Comments about ‘In our opinion: How to lead a recovery’

Return to article »

Published: Sunday, May 26 2013 12:00 a.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
no fit in SG
St.George, Utah

Lots of employment opportunities in Texas?
Anyone been paying attention to weather lately?
Yes, it may be economically favorable in Texas, but not if your town and home are repeatedly destroyed or blown away by a tornado. Then comes the floods where one's property and surroundings float away.
California's natural disasters haven't come close to what climate change is bringing, more frequently, to Texas and it's surrounding states.

Sandy, UT

I really wonder why this would be news to anynone. If you make it harder for me to run my business, I am going to go somewhere that will make it easier. While some companies are stuck where they are (the local store has to stay local) , plenty of businesses can move. Why would anyone owning a business that can relocate stay in a state run by politicians who view business as the enemy and force workers to join unions whether they want to or not? Those on the left know what is happening and that is why the National Labor Relations Board is fighting Boeing opening a new facility in So. Carolina. Tax heavy liberal states cannot compete and they arr trying to use the Federal Governnent to slow the exodus of profitable companies.

Likewise, profitable companies are leaving the US because we have such a high corporate tax rate. Liberals want to feed off these companies, but businesses who can are taking their facilities and jobs to other countries. It is not uncommon to see even snall comapnies who have some of their workforce overseas. The irony is that some who do this vote for liberal policies.

What in Tucket?
Provo, UT

Maybe Mr. Obama should read this article.

Cardston, Alberta

I have friend who is a long-time accountant in Chicago. If I owned a business in Illinois, I would be the first to move.

The Real Maverick
Orem, UT

Leading your state to be have the least amount of regulations is NOT a good thing. Just ask those who live in a certain town in Texas whose lives were destroyed when a certain fertilizer plant (which had a lonnngggg history of problems) blew up.

Contrary to what this editorial thinks, it's not a good thing to get rid of so many regulations that even 3rd world countries are rolling their eyes.

The bottom line is, we aren't recovering because regulation and taxes are too high. The rich "job creators" are sitting on trillions. The real issue is that the rest of us are lacking so much wealth and buying power that we cannot force companies to hire in order to produce more goods.

See, the economy grows when the masses not the minority has the bulk of the wealth. That's the #1 issue today. The rich have rigged the game and have it dead set against the poor and middle class. Until we change this progress won't happen.

Ultra Bob
Cottonwood Heights, UT

The things that might cause a business to relocate for non business reasons, would be outright bribery or government favoritism. In either case, the people will suffer from the action.

Salt Lake City, UT

Of course for labor this is a race to the botton, Labor gives and gives and gives, while capital takes and takes and takes. Eventually there will be a reckoning with much suffering. American labor increasingly survives under immigrant conditions, e.g. multiple non-benfit paying jobs, dangerous working conditions, complete insecurity. Texas is a paradise I'm sure.

Diligent Dave
Logan, UT

"(Texas) also grew by 18 percent in population and increased dramatically in terms of its share of the nation's total economy."

The population growth MORE THAN ANYTHING, I assert, is the REAL reason for Texas prospering. And probably much, if not most, of that growth came "naturally" (via BIRTHS). Immigrants, whether between nations or sub-divisional states within a nation, certainly can and do have a major impact on the "growth" of a given region, at least for a period of time.

However, the riots by "immigrants" and/or their posterity in Sweden, a nation that has a very wide "social safety net" of welfare, shows that the latent, and sometimes not so latent disparity between the "haves" and the "have much less's" of society shows "growth" via the womb of another nation or ethnicity has it's definite drawbacks.

Too often, when something good happens, there are many standing, waiting to take credit for it. However, the cause of that good is often far different than those who would attempt to suggest a causal effect from a correlation.

However, economies cannot grow with stagnant or shrinking populations.

Salt Lake City, UT

Businesses are like athletes who are free agents. They go where there is the best deal. Most of us move, changes jobs or locations when it is in our best interests. The governors of California and Illinois should get the message.


ALEC is a secretative conservative lobbying organization which writes legislation such as the infamous "Stand Your Ground Laws" passed in Florida.

CA response (in part) response to Rick Perry:

I can understand why Rick Perry is interested in California. We were the national jobs leader for most of the last year with 257,000 new private sector jobs said Kish Rajan, director of the Governors Office of Business and Economic Development. "But business relocations only account for 0.03 percent of annual job losses in California. At that rate of growth, it would take 20 years to lose just 1 percent of our businesses to relocation. The reports show that no state has ever poached their way to long-term prosperity. Real job creation comes from California's history as a national leader in start-ups and the expansion of homegrown businesses."

Sandy, UT

If this article is true then why aren't there more no state income states on the the list? Also who would really want to live in Texas?


TX and other states are experiencing growth largely from the oil and gas boom.

"If you’ve been reading our reporting on Rick Perry’s record in Texas, you’ll know that a large part of the state’s economic success can be attributed to its rapid population growth. Of course, Perry could take credit for that if, as some conservatives suggest, the population grew because of people flocking to the state’s lax regulations and low taxes.
To do a limited test of this theory, I plotted each state’s population growth from 2000 to 2009 (encompassing most of Perry’s tenure) against its fiscal year 2006 tax revenue as a percentage of gross state product (GSP), the state-level equivalent of GDP. There’s basically no relationship: The two are negatively correlated, with a 1 percent increase in the revenue/GSP ratio associated with a 0.7 percent drop in population growth. But the tax burden only explains 6 percent of variation in population growth, so it’s hardly a determining factor. "
(Dylan Matthews, The Washington Post 2011)


@ Hemlock
"Businesses are like athletes who are free agents. They go where there is the best deal."

This is only true for low value, less innovative type of business operations. Operations that do not involve a substantial "skill set" (such as customer service centers) will locate in low-cost states. But high value businesses, the kind that change the world like Apple and Google, involving innovation (and paying high salaries) will naturally locate in places like California where the education system is second to none.

Stalwart Sentinel
San Jose, CA

Two things:

1 - Somehow the DesNews opinion folks believe that when a job moves from one state to another that is recovery/job creation. Did it occur to them that no job was created in that scenario? That isn't a recovery, it's just swapping places. When you move your wallet from your right pocket to your left, did you just create money? Of course not. Texas, et al are simply engaging in a "race to the bottom" in terms of regulation and taxes because they cannot compete on actual job creation. Texas et al are banana republics that export cheap labor. If a job paying $100K in CA is moved to Texas and now only pays $75k, the $25K flows up to the owners. It's trickle up economics, folks.

2 - The reason why CA has Facebook, Twitter, Google, Yahoo, Apple, Cisco, eBay, Adobe, HP, Juniper, Wells Fargo, Intel, Marvell, Salesforce, SanDisk, Intuit, etc, etc... is because educated people live in California and California engenders start ups. Texas is known worldwide for having a poor educational infrastructure; excluding Dell, the whole of Texas wouldn't have sufficient brainpower to run one of the companies listed above.

The Real Maverick
Orem, UT

If lower taxes and fewer regulation meant economic growth then we would have seen a booming economy during the 2000s. So why was it the worst in job creation since WWII?

Repubs? Where are ya? Can't blame Clinton for everything.

There You Go Again
Saint George, UT


Rick Perry leading ...

It's a good thing the jobs junket out was not the third thing on his list...


Fertilizer plants are moving to Texas?

Ben H
Clearfield, UT

The number one reason that a business chooses one location over another is to be close to their customers. Silicon Valley has an advantage because so many other companies are there. It's easy to sell, do business and make money when so many of your customers are neighbors. This also give Texas an advantage over states like Utah.

Behind the location of your customers is where you can hire the best people. You might say California has an advantage because of it's educational system, but when you go inside many Silicon Valley firms, you find so many of their employees are from Asian countries. It could be that California gives itself an advantage by being friendly to immigrants and allowing those who are from elsewhere to get an education. No having to go very far to find people to work for you is an advantage no matter what business you are in.

Taxation and regulation are probably third on the list. Companies will locate where the local government doesn't have their hands in your pockets. This is where California and New York lose and Texas and Utah win.

Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

All of us should cheer any company that decides to move to another State to save money rather than to go off-shore. In today's world of high-tech, any computer oriented company is as close as the terminal on your desk. I use "face time" to talk to family and customers wherever they are in the world. One son regularly shares his experiences in India where he goes several times a year on business.

Texas should be applauded for reaching out to American companies and offering them a way to stay competitive in a world where taxes often mean the difference between staying in business in American and going off-shore.

Any State that thinks taxes don't matter had better sit up and listen - before they lose their tax base entirely.

The Taxman
Los Angeles, CA

@Ben H

The decision regarding where to locate depends on many factors, but the major factors depend upon your type of business. If you were correct regarding proximity of customers being #1, most manufacturers would be located in the United States (rather than China) because the United States is the largest consumer market in the world. It is good to be near your customers if you are manufacturing large items such as automobiles, but for small items that can be cheaply transported, proximity to customers is less important than other considerations. For companies located in Silicon Valley (who mainly produce intellectual property) the most important factor is securing the best talent (education and brainpower) they can get, which is why they are located near Stanford and Berkeley (who along with Cal Tech and MIT produce the world's best engineers).

My son is a EECS (electrical engineering/computer science) major at UC Berkeley right now. Most of his classmates in engineering are of Asian descent, but only 13% of engineering students on campus at Berkeley are international students. The bulk of his classmates attended California high schools and are Asian Americans.

Provo, UT

The Great Recession, or Little Depression, is exposing something very different than this editorial claims, but it will take more time, apparently, before the Deseret News can see it. States that consistently give tax breaks to corporations on the backs of its school children and the poor and disabled will live to regret their short-sightedness. Even many of Utah's business leaders can see the damage that is occuring and they are calling on this state to take better care of its people, especially its children.

As for the report you cite, this is a deeply flawed study, and its authors hardly command the respect of economists who pay attention to what's actually happening.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments