island across the state line to Merrillville, Ind., and the new town is rolling out the its welcome mat for the plant.

[…]On Tuesday, Indiana succeeded as Blue Island-based manufacturer Modern Forge announced it was moving across the state line. CEO Greg Heim said Illinois made it impossible to stay.

“The environment in Illinois, I would say there was no — we did not see any change coming in Illinois,” Heim said. “Illinois continues to stay on a path of not being – for us – a (pro-business) environment and the excitement and energy here in Indiana, that’s very important to us.”

That’s why, after 97 years in Blue Island, Modern Forge is picking up and moving its building and 240 jobs to Indiana.

“It’s a huge thrill for us,” Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels said.

Daniels didn’t mince words when he said luring business is the Hoosier State’s #1 priority. And there’s no question that Illinois – and companies like Modern Forge – are main targets.

He claimed that “well over a dozen” businesses have moved from Illinois to Indiana in the past few months. “And it’s not like this just started recently,” he added.

In fact, it really ramped up last year when Illinois lawmakers hiked the state’s income tax. Since then, some businesses have bailed and others threatened to do so, citing high taxes, worker’s compensation issues, lack of incentives and an overall lack of encouragement from the Quinn administration.

[…]According to U.S. Labor Bureau statistics, Quinn needs to do something. Statistics show a steady jobs decline beginning in January, shortly after the tax hike passed.

Daniels said he sees tax concerns in Illinois as a potential Indiana win.

“We’ve had a big upsurge in contacts from businesses who want to explore an Indiana location because the arithmetic tells them it’s less expensive to hire people here,” Daniels said.

And more from the Illinois Policy Institute:

In a trend that continues to worsen, more Illinoisans found themselves unemployed in the month of July.

Illinois lost more jobs during the month of July than any other state in the nation, according to the most recent Bureau of Labor Statistics report. After losing 7,200 jobs in June, Illinois lost an additional 24,900 non-farm payroll jobs in July. The report also said Illinois’s unemployment rate climbed to 9.5 percent. This marks the third consecutive month of increases in the unemployment rate.

Illinois started to create jobs as the national economy began to recover. But just when Illinois’s economy seemed to be turning around, lawmakers passed record tax increases in January of this year. Since then, Illinois’s employment numbers have done nothing but decline.

Data released today by the bureau confirms this downward trajectory. When it comes to putting people back to work, Illinois is going backwards. Since January, Illinois has dropped 89,000 people from its employment rolls.

Democrats complain a lot about companies that outsource jobs. And now we see what causes companies to outsource jobs – Democrats.They cause the very thing that they complain about. That’s insane.

News

Obamanomics: $500,000 stimulus grant to grow trees creates 1.72 jobs

2 Comments
Government Spending Vs Jobs
Government Spending Vs Jobs

From Fox News.

Excerpt:

A federal stimulus grant of nearly $500,000 to grow trees and stimulate the economy in Nevada yielded a whopping 1.72 jobs, according to government statistics.

In 2009, the U.S. Forest Service awarded $490,000 of stimulus money to Nevada’s Clark County Urban Forestry Revitalization Project, aimed at revitalizing urban neighborhoods in the county with trees, plants, and green-industry training.

According to Recovery.gov, the U.S. government’s official website related to Recovery Act spending, the project created 1.72 permanent jobs.  In addition, the Nevada state Division of Forestry reported the federal grant generated one full-time temporary job and 11 short-term project-oriented jobs.

[…]Repeated calls by FoxNews.com to the U.S. Forest Service were not returned.

[…]”Looking at the failure of the stimulus to live up to its promises, not just in Nevada, but throughout America, I think the question becomes ‘is there any good use of stimulus money?'” said Douglas Kellogg, communications manager for National Taxpayers Union, in an email to FoxNews.com.

[…]”The president may well propose new stimulus efforts when Congress returns from recess,” said Kellogg, “and those who learn from past stimulus debacles will not be fooled again.”

The Heritage Foundation explains how government spending has never worked to create jobs. Not even when Republicans do it.

Excerpt:

Indeed, President Obama’s stimulus bill failed by its own standards. In a January 2009 report, White House economists predicted that the stimulus bill would create (not merely save) 3.3 million net jobs by 2010. Since then, 3.5 million more net jobs have been lost, pushing the unemployment rate above 10 percent.[1] The fact that government failed to spend its way to prosperity is not an isolated incident:

  • During the 1930s, New Deal lawmakers doubled federal spending–yet unemployment remained above 20 percent until World War II.
  • Japan responded to a 1990 recession by passing 10 stimulus spending bills over 8 years (building the largest national debt in the industrialized world)–yet its economy remained stagnant.
  • In 2001, President Bush responded to a recession by “injecting” tax rebates into the economy. The economy did not respond until two years later, when tax rate reductions were implemented.
  • In 2008, President Bush tried to head off the current recession with another round of tax rebates. The recession continued to worsen.
  • Now, the most recent $787 billion stimulus bill was intended to keep the unemployment rate from exceeding 8 percent. In November, it topped 10 percent.[2]

Why is this? It’s because the government never spends money as efficiently as the private sector. Private sector firms have to stay lean and mean in order to stay afloat – because they have competitors who are always trying to sell better goods and services for less money. In a capitalist economy, the consumer is king – all the businesses fight to earn the customers’ money. But the government has no competitors, and so they neither care about efficiency, nor pleasing their customers.

CBS News reports:

ABC News reports:

And this one features a real economist:

We shouldn’t let the government take money out of the private sector and let the public sector spend it on “stimulus”. Stimulus means taking money away from your boss, or your possible bosses, and spending it on trees. It’s how you lose jobs – and that’s what we have today.

Related posts

Commentary

A closer look at Michele Bachmann’s record on fiscal policy

Leave a comment
Michele Bachmann: On the Issues
Michele Bachmann: On the Issues

An analysis of Michele Bachmann’s record on economic policy, courtesy of the Club for Growth.

Summary:

Congresswoman Michele Bachmann was first elected to Congress in 2006 after serving in the Minnesota State Senate from 2001 to 2006. If elected President, she would be the first woman President and the second person elected directly from the U.S. House of Representatives since James Garfield. Congresswoman Bachmann received a 100% score in the Club for Growth’s 2010 scorecard and has a lifetime score of 94%. The average house Republican score from 2007-2010 was 78%. Congresswoman Bachmann also has a lifetime score of 94% from the Minnesota Taxpayers League during the time she served in the State Senate. The average score for Republican State Senators during that time was 76%.

These guys do the most thorough job of anyone vetting the candidates – they go over every bill, every speech, every vote, every editorial – even campaign advertisements.

The report covers the following areas:

  • TAXES
  • SPENDING
  • ENTITLEMENT REFORM
  • REGULATION
  • FREE TRADE
  • SCHOOL CHOICE
  • TORT REFORM
  • POLITICAL FREE SPEECH
  • POLITICAL ACTIVITY & ENDORSEMENTS

Excerpt:

SCHOOL CHOICE
The Club for Growth supports broad school choice, including charter schools and voucher programs that create a competitive education market including public, private, religious, and non-religious schools.  More competition in education will lead to higher quality and lower costs.
Congresswoman Bachmann not only has a strong record on school choice, she is the first major presidential candidate to actually found a charter school. In fact, Congresswoman Bachmann co-founded the first K-12 charter school in the nation, New Heights Charter School back in 1993.  Her record on school choice has, predictably, been flawless since then.
In 2011, Bachmann voted to re-establish the DC school voucher program.  As a member of the State Senate, Bachmann voted to prohibit teacher strikes during the school year.  She also voted to allow parents to use education tax credits for tuition at private schools.  She’s introduced legislation to make foster children eligible for education vouchers.
As far back as 2003, Bachmann was fighting the No Child Left Behind Act, filing a bill in the Minnesota legislature that would have prohibited the Dept. of Children, Families and Learning or any other state agency “from entering into a contract or other agreement under the provisions of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, unless the financial consequences to the state and each school district have been identified.”  Another bill, S.F. 1921, “requires all state plans, agreements and contracts associated with NCLB compliance to be nullified and revoked on June 1, 2004, unless the Legislature specifically affirms implementation of the federal law by that date.”

Conclusion:

With very few exceptions, Congresswoman Bachmann has supported pro-growth policies throughout her career. She especially deserves praise for her consistent defense of school choice. After reviewing her record, we are confident that Congresswoman Bachmann would be a pro-growth President.

For my social conservative friends: please print out the paper and read it. These guys are not indifferent to your concerns at all.

Pat Toomey and the Club for Growth

The past director of the Club for Growth is current Pennsylvania senator Pat Toomey.

Here’s a blurb from his web site:

Pat is pro-life and believes that children should be welcomed into the world and protected by its laws.

While reasonable people may differ on the question of abortion rights, we should all be able to agree on policies that encourage adoption over abortion, that avoid taxpayer funding of abortions, and that allow parental involvement in decisions that involve minors. As a senator, Pat will support policies that further these important goals.

Pat also believes the tradition of marriage is sacred and is best defined as between a man and a woman. As a congressman, Pat voted to protect the institution of marriage in many ways. For example, Pat voted to reduce the tax penalty on married couples and will support similar policies as a U.S. senator. Throughout his time in Congress, Pat voted for legislation to protect innocent life, strengthen marriage, and protect the traditional values upon which this country was founded.

His voting record on abortion:

  • Voted YES on making it a crime to harm a fetus during another crime. (Feb 2004)
  • Voted YES on banning partial-birth abortion except to save mother’s life. (Oct 2003)
  • Voted YES on forbidding human cloning for reproduction & medical research. (Feb 2003)
  • Voted YES on funding for health providers who don’t provide abortion info. (Sep 2002)
  • Voted YES on banning human cloning, including medical research. (Jul 2001)
  • Voted YES on banning Family Planning funding in US aid abroad. (May 2001)
  • Voted YES on federal crime to harm fetus while committing other crimes. (Apr 2001)
  • Voted YES on banning partial-birth abortions. (Apr 2000)
  • Voted YES on barring transporting minors to get an abortion. (Jun 1999)
  • Rated 0% by NARAL, indicating a pro-life voting record. (Dec 2003)

And on marriage:

  • Voted YES on establishing nationwide AMBER alert system for missing kids. (Apr 2003)
  • Voted YES on reducing Marriage Tax by $399B over 10 years. (Mar 2001)
  • Rated 100% by the Christian Coalition: a pro-family voting record. (Dec 2003)

This is the record of the former leader of the most fiscally conservative PAC. The most pro-business group. The most anti-spending group.

Fiscal conservatives are more socially conservative than you think. If you are a social conservative, but not a fiscal conservative, then you should print out the paper on Michele Bachmann, a radical social conservative, and see how these fiscal conservatives at the Club for Growth judge what counts as fiscally conservative. It might be the case that fiscally conservative positions actually dovetail nicely with socially conservative positions. I think they do.

Campaign speeches, interviews and debates

Speeches:

Reactions from her recent debate performance:

Profiles of Michele Bachmann:

Michele Bachmann on television news

Let Americans spend their own money

Time to prioritize spending

Obama’s plan is to raise your taxes

Michele Bachmann in the legislature

Against socialism:

For economic growth:

Against ACORN funding: