Is N.C. willing to compete or not?

Published May 26, 2015

Editorial by Fayetteville Observer, May 26, 2015.

The other Carolina thumped us again. This time it's a Volvo plant, which will sit just outside Charleston, not far from the Boeing plant that North Carolina also tried to win but couldn't.

This state's leaders insist that they want projects like these, which bring billions of dollars in capital investment and thousands of good-paying jobs. But they're not willing to pay the price - which in the case of Volvo was more than $200 million in state and local incentives, including $120 million in state-issued economic-development bonds.

North Carolina's offer wasn't even close. If we want to compete with our neighbor, we've got to start playing the game.

It it worth doing? South Carolina thinks so. It has regularly opened its wallet and spent freely to bring in a variety of manufacturing plants. It went for broke to attract a BMW plant in Spartanburg. The plant opened in 1994 and has expanded four times since then. Last year, the company announced another expansion - a $1 billion investment that will add 50 percent to the plant's capacity and make it the German automaker's biggest plant in the world. The expansion will add another 800 jobs.

That's a nice return on the state's initial investment, especially considering it doesn't include all the component manufacturers that have located around Spartanburg to serve BMW, creating thousands of additional jobs.

The same is occurring around Charleston, with the Boeing plant, and will likely happen with Volvo as well.

And add this to the list: South Carolina has become the biggest tire-manufacturing state in the U.S. Michelin alone employs more than 9,000 people there. Continental and Bridgestone have plants there too. Indonesian tire maker Giti is on the way. So is the Swedish tire manufacturer Trelleborg.

North Carolina has had greater success in luring research and development companies, high-tech businesses and, especially in Charlotte, banks and other financial businesses. Pharmaceutical companies are big in and around the Triangle.

But we're not getting many of the kinds of jobs that could fill the vacuum caused by the collapse of the textile and furniture industries here. And that's because we're losing the bidding wars to South Carolina, among others.

It's time for the General Assembly to give us some honest answers about incentives. If we want those manufacturing jobs, we've got to be competitive. Are we willing to really compete, or aren't we?

http://www.fayobserver.com/opinion/editorials/our-view-is-n-c-serious-about-luring-manufacturing/article_7d555032-6dc7-5851-ba13-348292db22a1.html

May 26, 2015 at 9:03 am
Richard L Bunce says:

Buying favors is not competing. Cut taxes and regulations for ALL business, not just those with political connections.

May 26, 2015 at 10:10 am
Norm Kelly says:

Then there's the flip side, the one incentive proponents don't like to talk about or even admit. That's the ones where incentives are put on the table but the benefit never comes. That's the ones where the package doesn't have the proper strings attached and the government takes a loss on OUR money! (think most of what the current community organizer regime has done!)

We need to find some other way to compete with states that use incentives. Would it be possible for our legislature to create an environment in the entire state that is business friendly for every business instead of government types trying to play investment banker? Is it possible for our state to do anything to make it a better environment? I know the central planners could do a lot by getting out of our way with stup1d regulations and controls that hamper all businesses. Some of these regulations make it somewhat necessary for states to use bribes to win new business. It's time our governor be a leader, call for a meeting of all southern or southeastern governors to discuss a plan OTHER than incentives. Some type of regional plan that would encourage businesses to do business here, expand business here, without the need for bribes. Why is it that government bribes are legal, but any other type of bribe is illegal? How much does the state of Texas spend on bribes? How much does the state of Florida spend on bribes?

If I try to bribe the inspector on a project I want to do or have done at either my home or business so the inspection passes, then both the inspector (if taken) and I are liable to arrest and prosecution. But if my government bribes a competitor business of mine to expand here, I'm supposed to not just smile about it, but endorse it and ask for more of the same. Based on what LOGIC? And what rule of LAW? What's bad for the goose (the citizen) is good for the gander (the government)? Because ...? Is there ANY logic in this scheme? Since it's a scheme run by the government, does there have to be any logic? Does it have to be legal? Too many people are worried about 'money in politics' because it's considered buying some future vote from the politician but allowing those same politicians to bribe companies to do business in a specific location is not just legal, but encouraged?

May 27, 2015 at 11:42 am
Richard L Bunce says:

You are right... if Boeing had paid Volvo to locate in NC so that Boeing did not have to compete with Volvo for limited supply of skilled employees the two State governments and Federal government would have been all over them.

May 27, 2015 at 3:39 pm
bruce stanley says:

No, not willing to compete. Not at that price to the taxpayers. We will get plenty of economic growth by continuing to lower the corporate tax rate to 3%.