Here’s another “mystery,” discussed in the BusinessWeek article below. Well, a mystery for some, at least.
California is losing businesses faster than any state in the nation — both in the number of businesses lost (no big surprise, given our size) and the RATE at which they are being lost. And this is NET lost businesses.
Salient excerpt: There were 1.3 million businesses in California at the end of 2012, 5.2 percent fewer than in the previous year (that’s about 73,000 fewer). To put that in perspective, Massachusetts lost 5,200 businesses, the second-highest amount, and Kansas had 3.1 percent fewer businesses in 2012 than in 2011, the second-highest loss rate. Nebraska added businesses at 11.9 percent, the fastest rate.
Look at those stats, and consider this: In 2012 California lost businesses at a rate 67.7% higher than the SECOND worst state (Kansas).
Oh my!
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-07-03/why-are-californias-businesses-disappearing
Why Are California’s Businesses Disappearing?
Every now and then, one state governor or another will head to California to pitch businesses on leaving the Golden State. Canada’s immigration chief has been trying his luck, too. The coaxing usually provokes some pundits to bash the state’s high taxes and others to reassure middle-class Californians that employers aren’t planning on jumping ship before the state drifts off into the Pacific Ocean.
Much of the angst about California’s economy has been about jobs and whether employers are picking up stakes and heading for Texas. Bureau of Labor Statistics data compiled by Bloomberg News and published this week don’t answer the jobs question, but they do indicate that California is losing ground in a related category: the number of business establishments.
There were 1.3 million businesses in California at the end of 2012, 5.2 percent fewer than in the previous year (that’s about 73,000 fewer). To put that in perspective, Massachusetts lost 5,200 businesses, the second-highest amount, and Kansas had 3.1 percent fewer businesses in 2012 than in 2011, the second-highest loss rate. Nebraska added businesses at 11.9 percent, the fastest rate. Because BLS releases the data on a lag, the end of 2012 is the latest date for which numbers are available.
What gives? “It’s more likely the disappearance of a number of businesses than it is businesses leaving California,” says Kevin Klowden, an economist at the Milken Institute’s California Center. The state was hard hit by the Great Recession, Klowden continues, and businesses may still be shuttering in a hangover from tougher economic times. It could also be the case of an improving job market luring entrepreneurs of necessity away from their businesses, a trend that’s shown up in national data on new business starts.
In other words, it’s not exactly clear why California’s businesses are disappearing. Florida, another state hard hit by the bursting of the real estate bubble, and the state with the second most businesses, added new businesses at the nation’s seventh-fastest rate.
Clark is a reporter for Bloomberg Businessweek covering small business and entrepreneurship.
Comments 5
This is what you would expect in a state that is run by public sector unions and self servants in the power positions. They believe that the private sector is there to serve their needs for perks and benefits.
Why would anyone start or grow a business in this environment of regulation and taxation?
They do not want accountability nor efficiency from their work, but only lifetime employment and squandering of public monies for their benefit and that of their like minded colleagues and friends.
John K Stahl,
NAILS HEAD! Self Servants hate the idea of going back to working for a living, if they ever did.
‘In other words, it’s not exactly clear why California’s businesses are disappearing.’ I think if Clark would have a done a very short interview with Mr. Rider, he would have learned why businesses are disappearing. California laws, regulations and taxes are business unfriendly, not to mention energy costs.
This should be a potent campaign issue in Republicans favor, in legislative and statewide campaigns. However, for some reason, Republicans running in statewide and in well financed competitive districts, do not want to make this an issue.
Marshall has it right. The GOP SHOULD concentrate on economic matters where support for fiscal sanity is growing. But the Republican Party core electorate views such reforms as a secondary issue. As long as the GOP obsesses with immigration, gay marriage, MJ prohibition and other loser issues, it will never be effective in this state.
Yes, GOP district candidates can win their Gerrymandered districts — but the party will remain a minority. A SUPER-minority. And our elected officials first loyalty is to their DISTRICT — that trumps statewide GOP reform. BTW, that’s why I prefer proportional representation rather than fiefdom elections.
To make things worse, because the GOP now has such a negative image, the younger voters are moving further and further away from the GOP. Maybe not Democrat, but definitely not GOP. When the young voters talk with contemporaries, too often they feel It’s embarrassing to even admit that they are registered Republican.
The CA Republican Party base is literally dying off or moving out. Sad but true.