burlingtonfreepress.com

Sponsored by:

vt.Buzz ~ a political blog

Political notes from Free Press staff writers Terri Hallenbeck, Sam Hemingway and Nancy Remsen


12.06.2007

 

Telling Vermont's story

House Speaker Gaye Symington today offered more details of her plan to play up "Why Vermont Works." You surely read about the idea in last Sunday's Free Press (but available here in case you missed it) after Symington pitched it to the House Democratic caucus.

Symington was listening to the Red Sox in the World Series on the radio when she heard Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick giving a Massachusetts business success story. Shouldn't Vermont similarly play up its successes? she said. Over the air during Frost Heaves games, Vermonters could be hearing the story of Company X in Vermont, planting seeds of thought among their themselves and their friends about how they, too, could build a successful business in Vermont.

How's the idea work for you? If it putting a new paint job on a sagging house or are Vermont's successes going untold? You can read the still-in-the-works proposal here.

The Lake Champlain Chamber of Commerce has taken to Symingotn's idea. The governor's office isn't dismissing it. Which doesn't mean they're all on the exact same page about it.

Symington says this has been missing in Vermont, by which she means that Gov. Jim Douglas too often dwells on what's wrong with Vermont.

"I've gotten more and more frustrated with the negative message," she said. "Much of it is driven by Governor Douglas and the message he puts out but I also think it's the business community."

Douglas spokesman Jason Gibbs took exception with that notion (when Douglas is famously cutting ribbons around the state, he said, he is championing new business), but not with Symington's overall idea.

"It's certainly a worthy idea. At the end of the day, however, we've got to put together a complete package that makes relocating from one state to another a good idea," he said and that means making Vermont's housing, energy and other resources affordable. "The key aspect is they're turning attention to the top priority of the state."

Tom Torti, president of the Lake Champlain Chamber of Commerce, said Vermont has a long list of companies that are making a name for themselves and are worth touting, citing as one example Select Design, a Burlington marketing company. "The more we talk about the positive pieces without sticking our heads in the sand, the more other people in similar places are going to think if Select Design can do it, why can't I do it?" Torti said.

- Terri Hallenbeck

Comments:
The White House acknowledged last night that President Bush learned in August that Iran might have shelved its nuclear weapons program, contradicting what the president said at his press conference earlier this week.
 
So, he lied about that, too, eh?

Imagine that.
 
Symington's plan reminds me of what a cat does in the litter box -once they've made the mess they cover it up.
 
Exactly - like the phony JLO report showing Vermont to be a low-tax paradise! (Ooops, did we forget property taxes?)
 
"They want the federal government controlling Social Security

like it's some kind of federal program."

- George W. Bush in a debate in St. Charles, Mo., Nov. 2, 2000
 
Here's a cartoon I did on Symington's plan. Hope you like it:

The Gaye Symington Back-Patter
 
Gov. Douglas has used up alot breath trying to convince Vermonters that Vermont is a bad place to live. However, we live here because we love it here. Vermont has the lowest energy costs in New England, great skiing, hunting, arts, farming, and sugaring, and growing interesting new job sectors in software development, tourism, captive insurance, and design. There are many reasons why we choose to live here and not Connecticut, New Jersey,or Florida.
The Governor's office and its mantra that 'Vermont is a bad place to live and work' is improperly deceptive.
I think its great that Gaye Symington has chosen to elevate the strengths and sucesses of the Vermont economy. No other small agricultural state of Vermonts size has fostered as many small entreprenuers to achieve great success (think Ben and Jerry's, Burton, Magic Hat, IDX, Cabot, Select Design, ect.) We have alot to be proud of and I think that Rep. Symington should do as much as she can to let folks know about all the thinks that work well in Vermont. Hey, it may well inspire a few more success stories along the way.
 
Douglas is the one always patting himself on the back.

Gay is just pointing out that there are a lot of great Vermont businesses that are thriving, doing great things, making a lot of money and employing a lot of people.
 
You can do all you want to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear but intelligent business people are smart enough to look beyond the dog and pony show put on by the libs that seem to belatedly realize what an ungodly mess they have made out of the business climate in Vermont. Sure, you can drag out the usual left-wing business owners that may employ a dozen or so people, but to attract real businesses that pay good wages and hire hundreds of Vermonters, regulatory and tax policies must change, something that is impossible to do with liberals. Instead of promoting all the entitlements and "free" stuff available why not do away with most regulatory agencies and start lowering taxes?
 
The above mentioned businesses "employ a dozen or so" people???
 
More crazy lies from the far right-wing.

There are thousands of succesfull small businesses in Vermont. There would be more, if the Governor (who is in the pocket of the insurance industry) wouldn't block meaningfull healthcare reform.
 
Can also add Green Mountain Coffee, the Teddy Bear Factory, Jogbra, Hazlett, Ireland's, Pizzagalli Construction.... to name a few.
 
The above mentioned Vermont businesses (Burton, Cabot, IDX, Ben and Jerry's, ect.) employ hundreds of people at good wages and are quite successful in this "ungodly mess". The state of the economy in Vermont is working well for these businesses now and worked well as individual entreprenuers with a dream. There are many Vermont grown businesses with Vermont grown success.
 
When people can't succeed on their own, they blame others -- facts be damned!
 
The Dems should just archive Douglas footage from the past few years and do a 30-second ad of clips of him whining about all that is wrong in Vermont. Maybe a tag line of: "Vermont can do better, but, obviously, our current governor doesn't agree."
 
Cacti grow and thrive in the desert. It doesn't make the desert a hospitable eco-system for plant life. It doesn't matter that some businesses do well in Vermont. What matters is that we develop a business climate capable of supporting enough businesses paying enough taxes to support our desired level of government spending.

Peter Shumlin said it best, "Vermont taxpayers are tapped out. There is no tax capacitly left in Vermont." Raising taxes in no longer an option.

Given that fact, our choices are either grow the economy (create an environment that supports more than just a couple of healthy cacti), or shrink government to the point where it can live of a limited amount of cactus juice.

Please pick a direction, and we'll go from there.
 
Boohoo! I can't get a job! It must be someone else's fault !!!
 
Waaahhhaaa!! I don't have enough money!

I'm going to whine about it until my bills go down!
 
I have just started reading this blog so I am new to it but what I do know is that Gaye Symington does not understand how to run a state or a business. As a moderate Democrat I wish we had some new leadership.
 
wAAAAHHHAAA. I can't run a business and blame it on the Democrats.

Booohoooo.
 
When has Douglas ever needed to meet a payroll??

He's lived off of the government tit his entire professinal life ... and he's got nothing to show for it.
 
Boohoo and wahhhh is not a plan. Nor is it a vision.

We're facing a simple equation. Our government is consuming more than our ability to provide.

We must either create more tax capacity by stimulating economic growth, or government must consume less. I'll challenge this group again to pick one.

Terri, why does the press let our representatives get away with anonymous answers like boohoo and wahhh? And why do you allow such nonsense to dominate this space?

If this is the highest level of intellectual discourse the Burlington Free Press is capable of stimulating, you really should feel embarassed.
 
Either do we.
 
"When has Douglas ever needed to meet a payroll??
He's lived off of the government tit his entire professinal life ... and he's got nothing to show for it."

Bernie's "lived off the government tit" for longer than Douglas.
 
I hate to change the subject, but speaking of Bernie, how is the supply of "free" oil coming from his little buddy in Venezuela? Why would Vermont need federal assistance with all that free or low-price oil Bernie promised? Bernie? Bernie? Hello?
 
Bernie has not lived off the government for longer than Douglas. Douglas is a career civil servant.
 
What a joke! Can ANYONE name a single private-enterprise job Bernie has EVER had in his ENTIRE life? He is the epitome of the sleezy, crafty, New Yorkers that infested Vermont in the 60s and 70s, always living off welfare or some other "entitlement"! Now he is a millionaire, and guess what? STILL LIVING OFF THE GOVERNMENT!!!
What a piece of work!
 
Not a joke. What private sector job has Douglas held? And how recently?
 
aVermonta said... 12:21 PM, December 07, 2007

"Gov. Douglas has used up alot breath trying to convince Vermonters that Vermont is a bad place to live. However, we live here because we love it here. Vermont has the lowest energy costs in New England, great skiing, hunting, arts, farming, and sugaring, and growing interesting new job sectors in software development, tourism, captive insurance, and design. There are many reasons why we choose to live here and not Connecticut, New Jersey,or Florida."

What gops want is a business environment run like a pick up basketball game where Exxon calls its own foul.

No sale.

Did ya ever notice how the same coalition of the clueless clowns who are always whining about the alleged "Blame America First" crowd have no problem blaming Vermont first on the supposed anti-business climate in this state because we won't sell our soul to the devil to achieve the Vermont Business Community's dream of turning Vermont into New Jersey with longer winters?

Of course, much of Chittenden County is already there.

Then again, if they knew that a State Sales Tax and ACT 250 was brought in by Republican Governor Deane C Davis in 1970 - who, ironically enough, died 18 years ago today - or could grasp concepts like irony or dealt in facts in any way shape or form they wouldn't be gops.

The Business Community does nothing but whine about about everything in the best of times.

They've fought every worker-safety and environmental regulation the way the Klan has fought Civil Rights. That's why no gop can dream of stealing the Presidency without running the table in Dixie.

Of course, when many of them are the same people, that's bound to happen.
 
Please specify the "every worker safety and environmental regulation" that has been introduced in Vermont and that the Vermont "business community" fought.

No generalities, please. Give us specifics. Names and dates. Name the specific Vermont regulation, when it was introduced, and who fought it and how.
 
Well, for openers, little fella, feel free to point out just how the passage of mine you've cited is limited to the Vermont Business Community?

That's what I thought.

Adult Basic Education. Look into it.

Secondly, I'm not claiming to offer anything more than an opinion piece response to the original poster.

Furthermore, I can do that because - unlike you - I have a track record of knowing what the hell I'm talking about.

You and bubbles, on the other hand, not so much.

However, if you have knowledge of specific examples where the business community in Vermont or anywhere else in this Country for that matter did not fight to water down any and all worker-safety or environmental regs on business than what was initially proposed, feel free to cough 'em up with the rest of your gop-slop spew.

Stick with it, sport. You just may someday be able to read, write and reason at a 5th grade level yet.

Perhaps you could even do your grad school work at a middle school near you.

Always a pleasure.
 
Anonymous said... 1:23 AM, December 08, 2007

"Bernie's "lived off the government tit" for longer than Douglas."

In addition to demonstrating how this latest little claim of yours materially affects the original point in addition to just what it has to do with anything anywhere, I'm sure you'll be just as happy, willing and able to cough up some supporting evidence for this assertion of yours as you've been all the others, little fella.

Looks like another long, cold, coalition of the clueless night for you, yourselves and bubbles.

Always a pleasure.
 
Nobody disputes that some businesses are successful in Vermont, some by leveraging the state's "progressive" and "green" reputation, others by simply competing in the global market with everyone else.

But let's all be realistic. Vermont's economy has for a long time been propped up by one employer: IBM. Without its jobs and the multiplier effect they create, Chittenden County and Vermont's economy would be a lot different. And Vermont's standard of living a lot lower.

Everyone remembers what the last round of layoffs were like; what will happen when they shed the next 1,000 workers? Or worse, 2,000? Because it's going to happen, and the sooner we start getting ready for it the better. The future of IBM is in Fishkill, NY because of specific policy decisions made in the last 20-30 years, e.g. no Circ; Act 250; etc.

Vermont has been able to withstand the "no growth" policies that have maintained stasis in its population, its housing market, and its economy largely because of IBM. It cannot last.

Pretending that high taxes and workers compensation costs; a restrictive permitting process; and some politicians who are actively hostile to corporations or businesses who don't meet their standards for "social responsibility" or "sustainability" aren't detrimental to Vermont's economy is not going change that reality.

We can keep on this course and wait for fall, or we can try to grow this economy by addressing some of these issues. There's nothing wrong with touting what's right with Vermont, and there's plenty. But ignoring fundamental flaws that are going to catch up with us in the not-too-distant future is irresponsible.
 
Anonymous said...

"Nobody disputes that some businesses are successful in Vermont, some by leveraging the state's "progressive" and "green" reputation, others by simply competing in the global market with everyone else."

So, businesses that "leverage the State's 'progressive' and 'greeen' reputation" as you so ludicrously put it aren't 'competing in the global market like everyone else', eh?

Feel free to substantiate that slop, sport.

"...The future of IBM is in Fishkill, NY because of specific policy decisions made in the last 20-30 years, e.g. no Circ; Act 250; etc."

Again with the ACT 250 whining.

So, IBM's strategic decision to make Fishkill the focus of their future operations is based on the
"no growth" policies that have maintained stasis in its population, its housing market, and its economy largely because of IBM." ACT 250 and no Circ, eh, little fella?

The State of NY doesn't have any environmental regs or development regs on the State, County or Municipal Level?

The decision has nothing to do with oh, say, marketing or distribution factors in any way shape or form, sport?

Feel free to substantiate that mess while you're at it.

You coalition of the clueless knuckleheads have been whining about ACT 250 since day one.

It's not about anti-growth. It's about smart, sustainable growth whether you like those criteria or not, nitwit.

Evidently, you need to be reminded that the primary force behind ACT 250 was Republican Governor Deane C Davis who, ironically enough, passed away 18 years ago today.

He also introduced a State Sales Tax and, too the best of my recollection, no one ever called him a bleeding heart tree hugger, little fella, but if you wanna be the first, have at it.

Davis and the Jeffords decision to leave the Republican Party given his long personal and family history with the party speaks volumes as to just how far the gops have drifted towards their outright embrace of fascism on the National level and while the Vermont GOP is nowhere as nuts as the National Party, it continues to move in that direction on any number of issues.

Clearly, that's why the State Legislature is in Democratic hands.

It's not that the Dems are overtly liberal. It's more an issue of the gops following the lead of the National Party apparatus into blatant fascism.

Always a pleasure.
 
Wouldn't you all love to know whose money jw lives off? So anti-business!Do you actually have any visible means of self-support?
 
"So, businesses that "leverage the State's 'progressive' and 'greeen' reputation" as you so ludicrously put it aren't 'competing in the global market like everyone else', eh?
Feel free to substantiate that slop, sport. "

That's not what he said, idiot.

"So, IBM's strategic decision to make Fishkill the focus of their future operations is based on the
"no growth" policies that have maintained stasis in its population, its housing market, and its economy largely because of IBM." ACT 250 and no Circ, eh, little fella?
The State of NY doesn't have any environmental regs or development regs on the State, County or Municipal Level?
The decision has nothing to do with oh, say, marketing or distribution factors in any way shape or form, sport?
Feel free to substantiate that mess while you're at it."

No, NY does not have the same regs. as Vermont, and does not have a statewide growth control law like Act 250. Do you contend that they do? Name it.

In addition, you allege that IBM's decision to put its future in Fishkill has more to do with marketing and/or distribution factors than Vt.'s anti-growth policy. Got any evidence for that, little fella? I've spoken to various IBM officials and they all mention the difficulty of doing business in Vt. as a primary reason for looking to other states for their future? How many IBM folks have you talked to? You completely make shit up to support your preconceived notions, sport.

And the statement about fascism reveals your personality disorder.

Get on the meds.
 
Hey, jw - how about the head of EHV-Weidmann in St. Johnsbury stating that his company will definitely not look to expand in Vermont BECAUSE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND PERMITTING HASSLES! How about that, "little buddy"!

Have a nice day.
Always a pleasure.
 
Why respond to jw. He has nothing to say and feeds off the attention his lunacy draws. Ignored he will go back to posting on Bill Maher.
 
It's always interesting to throw totally clueless, left-wing morons like jw some red meat once in a while. What else could make the conservative cause look so good than to expose the leftist drooling and drivel?
 
So one company should set environmental policy for the entire state. Typical bullying.
 
No, that's not the issue, either. No one company is dictating environmental policy for the state. The fact is, however, that we have stricter environmental and zoning regulations than other states. The question is, are they too restrictive for our own good? In the debate between government regulation and economy, does Vermont find the right balance, or does it tilt too much toward anti-business? Weidmann is hardly the only company that has said it will look elsewhere for future growth.
 
bubba said... 11:22 AM, December 09, 2007


"Hey, jw - how about the head of EHV-Weidmann in St. Johnsbury stating that his company will definitely not look to expand in Vermont BECAUSE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND PERMITTING HASSLES! How about that, "little buddy"! "

This just in, bubbles: EHV-Weidmann is not IBM.

Feel free to produce the quote and the context in which it was given, little fella.

That's what I thought.

Always a pleasure.
 
The post above (6:41 p.m.) said should not is. You misread it.
 
I realize that the issue is the strictness of environmental laws; I merely commented that one company's desires should not set policy and to threaten to leave because they do not like the policy is an attempt at coercion: ie, bullying.
 
My post regarding IBM and Vermont's attitude regarding development and business were certainly not intended to imply that businesses who leverage the state's reputation don't compete in the global marketplace, I was simply trying to differentiate between companies that do take advantage of Vermont's brand and those who don't.

Dismissing concerns about the impact of Vermont's permitting regime, including Act 250, as "whining" isn't much of a economic development strategy whether Mr. Coop or Ms. Symington is the one suggesting it. My point in making this post was that, in my opinion, the luxury of having IBM has made it hold up for the last few decades but I don't believe it can last much longer.

Nothing against companies like Green Mountain Coffee Roasters, or Ben & Jerry's, or Cabot Cheese; they are fine organizations who provide good-paying jobs with good economic impact because they import their products.

But I think that it has come to pass that "smart" and "sustainable" growth are largely code for saying, "almost no" growth. I mean, who's in favor of "stupid" or "unsustainable" growth?

In my opinion, keeping Vermont's economy on a short leash, as is practiced by the "smart growth" advocates, is going to come back and bite us when IBM starts to reduce its presence in Vermont.

But I'm more interested in Mr. Coop's plans. What do you see as the future of Vermont's economy? Forget why they went to Fishkill; do you think IBM will maintain its Vermont workforce at its current level for the next, say, 10 years? 20 years? If not, what "smart" and "sustainable" business or businesses will take its place?
 
My post regarding IBM and Vermont's attitude regarding development and business were certainly not intended to imply that businesses who leverage the state's reputation don't compete in the global marketplace, I was simply trying to differentiate between companies that do take advantage of Vermont's brand and those who don't.

Dismissing concerns about the impact of Vermont's permitting regime, including Act 250, as "whining" isn't much of a economic development strategy whether Mr. Coop or Ms. Symington is the one suggesting it. My point in making this post was that, in my opinion, the luxury of having IBM has made it hold up for the last few decades but I don't believe it can last much longer.

Nothing against companies like Green Mountain Coffee Roasters, or Ben & Jerry's, or Cabot Cheese; they are fine organizations who provide good-paying jobs with good economic impact because they import their products.

But I think that it has come to pass that "smart" and "sustainable" growth are largely code for saying, "almost no" growth. I mean, who's in favor of "stupid" or "unsustainable" growth?

In my opinion, keeping Vermont's economy on a short leash, as is practiced by the "smart growth" advocates, is going to come back and bite us when IBM starts to reduce its presence in Vermont.

But I'm more interested in Mr. Coop's plans. What do you see as the future of Vermont's economy? Forget why they went to Fishkill; do you think IBM will maintain its Vermont workforce at its current level for the next, say, 10 years? 20 years? If not, what "smart" and "sustainable" business or businesses will take its place?
 
"Feel free to produce the quote and the context in which it was given, little fella."

Okay, here you go...


High Taxes Deter Weidmann Plant Expansion In Vermont
BY JEANNE MILES, Staff Writer
Caledonian Record.April 14, 2007
http://www.caledonianrecord.com/pages/top_news/story/ce4c0390d

ST. JOHNSBURY -- Business at Weidmann Electrical Technology in St. Johnsbury is booming. So much, the company is looking to expand its operations.

But that expansion will not take place in Vermont due to high taxes and a strong impression by investors that Vermont is unfriendly to business, according to a letter sent April 2 by John Goodrich, vice president and general manager of Weidmann Technology.

"The paradox of the situation is this: we are extremely busy but are unable to expand in Vermont," Goodrich wrote.

Vermont needs to sort out its tax credits and other issues that remain unclear, Goodrich said Friday in a telephone interview from Winnipeg, Canada, where he was on business. "Until that is done everything is unclear," Goodrich said. "Companies are left in limbo; they don't know what is possible and what is not."

Vermont needs to decide if it indeed wants to encourage in-state businesses to expand and new industry to locate here, Goodrich said.

For the past year, Weidmann has been looking for a place to expand its operations. The company makes insulation systems for high voltage transformers. Six sites were being considered and Vermont came in as second choice to Switzerland, the home base of Weidmann's parent company the WICOR Group.

"While our productivity proved to be equal or better on a cost basis, once taxes were factored in to the decision, we lost out on this investment in Vermont," Goodrich wrote. "Our corporate taxes are among the highest in the nation ... It is fundamentally critical that Vermont re-orient to bring our state into a modicum of competitiveness."

No need to thank me, JW. Glad to be of help.

Also, JW, you asked if other factors played a role in IBM's decision, mentioning "Transportation." Transportation did play a factor: Vermont refused to build the Circ.
 
Anonymous said...

"That's not what he said, idiot."

Really? It's your little invisible anonymous friend's quote, pinhead.

So, IBM's strategic decision to make Fishkill the focus of their future operations is based on "the
"no growth" policies that have maintained stasis in its population, its housing market, and its economy largely because of IBM." ACT 250 and no Circ," eh, little fella?

The State of NY doesn't have any environmental regs or development regs on the State, County or Municipal Level?

The decision has nothing to do with oh, say, marketing or distribution factors in any way shape or form, sport?
Feel free to substantiate that mess while you're at it.

"No, NY does not have the same regs. as Vermont, and does not have a statewide growth control law like Act 250. Do you contend that they do? Name it."

Nice try, nitwit.

Ya might wanna get someone to explain to ya what County and Municipal mean, sport.

I didn't say they did, little fella. I just called your pathetic bluff.

You're the one who picked it up and ran in the wrong direction with it, sporticus.

You squealin' like a stuck pig in the process is just gravy.

It's only an inch or two above ya but I'll give ya the original series of questions again, sparky.

So, IBM's strategic decision to make Fishkill the focus of their future operations is based on "the
"no growth" policies that have maintained stasis in its population, its housing market, and its economy largely because of IBM." ACT 250 and no Circ", eh, little fella?

The State of NY doesn't have any environmental regs or development regs on the State, County or Municipal Level?

How ya comin' on those county and municipal definitions, sporticus?

"In addition, you allege that IBM's decision to put its future in Fishkill has more to do with marketing and/or distribution factors than Vt.'s anti-growth policy."

I did, eh? Feel free to point out just where.

That's what I thought.

Nice try. I merely raised them as other possible potential factors that businesses routinely consider as part of their decision making process in the course of their long-term strategic planning, little fella.

Once again, you're the one who picked it up and ran in the wrong direction with it.

Seein' hows your havin' your usual trouble keepin' up I'll repeat it for ya again:

The decision has nothing to do with oh, say, marketing or distribution factors in any way shape or form, sport?
Feel free to substantiate that mess while you're at it.

Now that I've given you another crack at it, clueless, precisely where do I say those factors are given greater weight than the ones you've offered, little fella?

Take your time.

That's what I thought. However, the offer to substantiate still stands. Care to take another run at it, little fella?

That's what I thought.

"I've spoken to various IBM officials and they all mention the difficulty of doing business in Vt. as a primary reason for looking to other states for their future? How many IBM folks have you talked to? You completely make shit up to support your preconceived notions, sport."

Yeah, and I've got to cut this short. Some clown named Clapton is here for his guitar lesson.

Nice try, nitwit.

In other words, you've got bupkis. Gee, what a surprise.

I've got news for ya, little fella. Hearsay is not evidence.

However, 10th rate hearsay like yours is worth its weight in comedic gold.

You're a regular Ar-comedies, shmendrik.

Always a pleasure.
 
Anonymous said...
8:54 PM, December 09, 2007

"My post regarding IBM and Vermont's attitude regarding development and business were certainly not intended to imply that businesses who leverage the state's reputation don't compete in the global marketplace, I was simply trying to differentiate between companies that do take advantage of Vermont's brand and those who don't."

Sure thing, sport. Thanks for clearin' that up.

"Dismissing concerns about the impact of Vermont's permitting regime, including Act 250, as "whining" isn't much of a economic development strategy whether Mr. Coop or Ms. Symington is the one suggesting it."

What about when you and the business community do it, little fella?

That's what I thought.

"My point in making this post was that, in my opinion, the luxury of having IBM has made it hold up for the last few decades but I don't believe it can last much longer."

Once again, little fella, as I've informed you on any number of occasions, your ignorant, ill-informed, anonymous opinions ain't evidence. They're merely your ignorant, ill-informed, anonymous opinions.

"Nothing against companies like Green Mountain Coffee Roasters, or Ben & Jerry's, or Cabot Cheese; they are fine organizations who provide good-paying jobs with good economic impact because they import their products."

Actually, with the exception of Green Mountain Coffee Roasters, for the most part, they export their products, but, hey. Ya had a 50/50 shot there. I can't blame ya for takin' it. That's much better odds than you're usually up against, little fella.

Keep your chin up, kiddo. Ya can't lose 'em all.

That said, I'm sure they'll be pleased to hear you say that, sporticus.

"But I think that it has come to pass that "smart" and "sustainable" growth are largely code for saying, "almost no" growth. I mean, who's in favor of "stupid" or "unsustainable" growth?"

Outside of you, yourselves, bubbles, and a handful of other nitwits, virtually no one.

However, Clueless McLaughry did say you'd be having a convention just as soon as you can find someone to rent the other half of the phone booth.

"In my opinion, keeping Vermont's economy on a short leash, as is practiced by the "smart growth" advocates, is going to come back and bite us when IBM starts to reduce its presence in Vermont."

I think we've more than devoted sufficient time and space to the subject of your opinions and their value - if any, little fella.

"But I'm more interested in Mr. Coop's plans. What do you see as the future of Vermont's economy? Forget why they went to Fishkill; do you think IBM will maintain its Vermont workforce at its current level for the next, say, 10 years? 20 years? If not, what "smart" and "sustainable" business or businesses will take its place?"

In other words, you want an alternative to the " just cave and give the business community whatever they want even if they haven't asked for it yet" strategy you've outlined at length.

Nice try, nitwit. They pay people to sort that stuff out.

Frankly, I don't know. Clearly, business is in a state of flux everywhere. It's hardly confined to the State of Vermont.

However, I do know that you, yourselves and bubbles don't have a frickin' clue and turning Vermont into New Jersey with longer winters but without Springsteen ain't the answer.

It's certainly not gonna benefit travel and tourism and related businesses to pave everything in sight. There certainly will be no need to come to Vermont to see the dumpster behind the Williston Home Depot when it looks just like the dumpster behind the Home Depot at home in Akron.

Like any other negotiations, it's up to the respective stake-holders to come together, hash it out and come up with a framework from which they can hammer out an agreement everyone can live with for a specified period of time until they reopen negotiations and begin the process anew.

Trashing ACT 250 ain't gonna happen, little fella.



Always a pleasure.
 
Again, I rest my case.

Always a pleasure.
 
The Circ is a hobby horse ridden by people who are inconvenienced in the drive to the boxes; doubt very much that that little bit of roadway is of much significance to IBM in determining where they decide to expand. Fishkill's location is however much more convenient than that of Essex--that's a reality and IBM is certainly aware of that.
 
bubba said...

"Again, I rest my case."

You have no case, bubbles.

Always a pleasure.
 
IBM opted for NY because of a number of reasons. It was not because VT is the negative place that Douglas claims. It was not because of the circ. There is already good access from the Richmond exit. The fact is that IBM already had a larger presence in NY in Fishkill, Endicott, Somers, Armonk, and POK. Vermont is a remote place. A road that would best serve IBM would be one that connects VT and NY interstate routes crossing lake Champlain. NY offered $500 million in incentives to IBM. NY has a cash cow called New York City and can afford to provide incentives at this scale where VT can not compete. The labor pool was a non-issue. Chittenden county has a healthy pool of technical talent. Obviously, there are not 1000's of unemployed engineers, but the pool does exists. The majority of engineers and other people with good jobs at IBM Essex are either 1st generation Vermonters whose parents moved from NY to work at IBM, have themselves relocated from NY to work at IBM, or are from a different country. Those who work the line and perform lesser paying jobs tend to be locals. Getting people to move to VT to work good paying jobs is not a problem. You could staff 100 engineers with one phone call in a matter of minutes.


On a different note, am I the only one who caught the Mark Johnson show a week or so ago when he had the venture capitalist guest who said basically the same thing Symington is and had private sector stats to back it up?
 
The point is - do we really want Gaye Symington telling people "how Vermont is"?

NO WAY!
 
And the list of things you can't comprehend just grows and grows, little fella.

Always a pleasure.
 
Jwcoop, you are an asshole.

Always a pleasure.
 
Go Gaye, you go girl!
 
"Girl?"

Were you trying to be alliterative?
 
Get rid of Gaye - girl!
 
Post a Comment



<< Home

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

June 2006   July 2006   August 2006   September 2006   October 2006   November 2006   December 2006   January 2007   February 2007   March 2007   April 2007   May 2007   June 2007   July 2007   August 2007   September 2007   October 2007   November 2007   December 2007   January 2008   February 2008   March 2008   April 2008   May 2008   June 2008   July 2008   August 2008   September 2008   October 2008   November 2008   December 2008   January 2009   February 2009   March 2009   April 2009   May 2009   June 2009   July 2009   August 2009   September 2009   October 2009   November 2009   December 2009   January 2010   February 2010   March 2010   April 2010