In 2011, 254 California companies moved some or all of their work and jobs out of state, 26% more than in 2010, according to Irvine business consultant Joe Vranich.
The pace is accelerating. An average of 4.9 businesses left California each week of 2011, compared to 3.9 per week (202 total) in 2010 and one a week (51 total) in 2009.
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/moved-342887-companies-texas.html
Comments 18
One a day. This should be talking point #1 for any state-wide candidate
Author
These are only the larger businesses. Small CA businesses fly below the radar, and their departure is never recorded.
Author
Know the best way to have a successful small business in CA? Start with a successful LARGE business.
But the laughter dies quickly.
This should be the Number #1 issue for all candidates in California, especially those running in competitive assembly and senate districts.
Any detail about this data? I know this is a blog rather than a news outlet in the traditional sense, but to make any use of this information I’d want to know more. Is the number presented the difference between companies arriving and those leaving? What percent of the 254 businesses do the “expanding elsewhere” but not leaving make? We need a more business friendly climate in this state, and to get there we ought to start with analysis that provides a rich enough picture to tease out unfriendly policies from unsustainable giveaways by neighbor states or business choice as causes. That type of analysis should strengthen the credible arguments for pro growth policies.
The post links to the original news source, which mentions who provided the info.
Dear Omar,
You ask great questions. I might suggest going to http://www.ppic.org/main/pressrelease.asp?i=628 to get another perspective on this perennial issue that bubbles up during elections. And, to more up-to-date numbers, you can go directly to PPIC’s website at http://www.ppic.org. The Public Policy Institute of California is a private, nonprofit organization dedicated to improving public policy in California through independent, objective, nonpartisan research on major economic, social, and political issues.
This article on New Findings on Business Relocation is enlightening.
“In particular, the authors go beyond aggregate numbers and look at specific industries to determine if some are more affected by business relocation. They find, in fact, that certain industries such as manufacturing, information, and finance and insurance are more mobile and relocation is more frequent. However, this holds true in both directions – meaning that businesses in these sectors move into and out of California more often. The authors find, in fact, that the net effect on job loss and gain due to relocation remains small across all major industries. “
Author
Of course, Gwendolyn is a good foot soldier in the cause of the Democratic Party (and those to the left of the Dems). That’s fine. But judge her comments the same way you should judge my own — take into the account our respective biases.
Fortunately, she’s not very good at disguising her bias — or even at presenting “facts.” Take this quote from her posting above:
“The Public Policy Institute of California is a private, nonprofit organization dedicated to improving public policy in California through independent, objective, nonpartisan research on major economic, social, and political issues.”
Note she presents this assertion without quotes or source.
How does she know this is true and factual? Because she is quoting VERBATIM the usual self-serving boilerplate found in most PPIC press releases! For example:
http://www.ppic.org/main/pressrelease.asp?i=516
From the release:
“The Public Policy Institute of California is a private, nonprofit organization dedicated to improving public policy in California through independent, objective, nonpartisan research on major economic, social, and political issues.”
So, we know that PPIC is an impartial source because . . . PPIC SAYS it’s an impartial source. Works for Gwendolyn!
Gee, Gwendolyn, if you are going to offer such quotes as factual, should not you attribute the quote to the source?? Guess not.
Truth is, PPIC is left of center, and pretty much in the liberal camp. Its CEO is MARK BALDASSARE, an academic with PhD in Sociology from UC Berkeley (and it shows!)
Guess who is the head of their board of directors:
Former State Senator GARY HART (D)
Other Directors:
ROBERT M. HERTZBERG (D), former Speaker of the CA State Assembly.
MARÍA BLANCO, a civil rights lawyer for numerous liberal organizations and causes.
Other board members are less obvious in their big government bias — including some RINO’s. But there are NO limited government members — all board members too frequently would tend to look to government as the solution to various problems (my opinion based on my review of the other bios on the PPIC website).
For instance, I would wager that at least 90% of the board favor a “modification” of Prop 13, if not its outright repeal.
Others have pointed out the liberal bias of PPIC. Consider this article for admittedly biased CalWatchDog:
http://www.calwatchdog.com/2010/04/29/liberal-groups-ppic-loaded-questions/
Richard,
You seem rather threatened by another point of view. Should not all points of view be available to readers here? Why not let the readers make up their own minds and do their own research. Vilifying the opposing view, only serves to weaken your arguments.
All of the arguments you’ve made against the PPIC could also be made against websites, such as CalWatchdog, that you quote from. And to what end?
Why not try to use some actual research data such as presented by the PPIC in your arguments? Do you have a resource that presents different data? PPIC looks at both sides of the equation, i.e. the coming and going of small and large businesses over a number of years. The article you draw your information from http://www.ocregister.com/articles/moved-342887-companies-texas.html only deals with departures. It only gives half of the story. This is also a very conservative/GOP leaning publication.
Gwendolyn – First off, Richard Rider admitted tht calwatchdog is biased. They make no claims that it isn’t, or that it does not have an agenda, unlike PPIC. In all fairness, the PPIC information is from at best, 9 years ago. Second, that press release said a whole lot of nothing, without any facts to rebut the charges made about jobs relocating.
Second, what does the editorial views of the Register have to do with the facts o in the article. No one, especially the individuals would deny that editorially, they are biased toward a libertarian viewpoint. However, in regards to the news side, they are an unbiased paper.
Last, why is it so hard for liberals to admit, that California is losing businesses. This is not some divisive social issue, but one of plain facts. If our 11%+ unemployment rate not enough, then what is. Contrary to your belief, this is not a new issue. Companies like Hughes Helicopters that moved totally out of Culver City to Mesa, AZ in the mid ’80s or McDonnell Douglas, flat out saying it was cheaper to build a completely new plant in another state, than to build a new model of airplane in Long Beach shows that this has been an important issue for decades.
In general, there is one remarkable difference between left-leaning and right-leaning think tanks and advocacy groups. The left lies about their objectivity. The right doesn’t.
THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS on both sides. But more often than not, the left relies on their fake “nonpartisan” thank tanks to con the public and the media.
NO ONE thinks that Reason, CATO, Heartland, Hoover, or Heritage are neutral on issues. Certainly not the press, nor should they. We can all judge their information in that context.
But the Left relies on Common Cause, PPIC, First Five, League of Women Voters, California Budget Project, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Center on Policy Initiatives, Center for Community Economic Development, and other “impartial” think tanks to generate their biased reports and studies. And too often, the gullible and/or duplicitous press regurgitates their propaganda as objective facts.
BTW, a good quick list of California progressive think tanks can be found at this link — a link provided on a progressive website:
http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/site/directory/thinktanks
The left/Gwendolyn refuses to accept the consequences of the anti-business, high tax policies of California. I doubt they will EVER admit that they are harming the economy. No surprise, come to think of it.
But along with business departures there has been a remarkable departure of PEOPLE — and it predates the recession. And the sources I provide are not terribly biased either (though the commentary below IS adopted from my biased “Breaking Bad” fact sheet). Gwendolyn, check the included sources:
“Consider California’s net domestic migration (migration between states). From April, 2000 through June, 2008 (8 years, 2 months) California has lost a NET 1.4 million people. The cumulative net annual income lost from this 8 year out-migration comes to about $26 billion.
“Net departures slowed in 2008 only because people couldn’t sell their homes. In 2010 we lost “only” 72,000 net people to domestic migration. Again, note that this is NET loss.”
http://www.mdp.state.md.us/msdc/Pop_estimate/Estimate_08/table5.pdf and
http://tinyurl.com/2010-CA-lost-72000 and
http://interactive.taxfoundation.org/migration/
“These are not welfare kings and queens departing — California has almost triple the national ratio of welfare recipients. This is a great state to be on the dole.”
http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/weblogs/afb/archives/034662.html
“The departees are primarily the young, the educated, the productive, the ambitious, the wealthy (such as Tiger Woods) – and retirees seeking to make their pensions provide more bang for the buck.”
Gwendolyn, I don’t mind you referencing the work of biased sources. I do!
But you refuse to accept responsibility for your subterfuge in quoting PPIC’s self-serving description of how objective they are — without you admitting that they wrote it themselves. THANK YOU for proving my point about the dishonesty of the Left!
Richard,
Do you realize you have shifted your argument from businesses and corporations leaving California to net migration? How to you correlate those entities?
I still have not seen you refer to any real research that shows more than just a few named firms and companies that have left the state. There seems to be a big assumption that because these guys have left, there must be more we don’t know about. And, what about companies that come into the state each month/year? No mention of those.
Yes, you may be right that PPIC looks like it’s a left leaning organization, but at least they have research data and comparisons to back up their statements and they are coherent. Can you come up with research that supports a net loss of businesses and corporations i.e. proving your argument that more businesses have moved out of state in 2011 than moved into the state?
The statements you make leave you with the burden of proof.
Two words: Buck Knives
Oh no Gwendolyn,
In this thread alone you’re already behind 0-1 against Richard in points where he blasted you for incorrectly labeling that think tank as neutral, objective, and all the other false descriptions.
Now you’re calling out his sources? Have you seen Richard’s blog? It’s filled with links and lists and is just a downright brain dump of data facts.
No doubt right now he’s amassing a huge list of companies that he’s going to drop on your head to make you look even more foolish than you already do by implying that amount of businesses that have come into California have offset those that have left.
I can’t watch….
Dear OhDear:
Hopefully he is doing just that….amassing data in a research format that indeed shows that over a period of time there has been a net departure of businesses and companies, large and small from San Diego County or California in general.
As in the PPIC report, I’m wondering if he will be able to describe why some businesses move into California while others choose to leave. That is what I found most interesting about their research.
BTW: I am not “implying that amount of businesses that have come into California have offset those that have left.”
Richard has a premise that businesses leave California because of high corporate taxes and too many regulations. If that is the case, why would they come here in the first place?
His premise is the crux of the argument/debate.
Good news you guys, especially for you Richard since you mentioned California’s net migration out of the State:
http://blog.sfgate.com/ontheblock/2012/01/09/more-people-moving-to-california/
For the longest time, it’s been known that California was losing residents. While there is still natural population growth, there was always more folks moving out of the state than moving in. But, could that be reversing?
The OC Register wrote last week about 2011 data showing an inbound trend of movers into the state of California from moving companies Allied Van Lines, United Van Lines and Atlas Van Lines.
Allied handled 6,574 moves to California last year, up 8 percent vs. 2010 — as well as 6,227 moved away from the Golden State, virtually unchanged in a year. That’s a net gain of 347!
At United Van Lines, 16,292 of its moves were to California, a 4% increase vs. 2010. Moves away from California totaled 14,758 — down 1% in a year.
Then there’s Atlas Van Lines, which handled last year 7,803 moves to California, a 9% increase vs. 2010. Its moves away from California totaled 6,758 — up 4% in a year.
Another storage and moving company interviewed for the article is attributing the trend to prices coming back to reasonable levels.
Linda Oakley, vice president of Atlas Transfer and Storage: “People are realizing that living in California is finally affordable and they’re jumping on that bandwagon. We’ve had customers that we’ve moved out of state that have called us back to say, ‘I want to come home.’”
It’s the 2nd year in a row that more people are moving into the golden state than out according to the Register. It’s also the highest number since the bust of 2008, though still well below the numbers of the years prior.
[T]hese three van lines combined moved more folks to California than out for the second consecutive year — and third out of the last four. Plus, the 30,669 households moved to California last year was up 5.9% in a year and the highest number of new neighbors since 2008…Last year’s inbound moves were still 23% short of the average years seen in the most recent boom of 2005-07.
My guess is that full-service van lines are often used by the moderately well-to-do and above moving on a corporate relocation package. Could this mean that the more well-to-do middle-senior manager types are coming back to sunny California? Is this an indicator of jobs and growth returning to California, both currently and in the near future?