South Carolina's Economic Engine

[krazeeboi]

Again, I agree whole heartedly and great point!

There are reasons why some states are better off economically than others. I think states that followed the model listed above are the ones who have been more successful. Pay attention to the little things next time in NC (roads just as an example). Is NC really more desireable than SC? Probablly not but has NC utilized its resources and created a better economic environment than SC yes.

Yes it has, but it wasn't because it offered lower incentive packages for companies to relocate to the state. It was because economically, the state was ahead of the curve. RTP was well ahead of its time, and Wachovia and Bank of America are home-grown institutions. When you look at Atlanta's success, you see some of the same elements: home-grown major companies, wealthy benefactors, elite private institutions, etc. I think that SC, particularly Columbia and Greenville, are catching the next "economic wave" by focusing on automotive engineering and alternative fuels, but until those things can translate into dollars for us, I don't think we're in the position to turn down opportunities to supply good jobs to citizens in a state with one of the highest unemployment figures in the state.

And to me, it seems like using tax incentives to lure companies here IS creating a better business climate. Of course there are more ways to do this, but it does play a role. And from what I understand, SC does have one of the better business climates in the nation.

This is relevant, as is this.

[krazeeboi]

While the SC portion of the Charlotte metro does not compare to our major metros in terms of economics (as I stated earlier), within the next few decades, York and Lancaster counties may indeed constitute a force to be reckoned with, especially if moves like this continue to occur.

[Infinite1]

we need to face facts. The reason our unemployment rate is so high is that we have a larger percentage of people who are unemployable. Every business owner or manager I deal with is looking for people to hire, but the pool of QUALIFIED applicants is not sufficient. When companies do relocate here, they will be hiring people that either move here from other areas or workers who are currently employed and seeking better opportunities.

Incentives are the only real way to lure business in the times. Businesses realize the economic impact of building $100M facilites and employing hundreds of people and they are all looking for their best deal. that's not solely economic, but it plays a huge part....as does having a talented work pool to draw from. Furthermore economic incentives are rarely actual money, but instead are in the form of deferred or reduced tax payments and subsidized land costs. More often than not, the impact of adding several million dollars of payroll to the local economy is going to outweigh the revenue that is not seen directly from business taxes.

[Greenville]

Good points, Infinite1. It is hard to argue with anything you said.

[krazeeboi]

South Carolina has been named the nation's most business-friendly state for 2005 by Pollina Corporate Real Estate Inc., a Chicago-based company that focuses on corporate site relocations. The study bases its listing on state and federal economic development policies.

Here's a quote:

South Carolina is the overall highest ranked Top 10 Pro-Business State, which reflects very highly on the state's political leadership. It moved from 8th place on the Top 10 Pro-Business list for 2004 to 1st for 2005. South Carolina's workforce training is a top priority. Its Center for Accelerated Technology Training (CATT) Program has long been regarded as one of the leading job training programs in the country. Combined with a relatively low cost of doing business and an almost non-existent union presence, it has become a major player in the game of attracting corporate investment and jobs.

[LuvSC]

South Carolina has been named the nation's most business-friendly state for 2005 by Pollina Corporate Real Estate Inc., a Chicago-based company that focuses on corporate site relocations. The study bases its listing on state and federal economic development policies.

Here's a quote:

Pollina makes his living by helping his corporate clients find the best deals. What he's saying is that South Carolina is the state where he can find the best deals for his clients. That doesn't necessarily mean South Carolina is the state doing the best for its residents and taxpayers.

[LuvSC]

Here's another one of these site-selection studies from a bigger and better-known company.

http://www.competitivealternatives.com/

And an article about it.

http://www.greenvilleonline.com/apps/pbcs....=73239379654338

[krazeeboi]

Pollina makes his living by helping his corporate clients find the best deals. What he's saying is that South Carolina is the state where he can find the best deals for his clients. That doesn't necessarily mean South Carolina is the state doing the best for its residents and taxpayers.

I'm just posting rankings that I find as I come across them. I cited Site Selection's rankings earlier in the thread.

It seems like the KPMG rankings left out a few metros, such as Columbia, Charlotte, Greensboro, Winston-Salem, Augusta, Savannah, Jacksonville, Orlando, Little Rock, Richmond, Norfolk, Birmingham, Huntsville, Mobile, Knoxville, Memphis, Louisville, etc.--and these are just Southern metros. I would think that a more reputable company would include these. Furthermore, I only saw metro area rankings on the site, and not state rankings.

[krazeeboi]

According to a recent report by the SC Department of Commerce, the Pee Dee/Grand Strand region of the state received the most capital investment of any region in the state in 2005, totalling $768,710,000 which accounts for almost 29 percent of the total capital investment in the state. The Upstate ranked 2nd with $766,530,000 in investment. In terms of job creation, the Upstate created the most with 2,888 followed by the Midlands with 2864.

[LuvSC]

NC has more people employed in autoparts manufacturing than SC yet it doesn't give financial incentives for companies such as those offered to BMW. (the recent payoff to Dell is an exception to that)

NC doesn't give financial incentives? Dell was an exception? Really?

From the Raleigh newspaper:

http://www.newsobserver.com/104/story/421462.html

[monsoon]

NC doesn't give financial incentives? Dell was an exception? Really?

From the Raleigh newspaper:

http://www.newsobserver.com/104/story/421462.html

I wish people would read what I actually wrote.

The state does allow cities to make infrastructural improvements to attract business. In that article it is the city of Durham that is going to spend $650K to make public infrastructure improvements to attract the business.

[breed]

I wish people would read what I actually wrote.

The state does allow cities to make infrastructural improvements to attract business. In that article it is the city of Durham that is going to spend $650K to make public infrastructure improvements to attract the business.

It sounds like you're back-peddling a bit. NC is one of the most ambitious financial recruiters of new business. You make it sound as though NC does little to attract new business, but they still choose to locate there, which is false.

Regardless of whether funds are tagged for "infrastructure improvement" or not, a financial incentive is a financial incentive. Is there room for improvement in SC in how funds are offered to new businesses? Absolutely, but painting NC as a state that gets businesses without recruiting efforts greatly discredits the work of the NC Department of Commerce, which does a phenomenal job.

[LuvSC]

Georgia plays the game, too. It gave an incentives package worth about $160,000 per job for the Kia plant that's going to its western border, according to a recent article I saw in the Atlanta newspaper.

[wellen]

Interesting research out of the Strom Thurmond Institute at Clemson.

[krazeeboi]

This article, which discusses many businesses that have left Charlotte for York and Lancaster counties, speaks of the benefits of incentives for SC.

[Jerseyman4]

Sounds familar to this post i made not too long ago.

[krazeeboi]

Interesting research out of the Strom Thurmond Institute at Clemson.

Great report, Wellen. Thanks for sharing.

[krazeeboi]

By the way, here's a graphic from the report Wellen provided the link for:

[krazeeboi]

According to a recent report by the SC Department of Commerce, the Pee Dee/Grand Strand region of the state received the most capital investment of any region in the state in 2005, totalling $768,710,000 which accounts for almost 29 percent of the total capital investment in the state. The Upstate ranked 2nd with $766,530,000 in investment. In terms of job creation, the Upstate created the most with 2,888 followed by the Midlands with 2864.

And here's the graphic displaying this information:

Hope you guys haven't lost interest in this topic!

[GvilleSC]

Do these not seem to contradict themselves?

Maybe someone could explain the difference between the data to me.

[Spartan]

There does seem to be some inconsistancy. The Upstate as a whole have have a net loss of jobs during the 2000-2005 period, but in 2005 alone there could be a gain. Much of the loss in that time frame came from Oconee, Spartanburg, and Laurens counties, all of which had companies leave of cut back on their employment significantly.

Also, the data you see in the second map is aggregated differently than in the first map (Dept of Commerce regions VS Metro Statistical Area)

I'd like to see the tables behind all of that

[GvilleSC]

There does seem to be some inconsistancy. The Upstate as a whole have have a net loss of jobs during the 2000-2005 period, but in 2005 alone there could be a gain. Much of the loss in that time frame came from Oconee, Spartanburg, and Laurens counties, all of which had companies leave of cut back on their employment significantly.

Also, the data you see in the second map is aggregated differently than in the first map (Dept of Commerce regions VS Metro Statistical Area)

I'd like to see the tables behind all of that

[krazeeboi]

I'm also thinking the time frames may be a bit different. The map showing statistics from 2004-2005 is probably from May 2004-May 2005 or something like that, while the second graphic reflects all data from the entire year of 2005.

I know that tables are included in the SC Dept. of Commerce report.

[Infinite1]

the two graphics show different things...the first shows the change in the total # of jobs, which could come from existing businesses as well as new business...the 2nd shows announcement of NEW investments and jobs. Conceiveably, an area could have 2000 new jobs but existing businesses reduce jobs by 3000 leaving a new job growth of -1000 jobs.

[monsoon]

The investment chart is from data that looked at job creation due to publically announced investments in certain industries. (mostly manufacturing) It does not look at job loses, or jobs created from existing infrastructure and of course private investment. For example it did not include job increases due to tourism, real estate, or government. And it did not include SMB increases.

The report behind the graphic showing job/loss gain does not cite any information or source for the numbers presented so I don't think it can be used definitively for anything. It's from a teacher at Clemson and it looks to be a presentation to push an opinion for a class rather than anything that could be used to make a determination as to the specifics of the state's economy. It doesn't have a methodology or source of data.

In any case the two reports are inconsistant from the fact that one excludes services jobs while the other says that much of the state's growth came from the services sector.