Comments on: Minnesota and Michigan https://michiganfuture.org/2013/09/minnesota-michigan/ A Catalyst for Prosperity Wed, 09 Oct 2013 16:35:53 +0000 hourly 1 By: Lou Glazer https://michiganfuture.org/2013/09/minnesota-michigan/#comment-2901 Wed, 09 Oct 2013 16:35:53 +0000 https://www.michiganfuture.org/?p=5039#comment-2901 In reply to Don.

Exactly. What you get for higher taxes matters. What is interesting though is Minnesota’s tax are quite a bit higher than ours. And the revenue higher taxes produce allows Minnesota to make more of the public investments that matter to economic growth/prosperity. We are doing a case study of Minnesota’s tax and spending policies. I think folks will be surprised at how much higher their income, business, sales and gas taxes are than ours.

]]>
By: Don https://michiganfuture.org/2013/09/minnesota-michigan/#comment-2900 Wed, 09 Oct 2013 15:22:07 +0000 https://www.michiganfuture.org/?p=5039#comment-2900 I think tax increases can have a positive or negative impact. It is sort of a balancing act. As Dudley Ryan points out, tax increases can cause people to make decisions to move. A moderate increase may cause a few people to move, but a very large or excessive increase may cause a large number to move and have a negative affect. The problem we all struggle with is where is the “sweet spot” where the benefits outweigh the cost. Continuously cutting taxes to attract new business will result in a “race to the bottom.” But irresponsible tax increases without adequate controls could result in the scenario Dudley Ryan mentions. I think Lou is talking about moderate tax increases with the proceeds directed toward education and infrastructure. This is what I think is the best, but we have to monitor what happens and keep fine tuning as appropriate.

]]>
By: Lou Glazer https://michiganfuture.org/2013/09/minnesota-michigan/#comment-2889 Wed, 02 Oct 2013 16:19:27 +0000 https://www.michiganfuture.org/?p=5039#comment-2889 In reply to Dudley Ryan.

Thanks for the kind words. That is the debate. Do high taxes drive more and better jobs or as we see it talent which requires public investments both in education and creating places where mobile talent wants to live and work? Minnesota has been the high tax state (along with Illinois) in the Great Lakes for decades and has outperformed us and all the other lower tax Great Lakes States on all the economic measures that matter to people (jobs and income). We believe even with their latest tax increase that will be true in the future just as it has been in the past. There is more exploration coming from us on why Minnesota has been doing so much better than Michigan. Look forward to your reaction to that work as well.

]]>
By: Dudley Ryan https://michiganfuture.org/2013/09/minnesota-michigan/#comment-2888 Wed, 02 Oct 2013 14:44:10 +0000 https://www.michiganfuture.org/?p=5039#comment-2888 Mr. Glazer,
Your article was well written but does not consider the fact the the tax increases have increased the number of well to do Minnesotans exiting the state. If you fast forward 5 years it will be Minnesota on the wrong side of the unemployment.

]]>
By: Lou Glazer https://michiganfuture.org/2013/09/minnesota-michigan/#comment-2880 Wed, 25 Sep 2013 19:17:30 +0000 https://www.michiganfuture.org/?p=5039#comment-2880 In reply to David Cherry.

I feel like I am responding to a lot of public conversation on the other side. Seems like they have no difficulty in getting their ideas out. But I would enjoy comments to the blog that don’t agree with my analysis so we can have a conversation here.

]]>
By: David Cherry https://michiganfuture.org/2013/09/minnesota-michigan/#comment-2876 Wed, 25 Sep 2013 14:38:16 +0000 https://www.michiganfuture.org/?p=5039#comment-2876 I enjoy your analysis, but find myself wondering what those on the other side of the aisle would say. Perhaps posting in a point-counterpoint style in the future would lend added credibility to your points, and drive the conversation we’re having as a state through a more rapidly moving and dialectic process.

]]>