Providing a non-partisan model for generating and sharing          

    essential information on public issues and proposed solutions              

10th Anniversary :  2005- 06 to 2015-16

   
                                                                                                  About Civic Caucus   l   Interviews & Responses  l   Position Reports   l   Contact Us   l   Home  

 
 Response Page - Haveman  Interview -      
                                                      Please take one minute to evaluate our website. Click here to take the survey.

These comments are responses to the statements listed below,
which were generated in regard to the
Mark Haveman Interview of
06-07-2013.
 

A mixed Minnesota scorecard on business attractiveness

                                                                                                         OVERVIEW

According to Mark Haveman, executive director of the Minnesota Center for Fiscal Excellence (MCFE), scholars say the economic competitiveness of a state or region is comprised of two basic elements. The first is foundational competitiveness, human capital, physical infrastructure, quality of life and related factors, most of which have a strong public goods orientation to them. The second is investment attractiveness, the actual tax and cost climate.  Both clearly matter, but he says much of the current political debate surrounds which competitiveness element deserves more of our attention.  To provide some light on this debate, MCFE conducted a review of 10 national competitiveness and business climate studies to evaluate Minnesota's relative performance and national rankings in each area compared to other states.

Haveman explains that Minnesota continues to excel in the area of foundational competitiveness. It consistently ranks in the top 10 states in the education, composition and deployment of its labor force and maintains high rankings in innovation capacity, information technology adoption and public goods, such as infrastructure.  One weak spot is higher education, where Minnesota is lagging on several important measures.  With respect to investment attractiveness, Minnesota shows pockets of comparative advantage within a generally more challenging business tax and cost climate.  

As important as public goods and services are, Haveman notes, their tax prices also matter.  Because Minnesota is already at more of a competitive disadvantage with respect to its general tax and cost climate, future gains in foundational competitiveness should come from prioritizing foundational competitiveness spending in the state budget and aggressively pursuing redesign to obtain greater returns on public spending and investments. 

For the complete interview summary see: http://bit.ly/13dcwde

Response Summary: Average response ratings shown below are simply the mean of all readers’ zero-to-ten responses to the ideas proposed and should not be considered an accurate reflection of a scientifically structured poll.

Readers were asked to rank the following on a scale of 0-10 ("not at all important" to "very important").

1. Usefulness of this topic. (8.3 average response) On a scale of 0-10, how useful to you is today's interview?

2. Importance of further investigation. (8.5 average response) How would you rank the importance of scheduling additional interviews on this topic?

Readers were asked to rate, on a scale of (0) most disagreement, to (5) neutral, to (10) most agreement, the following points discussed by Haveman.

3. State economy is good. (6.7 average response) Minnesota's economy is doing very well relative to other states.

4. Invest in business attractors. (6.4 average response) The state should invest more in public goods attractive to business, such as skilled employees, specialized infrastructure, technological knowledge, etc.

5. Lower business taxes. (6.7 average response) The state should lower business taxes to create a more favorable business climate.

6. Minnesota labor is too expensive. (4.9 average response) Minnesota’s cost of labor is too expensive relative to the education and productivity of the workforce.

7. Balancing tax types not sufficient. (8.8 average response) Competitively, it's not sufficient to have a balanced tax system—with relatively equal emphasis on sales, income, and property taxes—if the state doesn't get better value and results from the services that those taxes pay for.

8. Policy needed on tax breaks. (8.9 average response) The state needs a clear policy on whether giving tax breaks to selected businesses represents a better strategy than improving the general business climate.

Response Distribution:

Not important at all

Moderately unimportant

Neutral

Moderately important

Very important

Total Responses

1. Usefulness of this topic.

0%

0%

15%

46%

38%

13

2. Importance of further investigation.

0%

7%

7%

36%

50%

14

 

 

Strongly disagree

Moderately disagree

Neutral

Moderately agree

Strongly agree

Total Responses

3. State economy is good.

7%

0%

14%

71%

7%

14

4. Invest in business attractors.

7%

14%

14%

50%

14%

14

5. Lower business taxes.

0%

7%

36%

36%

21%

14

6. MN labor is too expensive.

14%

7%

57%

14%

7%

14

7. Balancing tax types not sufficient.

0%

7%

0%

36%

57%

14

8. Policy needed on tax breaks.

0%

0%

7%

43%

50%

14

Individual Responses:

Anonymous (10) (10) (7.5) (0) (10) (0) (10) (10)

Bert LeMunyon (7.5) (7.5) (5) (5) (7.5) (7.5) (10) (7.5)

4. Invest in business attractors. According to the presenter, we are doing quite well in these areas.

Dave Broden (10) (10) (7.5) (10) (7.5) (5) (10) (5)

1. Usefulness of this topic. Brings the competitive issue from a tax point of view into perspective.

2. Importance of further investigation. Growth is dependent on the Minnesota competitive structure

3. State economy is good. Minnesota is doing well in respect to operations of current business but the real question is the basis and structure present to represent and support growth.

4. Invest in business attractors. A real analysis of Minnesota government balance of tax, spending cuts, and growth incentive actions is required. Minnesota may look good today but the future is the key. We need a vision and action supporting it. Does Minnesota focus too much on the social side without attention to growth that will enable funding of the social side?

5. Lower business taxes. A new corporate tax structure for Minnesota is mandatory for the future if we wish to remain competitive. The structure may be balanced to account for other factors. Elimination of corporate taxes is perhaps not needed as some states are doing.

6. Minnesota labor is too expensive. This is a debate that needs some real objective and solid study, not just the emotional side.

7. Balancing tax types not sufficient. Need to move to outcome-based services.

8. Policy needed on tax breaks. An objective study would likely suggest that first of the general climate, but that special consideration must be present.

Pat Barnum (7.5) (10) (5) (2.5) (10) (5) (10) (10)

Scott Halstead (10) (10) (10) (10) (5) (10) (10) (10)

5. Lower business taxes. Businesses need to provide income to the state. They need to pay for infrastructure.

8. Policy needed on tax breaks. The Bloomington/Mega Mall tax break was totally wrong.

Ray Ayotte (5) (2.5) (7.5) (5) (5) (5) (7.5) (10)

Don Anderson (5) (5) (7.5) (7.5) (5) (5) (2.5) (7.5)

Paul Gilje (10) (10) (7.5) (7.5) (2.5) (5) (10) (10)

Bright Dornblaser (na) (10) (6) (8) (5) (8) (10) (10)

Wayne Jennings (8) (8) (6) (9) (7) (3) (9) (10)

Interesting and informative. One doesn’t know how to judge these remarks and positions without hearing the range of other opinions/studies, which may agree or contradict this speaker. He seemed reasonable and balanced but I have no good way of judging (as a layperson in this field) the study he reported on without hearing experts’ views of the accuracy, relevance and fairness of the report other than a personal reaction.

Lyall Schwarzkopf (9) (9) (7) (6) (7) (5) (9) (9)

Al Quie (10) (10) (0) (8) (10) (0) (10) (8)

Tom Spitznagle (9) (8) (8) (3) (5) (5) (7) (9)

Tom Swain (7) (9) (9) (8) (7) (5) (8) (9)

    

The Civic Caucus   is a non-partisan, tax-exempt educational organization.   The Core participants include persons of varying political persuasions,
reflecting years of leadership in politics and business. Click here  to see a short personal background of each.

   David Broden,  Janis Clay,  Bill Frenzel,  Paul Gilje,   Jan Hively,  Dan Loritz (Chair),  Marina Lyon,  Joe Mansky, 
Tim McDonald,  John Mooty,  Jim Olson,  Wayne Popham  and Bob White


©
The Civic Caucus, 01-01-2008
2104 Girard Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55405.  civiccaucus@comcast.net
Dan Loritz, chair, 612-791-1919   ~   Paul A. Gilje, coordinator, 952-890-5220.

contact webmaster
 

 

 

Hit Counter