SC Jobs: Keep Your Eye On The Ball

By fitsnews • on October 29, 2009
Comment Print

eye on the ball

Obviously, it’s wonderful news that Boeing has chosen South Carolina over Washington State for its second 787 Dreamliner assembly facility.

Even better news?  Boeing and the S.C. Department of Commerce clarified yesterday that the company will be adding 3,800 new jobs to the 2,500 it already employs in the Palmetto State, or at least Boeing “feels confident we can reach that figure” over the next seven years.

That’s great to hear.

Excellent, in fact, when you consider the fact that Boeing jobs bring a disproportionately high percentage of “spin-off” or “support” jobs with them.  Some estimates are that the company will create nearly two positions for every one position in its South Carolina factories – which will obviously be a boon to the Charleston area and the state’s economy as a whole.

We were, however, a little disturbed to hear advocates of government-run economic development in South Carolina already touting Boeing’s announcement as a victory for the “clusters” approach to generating economic growth.

It’s not.

It’s a victory for the almighty dollar – as our economic development team simply threw more taxpayer money at Boeing than Washington did, a fact that has to infuriate the synergy-speak socialists in the Darla Moore crowd.

Want to see “clusters” at work?  Check out the Innovista project, which has spent $150 million (with another $150 million on the way) to produce jack squat  in the way of jobs or capital investment.

South Carolina went big bear hunting with hundreds of millions of dollars worth of taxpayer incentives – including $170 million in up-front grants – and this time it paid off.  Five years ago, obviously, it was a different story.

Similarly “full of it” is the politician likely to gain the most from Boeing’s announcement, embattled S.C. Gov. Mark Sanford, who called it a “telling dividend from our state’s continued efforts to better our business climate.”

That’s not true, either, as South Carolina’s competitive position has appreciably worsened since Sanford took office.

Again, we paid Boeing more money than Washington.  Simple as that.

So … what do we get for this investment?

Well, assuming that Boeing were to immediately create every single one of the 3,800 jobs envisioned by the state’s incentive offering, South Carolina’s unemployment rate would inch down from 11.6% to 11.43%.

Indeed, these 3,800 jobs represent just 1.5% of the employment pool and a measly .17% of the state’s workforce – or approximately the same number of full-time positions shed by the state during the month of September.

Of course, in addition to the 3,570 workers who were added to the Palmetto State’s unemployment rolls last month, another 2,851 left the labor force – many of them no doubt in frustration at being unable to find a job.

Again, don’t get us wrong … Boeing is huge news.  Great news.  And depending on the data released by Commerce, we may even conclude that the final incentive package was a good deal for the state.

But we cannot take our eye off the ball.

We cannot forget where sustained job creation comes from.

Making a lasting impact on our state’s unemployment rate means improving our underlying business climate for companies that employ 50 or fewer employees – small businesses – the people who (oh by the way) produce 95% of the jobs in this state.

Incentive packages are fine for big-game hunting, but as these numbers indicate the real solution is a climate that fosters small business growth and entrepreneurship.

fitsfinger

Match.com

Comments

By Katherine Jenerette on October 29th, 2009 at 11:41 am

This economic dance could really go somewhere:

STEP One – The SC government provided the Boeing Friendly operational environment; now it’s time for the Government to get out of the way and let market forces do the rest.

STEP Two – Repeat step one for small businesses in South Carolina.

STEP Three – Decrease Taxes and bureaucratic snafus and repeat step Two over-and-over…

By Mike on October 29th, 2009 at 11:41 am

Sounds a lot better way of saying things than the garbage put out by the tone deaf fools at the Policy Council.

By Joseph Reynolds on October 29th, 2009 at 11:58 am

You are sure that the lack of unions wasnt just a teensy-wheensy bit of the reason that Boeing picked SC?

By G.L. on October 29th, 2009 at 12:14 pm

Yeah, small businesses are getting shit on by the government from every side. The school tax now is the worst because businesses got no relief from the tax swap a few years ago. Since homeowners’ taxes don’t increase, school boards are raising taxes to the maximum amount allowed by Act 388 each year which is adding to the business taxes never got decreased. Also, businesses are having to pay the extra sales tax on top of all that.

By donny on October 29th, 2009 at 12:56 pm

Fact check: Washington state had $3 billion in incentives vs. $170 million from SC, so we did not out-incentivize them.

By SC Native on October 29th, 2009 at 12:59 pm

Fits,

You are obviously not a fan of the research university economic development initiatives, but what is your take on Clemson University’s ICAR?

By Minto W. McGill on October 29th, 2009 at 1:56 pm

It’s the soil conditions, I tell you, it’s the soil conditions. You were right Mark, all is forgiven!

By Small Business Always Overlooked on October 29th, 2009 at 3:33 pm

Small businesses will never see the incentives. Too much corruption would be had if there were incentives for small businesses. That’s part of the problem. That and the Walmarting of American small business.

By political hack on October 29th, 2009 at 4:44 pm

Gotta love the hype the great Guvment of our state is getting on this from all news media outlets for bringing .25 whatever percent of the jobs back to SC, they must be the saviors we have been searching for in all this mess! I wonder what the Soviet will do next?

By SCCON on October 29th, 2009 at 5:39 pm

So Dad was right: money really doesn’t grow on trees. It’s a root crop.

By Jim Kappler on October 30th, 2009 at 11:53 am

Can 200 people generate enough economic activity to create one more paycheck?

If so, then you can create “local shopping” programs that can lower the unemployment rate 1%. In South Carolina that would be more then 20,000 jobs created from the production and purchase of goods and services, without one dime of “bailout” or “stimulus” money.

With regards to the high unemployment rate, it is not the job that is important. It is the paycheck that is important. Therefore, a “paycheck creation” program is needed.

The unemployment rate is a percentage of the labor force that is unemployed. Since the labor force is approximately 50% of the population (this varies from county to county,) jobs need to be created for approximately 1/2 of 1% of the population to shift the unemployment rate 1%. The ratio of population (local shoppers) to a 1% unemployment rate shift is about 200 to 1.

Click on the following link to download an analysis that presents a starting set of numbers for the wages, generated from per capita economic activity, that would lower the South Carolina unemployment rate 1% (20,000+ jobs.)

http://paycheckeconomics.wordpress.com/2009/08/26/an-approach-to-lowering-the-south-carolina-unemployment-rate-1-2/

Being a per capita based, this analysis this can be adopted for any community, county, state, or even nationally (it all adds up.) Click on the following link to download an analysis that presents a starting set of numbers for the wages, generated from per capita economic activity, that would lower the United States unemployment rate 1% (1.5 million jobs.)

http://paycheckeconomics.wordpress.com/2009/10/18/an-approach-to-lowering-the-united-states-unemployment-rate-1-on-about-20week/

Leave a Comment