Lower Taxes, Less Regulation Key to Twenty-First Century Economy

2015

Social Science Quarterly, 2008

Objective. Growth in the share of high-technology employment is critical to discussions of the postindustrial transition. Do new state and local technology policies create growth in the share of high-technology employment? This article examines this question along with the effects of location and agglomeration advantages, identifying sources of qualitative growth in the U.S. economy. Methods. We examine change in the share of high-technology employment in metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) in the United States between 1988 and 1998. High-technology employment is measured from the BLS Current Employment Statistics Survey. The scale of state and local technology policies are measured from a comprehensive survey of state and local technology programs. A generalized linear model (GLM) estimates the effects of technology policies along with regional proximity, location, and agglomeration factors. Results. Technology grant and loan programs and research parks have direct effects on the share of high-technology employment, along with private venture capital firms and military R&D. Research parks also magnify the effects of private venture capital firms, while public venture programs and technology development policies compensate for agglomeration deficits. Rapid population growth provides a more conducive context for these policies but does not directly influence growth in the share of high-technology jobs. Conclusion. State and local technology policies compensate for and magnify the effects of agglomeration advantages, indicating that state and local government can play a strategic role in high-technology development. Over the last three decades, state and local governments have adopted a wide array of new technology policies. Popularized as ''third wave,'' ''new industrial,'' and ''entrepreneurial'' policies, these initiatives involve direct state intervention in the creation of new enterprises, products, and

1993

In developing strategies for economic development, state governments must target base industries that bring income into the state and drive the rest of the economy. This article presents a case study of industry analysis and development strategy for Massachusetts, focusing on the state's base industries. Particular attention is paid to the role of industry clusters — groups of industries linked through customer, supplier, or other relationships, and typically concentrated geographically as well. After assessing strengths and weaknesses of the state's economy, the author concludes that despite the current severe recession, the state possesses the basis for renewed growth. Policy implications for the state government are summarized.

Jobs For the Future, 2005

SSRN Electronic Journal, 2018

The author is grateful to Eric Scorsone and William Knudson for helpful comments. All errors are the sole responsibility of the author.

We also thank the public officials who provided us the public records that inform our case studies. Thanks also to those public officials in some states who fact-checked the taxcode inputs for our representative firm modeling and our incentive code summaries. Good Jobs First research analyst Tommy Cafcas supported this project with research assistance on several sections. Former Good Jobs First research analyst Karla Walter oversaw the collection of public records for the case studies and went on-site to North Carolina to collect the voluminous Dell and Google documents. About the Contributors Although this report combines the work of many contributors, Good Jobs First is solely responsible for its content. Staff Contributors Greg LeRoy (project director) is the founder and executive director of Good Jobs First and the author of two books on economic development accountability. He has been writing, training, and consulting on economic development for state and local governments, labor-management committees, unions, community groups, tax and budget watchdogs, environmentalists, smart growth advocates, foundations, and associations of public officials for more than 25 years. Phil Mattera (five case studies) is research director of Good Jobs First and director of its Corporate Research Project. He has been doing strategic corporate research for labor, environmental, and public-interest groups nationally for two decades. Before that he spent a decade as a business journalist. He is the author of four books on business, labor and economics. Leigh McIlvaine (state incentive summaries) is a research analyst at Good Jobs First.

2003

At one time Southeastern Michigan was characterized by a rapid decline in manufacturing jobs and was labeled a typical rust-belt region over-dependent upon one sector of industrial production. By the end of this century in almost twenty years the region has become a center of hightech activity, an area of increasing employment in manufacturing, and an example of a revitalized and restructured industry. The root of this transformation is found in the way the industry was restructured in order to confront its problems and, among other things, in the way it increasingly relied on a more flexible structure of engineering and production led in part by smaller and independent businesses. But this transformation has also meant a significant change in the kinds of work performed and the skill sets needed, and the need to revise how workers are to receive education and training to ensure a workforce able to address the workplace of the future.

2014

Human Resource Management, 1984

A growing number of economists, public policy analysts, and government oflcials have heralded a transformation said to be occurn'ng in the American economy. The Americnn-in-tramjbrmation thesis hlds that new high-tech infiwmah-oriented industries are replacing basic industries as the primary source of America's economic stability and growth. This thesis, the authors pint out, omtates the extent of the changes which are taking place. According to the best available projections, basic industries will continue to be an important sector of the American economy. Further, basic industries will m e as markets for high-tech products and seruices as they modernize their operations. Both sectors of the economy will be needed to sustain an integrated, two-track economy.

, and Flint) ranked third from the bottom of the nation's thirty-two largest MSAs, with growth of 3.4% versus 40.2% for the United States as a whole. The Detroit CMSA saw its relative per capita income fall from 117% of the U.S. average in 1969 to 110.9% in 2000. Within Michigan, population growth between 1969 and 2000 ranged from slight declines for the Detroit, Flint, and Benton Harbor MSAs to growth of 44.8% for Grand Rapids-Muskegon-Holland area and 62.1% for Ann Arbor. Between 1969 and 2000, per capita income relative to that of the United States as a whole declined for all nine of Michigan's MSAs, with declines ranging from only 0.8% for Ann Arbor to 21% for Flint and Jackson. Population growth and changes in relative per capita income also differed substantially across counties in multicounty MSAs. In the Detroit MSA, for example, population declined by 23.3% in Wayne County but grew by 35.1% in Oakland County; Wayne's relative per capita income fell by 17%, while Oakland's grew by 11%.