Seven Days contributing writer Kevin J. Kelley wrote this post.
A commentary in today’s Burlington Free Press offers inadvertent but persuasive proof that graduate degrees from Ivy League institutions are no guarantee against loopy thinking.
UVM business school assistant professor Allison Kingsley, who holds a master’s from Yale and a PhD from Columbia, groups Vermont with several failed states that, she claims, handcuff private business by imposing “high corporate taxes, high energy costs, arduous permitting, and extensive regulations.”
The failed states Kingsley, who earns $125,000 a year, is referring to are not Nevada, Florida or Michigan — all of which are suffering from rampant unemployment and destabilized housing markets. No, Kingsley is likening Vermont to such third-world sinkholes as Burundi, Mali and Sri Lanka.
Kingsley, who’s been mis-educating UVM students since 2010, concedes in her Freeps screed that she may be too recent an arrival in Vermont to understand how things actually work here.
For sure.
But she clearly has no clue, either, about the nature of the troubled countries that she claims are similar to Vermont.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
Well put. Dr. Kingley also doesn’t talk about another fundamental economic metric: The unemployment rate. Per Google’s Public data tool, Vermont’s seasonally-adjusted unemployment rate in August 2012 was 5.3%:
http://www.google.com/publicda…
If you click the checkboxes for all the states in that tool, you see that Vermont had the fifth-lowest unemployment rate in the entire country that month. If that fact makes our state “business unfriendly”, then maybe there are 45 other states that should follow our “business unfriendly” lead.
I read the article and found it to be a reasonable critique of the status quo. She wasn’t comparing Vermont to a bloody war torn country- she was saying (among other things) that our politically stagnant pool of one party control was similar to third world authoritarianism. This is a legitimate criticism , in my view.
Perhaps Mr. Kelly should retire to the fainting couch.
Hope there aren’t more UVM professors as clueless and idiotic as Kingsley.
I thought Kingsley’s article was well written as well, and made
excellent points about the business climate in Vermont. As a recent
transplant myself, I’ve heard many stories about the business / tax /
economic climate in Vermont making it a hard choice to deal with. (As a
side note, since it’s not directly related to the article premise –
Vermont is near top of list for Worst states to retire in. I thought
others were taking detours in their criticisms so I am just taking that
example.)
On the other hand, Mr Kelly’s dismissive tone and snarky
comments about her salary, have little argumentative value to rebut Ms
Kingsley’s points.
Low unemployment? Again, that has nothing at all
to do with the basic premise of a tough climate to run or start a
business in. While it may be an appealing stat for employees wanting to
work here, it does not directly translate to a business climate
enhancement. I’ve heard many people talk about how many young adults
raised in Vermont, go to school in Vermont, then go get jobs elsewhere
because few businesses locate here. Much of Vermont is proud of fact
that they are resistant and reluctant to change. Business growth is
change, and it’s not welcome in Vermont.
Clearly the author of this article has never owned a business, much less a business in VT. As a business owner who has owned business in this state and others I can say that the Professor is right on, the state of VT makes it extremely hard on small business by imposing ridiculous policies and unreasonable tax code. The state takes the money they bleed from small businesses and then “reinvests” it to train new employees for big VT companies like Dealer.com.
I find it interesting that the author of this article chose to use this as a way to get up on an political/ environment pedestal as well. The author is way off base and attacking a professor who should be applauded for addressing a very real issue in this state.
She’s anything but clueless and idiotic (reinhold’s epithets). Maybe he should read the article before slinging clumsyterms around.
I found Ms. Kingsley’s article to be very reasonable and thought-provoking. She raises impt and interesting questions about whether VT is business-friendly and I frankly don’t see why that’s so offensive to you. And you do seem offended. The tone of your response construes Ms. Kingsley as having a far more extreme position than she does and you go after her in such an obnoxious and angry manner that I cannot help but think that if anyone is a fool it’s YOU. If you want people to respect your view on a topic, you should communicate your views in a much more responsible, balanced and professional way and you may want to actually address your opponent’s arguments (you do not here) rather than just mock them. Come to think of it — maybe you should enroll in one of Ms. Kingsley’s seminars so her classier and more compelling style of argument will rub off on you?
Mr. Kelley has obviously never taken a gander at the impoverished conditions a huge majority of Vermonters live in. Ever been outside of Chittenden County? The squalid living conditions throughout this state are appalling and are reminiscent of a third world country. As for small business in Vermont- forget about it. The state will stomp you out with all of it’s regulations and high taxes- insuring bankruptcy, even though you’re employing 20-30 Vermonters. Oh well, I guess they’d rather have to pay more in unemployment than see a small business thrive. I think Dr. Kingsley hit it right on the head.
How easy it is to be a commentator like Kevin Kelley. When someone writes something you don’t like, no need to check their facts or refute them point by point. Just call them names, make irrelevant reference to their salary, and be sure to adopt a hip, snarky tone. With this kind of writing Seven Days will never be more than a “lifestyle” paper, incapable of objectively digging into any issue.
It’s too bad, too, because the “business unfriendly” claim comes up again and again. Prof. Kingsley is right: by commonly-accepted measures, Vermont is indeed less accommodating to business that practically any other state. But we also have some of the cleanest air and water, lowest crime and healthiest people. Could there be a connection? Maybe Vermont is a better place to live because it doesn’t grovel for new business at any cost, as other states seem to do. That’s a subject worth exploring, but doing so requires more than this sophomoric response.
From the BFP comments –
Doug Hoffer · Top Commenter · Sole Proprietor at Self employedMs. Kingsley said, “Vermont’s corpoÂrate income tax rate is the twelfth highÂest.”
First, Ms. Kingsley failed to mention that more than half the states have flat corporate tax rates while Vermont’s is graduated. As a result, very few Vermont businesses pay at the top rate.
In addition (and more importantly), for the state corporate tax rate to be a meaningful predictor of economic health, Ms. Kingsley would have to demonstrate that states with higher tax rates have lower job growth. She didn’t do that, and she can’t.
Ms. Kingsley also said, “VerÂmont has one of the highest energy rates in the U.S.”
This is true but it’s a bit unfair to compare Vermont with states that burn cheap dirty coal or those with massive federally subsidized hydro. In addition, Vermont also has one of the lowest average monthly residential bills because we have made wise investments in efficiency.
Instead of repeating these tired sound bites, Ms. Kingsley should check the data instead. For most major indicators, Vermont’s economy is at or near the middle of the pack. For some, it’s better. For example, over the last 20 years
— Vermont private sector job growth was 21% and the U.S. rate was 23%.
— Median household income increased 10.4%, U.S. figure was 5.9%
— Unemployment rate has been lower than the U.S for all but one year
— Inflation adjusted per capita Gross State Product increased 27% from `97 to `11 (earliest & latest data available); U.S. rate was 17%
— Two-year new business survival rate has exceeded the U.S. average for all but one of the last 16 years
She’s not clueless and idiotic, but she is “too new to Vermont to know whether or how much of this is true”; she doesn’t “know enough about any of these cases to be confident in their application”; she bases her claim on “anecdotal evidence”; and the tool she uses to support her claim is “admittedly … an imperfect tool when applied to U.S. states.” It’s difficult to take her points seriously when the title of this piece could have easily been “Disclaimer.”
Wow. Regardless of whether Prof. Kingsley’s analysis is right or wrong, Kevin Kelley’s snarky, substantive-devoid attack is the product of a jerk (vs.someone whose writing in 7D is usually good).
I have not heard the statistic that Vermont is one of the worst states to retire in. References please? As a retiree, I have lots of peers, so I’m just wondering. Possibly the winters are daunting and I’ve given up shoveling snow. But in many ways, V. is quite supportive to elders.
Business is not an antidote to poverty. Red states are a testimony to that. Southern and western states are very business friendly, anti-tax and totally filled with have nots. All I am saying is a balance of business and government seems like a good thing. Also, having visited rural Vermont as well as third world countries, there is no comparison. Certainly we can improve, but we are far from the scenario you state.
Thanks! Well said!
Having moved to Vermont recently from across the country – it has been eye opening to see the walls of regulation and red tape that plague our local businesses from being agile, growing and hiring. Sure, VT has a relatively lower unemployment rate – this is mostly a factor of our lower population density and agricultural based GDP. A number of my friends who own, and manage businesses here – even a couple mentioned by the misguided writer – have to spend considerable, internal resource and capital on burdensome regulatory governance, risk and compliance. My advice would be to collaborate with Prof Kingsley – and gain more insight rather than rush to a childish, “occupy” point of view…