Viewing blog posts written by Gino DiCaro
Promote -- don't revoke -- economic recovery policies set for 2011Posted by Gino DiCaro, VP, Communications on June 10, 2009
Those "breaks" were intended to remove barriers to California’s economic growth and neutralize a portion of the more than $9 billion in tax hikes and revenue accelerations on the business community. Certainty and predictability are primary tipping points for businesses looking to grow, stay or site in a location. Revoking economic stimulus policies 6 months after they were passed sets a dangerous precedent and sends signals to high wage employers that the state can't be trusted.
The NOL and the single sales factor provisions do not apply until January of 2011 and their elimination would do nothing to infuse cash to the 2009-10 budget.
Watch how the Legislature treats and delineates these important job growth provisions in the budget debate.
Tags: Assembly Democrats Darrell Steinberg economic recovery net operating loss NOL single sales factr state budget
0 comments | Post your comment
The capitol should be teeming with economistsPosted by Jack Stewart, President on Dec. 15, 2008
Economic impacts must always take precedent in a state that leads the nation in bold government programs. The unintended consequences of previous policies and budget solutions have exacerbated the current emergency and still we see almost no economists in the Capitol laying out the long and short term effects for the myriad policy debates that make up our budget negotiations.
Today, CMTA and 25 other employer groups sent a joint letter to the Legislature insisting that economic stimulus must be the third leg of budget negotiations.
With this letter a consortium of employer groups are urging lawmakers to negotiate in good faith to resolve the budget crisis for the good of all Californians. A crucial part of the solution is understanding and building the foundation for a healthy economic recovery -- a dynamic we do not currently enjoy.
Lawmakers must understand that, in the coming months and years, this state will only thrive by growing the industries that create both wealth and high paying jobs -- such as manufacturing. That will in turn produce robust economic activity and new state revenue.
The state has already lost 25,000 manufacturing jobs through the first ten months of 2008 rounding out an unbelievable loss of a quarter of its industrial workforce since 2001.
California has reached an economic tipping point where current economic activity can no longer produce the revenues needed to sustain state spending. It is important that legislators focus on how spending cut and tax increases impact jobs and future economic growth. For example, a sales tax increase would further discourage manufacturing investments. Because, unlike 47 other states, California applies full sales tax on the purchase of capital equipment. Our state's tax burden on business is already 20 percent higher than the rest of the country, along with overall costs that are 23 percent higher.
The coalition is simply asking that economic recovery guide budget decisions and that negotiators fully account for jobs and revenue lost or gained as a result of budget outcomes.
Abbreviated principles are as follows:
0 comments | Post your comment
Dispatch to incoming freshmen legislators: Ask 'Why not California?'Posted by Gino DiCaro, VP, Communications on Dec. 2, 2008
Over the past few years, this state has seen incremental declines in California manufacturing investments. A little here, a little there has amounted to the loss of over 440,000 high wage jobs since 2001. Why didn't Intel keep their wafer fabrication plant in California? Why did Exxel Outdoors go to Alabama when it decided to move back to the US from China? Why did Buck Knives move an entire operation to Idaho from California? Why did a Toyota car seat supplier site a facility in Indiana over California? Why did Tesla initially decide to build in New Mexico? Notice it's not only about companies moving out of California but also of ones that never got here. And these are only the big ones. There are many more smaller undocumented shifts of capital and salary to other less expensive regions.
In other words, "Why not California?" We'll attempt to answer these questions in the coming sessions by sending you periodic pieces to your offices (and blogging here at MPowered). We'll highlight these companies' decisions, their economic footprints and their vast supplier networks that California could have profited from. While these missives will be important, they are only meant to prove a point and not to dwell on the past. The bigger point is what California should look like in five years. Will we lose another 440,000 manufacturing jobs? Will we gain the same amount? A large part of that question lies in your hands over the next two years. We understand you'll have requests from all directions. But every single Californian benefits from manufacturing growth because of massive investments, large job multipliers, premium benefits, increased revenue to the state, and more.
Let's do this. Let's make things. Let's make green things. Let's train our workforce. Let's research, develop, manufacture and fix things. Let's lead the world. And with a beacon of open arms in our policy decisions, we can empower our state and our workforce to blaze a double-lane trail of innovative products made with our hands and economic activity created by our ambition.
A while back, our Board of Directors congregated to discuss what affects them most, and the words "stay true" were part of one empassioned plea to regain California's manufacturing leadership. But too many company representatives said their most expensive facilities were here in the state. That trend must change.
We hope you'll count on us in 2009 for the support to make informed decisions on policies that send signals to the world that this state's economy, government and working families want manufacturing to prosper.
0 comments | Post your comment