Monday, November 14, 2011

Companies Continue to Leave Anti-Business California in Record Numbers to Save 40% in Costs


Los Angeles - "It's time to take a hard look at why businesses are leaving the state.

Since 2007, more than 2,500 employers have left California. They've taken about 109,000 jobs with them. Why is that happening and... more importantly... how can it be stopped?

Joseph Vranich, a business relocation expert, explains the exodus in the video report."

According to Joe Vranich, "Business leaving the City of Los Angeles for a nearby county can save up to 20% in costs while moving to another state can save up to 40% in costs."


7 Comments:

At 11/14/2011 2:10 PM, Blogger Colin said...

More here:

http://www.theatlanticcities.com/jobs-and-economy/2011/10/condos-and-industry-collide-san-diego/395/

“The primary issue,” said Solar President D. James Umpleby, “is that we have invested hundreds of millions of dollars in machine tools. If we were in fact to invest the millions it would take to leave this site, it wouldn’t be a prudent business decision to put the plant in the state of California. Heavy manufacturing has left California for the last 30 years. We’re one of the last heavy manufacturers here. If in fact you looked at the business climate, environmental regulations, costs, taxes, everything that goes into heavy manufacturing in San Diego County — if you invested the money, quite frankly, you probably would not stop until you hit the fence line (of the state).”

 
At 11/14/2011 2:30 PM, Blogger JamesD'Troy said...

and then California came for the art dealers...

Coming up next week in New York is the Peter Norton collection at Christie’s, a $25m ensemble of contemporary art that was built up over two decades by the “anti-virus” mogul. It includes blue-chip works by the likes of Paul McCarthy, Nam June Paik, Barbara Kruger, Christopher Wool, Matthew Barney and Maurizio Cattelan. But there’s a fly in the ointment: Norton is based in California. The state is the only one in the US to have a resale royalties levy, which in theory means that residents must pay the artist 5 per cent when they resell work for over $1,000. This is rarely applied, but now artists including Chuck Close and the estates of Sam Francis and Robert Graham have filed class action suits against Sotheby’s, Christie’s, eBay and nine galleries, claiming they have refused to pay the levy. Court documents claim that “several hundred” other artists could be concerned. Asked if Norton was going to pay the royalty, Christie’s said: “Christie’s views the California Resale Royalties Act as subject to serious legal challenges ... As this issue is directly connected to the subject of the lawsuit, we will address it as part of the litigation process.”
Link: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/c0b209a8-0606-11e1-a079-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz1di2uLeHI

 
At 11/14/2011 3:18 PM, Blogger Jim said...

Now consider those costs endemic to all the USA.

1. The workplace liability rules which assume a total dunderhead as an employee.
2. Compliance and reporting costs.
3. Sexual harassment and other 'fair' rules which assume guilt and are open to all litigious lawyer fantasies and disgruntled employees (And if you think I am condoning sexual harassment then you must assume I am a monster). The frost introduced into the workplace of this kind of legislation over the years, and the insidious us/them mentality it produces is absolutely destructive.
4. Land and clean-up rules which have jumped the shark of all common sense.

Many of these rules were arguably born of legitimate concerns by caring people. It is the wing-nut manner in which they have been encoded into the law, and which they are litigated, that inspires a huge reluctance on the part of any employer to hire.

It is one of the driving factors of temp labor; it allows employers to check the person out for a year to avoid separation penalties and ensure they are not just looking to game the workplace rules.

 
At 11/14/2011 7:01 PM, Blogger Benjamin said...

Pensions for unionized public workers, especially the sacrosanct uniformed employees, are eating up CA tax dollars.

 
At 11/14/2011 10:43 PM, Blogger Don said...

There is one and only one role for politicians to play to have a beneficial economic effect, and that role is that of corpse.

Regards, Don Lloyd

 
At 11/15/2011 6:41 AM, Blogger sethstorm said...


Joseph Vranich, a business relocation expert, explains the exodus in the video report."

Not exactly one that would say much on how to stop it.


how can it be stopped?

Be willing to put tax breaks on the table if they agree to not leave - with large penalties for attempting to leave early or fail to honor their end in good faith


Another measure would be making the cost of scuttling/leaving more expensive than staying.

For example, if a business moves, it must be willing to relocate the people that work for them as well - in good faith.

 
At 11/15/2011 11:19 AM, Blogger Cabodog said...

I remember a couple of years ago, Costco in thir annual report specifically cited the costs of Workman's Comp in California as a major factor in reduced earnings for the chain, overall.

Wake up California. It's just not working for you.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home