Wednesday, July 2, 2014

More Jobs for Moultonborough

More Jobs for Moultonborough
A local Moultonborough company, CruCon Cruise Outlet Plus, recently had a grand opening, at which their employees officially greeted the community, providing a tour of their operation. I believe the event was significant because it represents how we can attract commerce and jobs to our area. This marvelous company has attracted career-minded employees, many of whom, are just starting their families. In a short time, the company has grown to over 100 employees, with $160 million in gross sales.
Employees expressed to me their delight that the company is situated in an ideal location with its beautiful lakes and mountains, and easy lifestyle. Through technology, a company like CruCon can operate just about anywhere. Through the telephone and the Internet, the company books cruises to anywhere in the world, on any cruise line.
Using this company as an example, we can attract other growing businesses. One way is to establish an Enterprise Zone in our District that provides businesses with certain incentives to relocate, such as tax breaks and help in finding investment. Businesses can also offer services to each other. Called “B2B,” - business-to-business creates a strong middle class that invigorates our entire economy.
Nick Vazzana
Candidate, NH House of Representatives

15 comments:

More Govt NO Help. said...

I started a business, finally ended up with 80 employees...the scariest times were visits from local or state business development people, who could turn the simplest requests into 3 year nightmares. Our Feds just finished a primer on this...the green stimulus package...didn't we learn anything?
Today's Union Leader drives home the point, Last year N H was # 3. On business friendly ranking, out of 37 states. This year we rank # 19 out of 37 states.
Throwing money and tax relief just create an uneven playing field for anyone already in business. Spend your time downsizing federal government, not making it bigger.

Government is Not the Solution said...

Nick, Uncle Sam and budding entrepreneurs could learn a few things from CruCon's owner Ms. Cleary and her can do attitude. Less government involvement and fewer regulations is what's needed to get the economy humming again.

Anonymous said...

Crucon didn't build that building without any approvals. Our local government correctly approved the project with conditions to assure the safety of all the town. The idea that no regulations or "government involvement" are needed is very naive and incorrect. You extremists usually miss that point on purpose and exaggerate the issue for effect.

Anonymous said...

To anon at 9:25, no one said that CruCon's building and business
was done without government approvals. The point being made was that the business was done WITHOUT government assistance, subsidies, tax breaks, enterprise zones or hand-outs. There is a huge difference and there was no government involvement. Complying with zoning regulations is not government involvement.

Perhaps you are the one who is being naïve in thinking that a business can only be successful if there is government involvement such as candidate Vazzana advocates.

Nanny State Mentality said...

Anonymous, 9:25, Before you criticize another's comment read it carefully.

You are the one that missed the point and exaggerated the issue. "Government is not the solution" said LESS government and FEWER regulations.

Anonymous said...

The Small Business Administration has helped countless business get started and grow. Without their help, they would not be able to create jobs. I'm sure there will be some whiny comment about that.
Anyone who feels that zoning regulations are not government intrusion is an idiot.

Long Story said...

The S B A was a good help...1982, prime rate at 18%__
SBA was 3/4 million limit, 10 year at 8% fixed. They would not do start-ups.. We had to show a cash flo from the business that would service the loan. Banks were kind of useless...we had $40,000 cash from selling a house, so bank would loan us $ 40,000. Banks take no risks... O well, it worked...20 years....six day weeks...12 Hr days. The whole industry is in Asia now...all gone from U S....

What We Have Lost.. said...

1982. Good oold days...not much government help, other then Free Trade, exporting U S jobs.. Buy a house...10% down, four years later sell it for twice what you paid... Stock Market...15% returns year after year....ivy league college $ 10,000 per year....full sized ford $ 3300.... We have to keep this in the face of our younger generation...the things we did without government assistance.

Moderate, not extreme said...

The federal government, right or wrong, funds many jobs. If real world-peace broke out, so would depression level unemployment.

At the local level, government regulations, along with spending on infrastructure and 'perks' can attract or repel businesses. Our town has a lot of small businesses, some doing better than others, but not enough of the right kind of jobs to keep most of our students from leaving town after high-school graduation. We are also not attracting younger families. If (big if) we want more students to stay and lower the average age in town, it is going to take action by our government on our behalf to make that happen. Market dynamics are not linked to town vision. Fewer regulations can help, as shown by the Reagan era, but also allows misdeeds, as shown by the Reagan era (Google S&L scandal). Finding the right balance at the local level requires local involvement. Government by the people - what a concept. Get involved!

Please, do your job said...

Dear "what we have lost" after reading your comment I couldn't help think of the Recreation Director who operates like it's still the 80's when life was good and money was easy.

Guess it's not fair to only single the Recreation Director out, she has lots of company. Carter's another one that can't help himself when it comes to spending other peoples money but he claims to get his marching orders from the Selectmen.

It's time to stop playing games and stop using Carter as a scapegoat. It's time for the Selectmen to take responsibility and let voters know where they stand on the issues. Please, do the job you were elected to do and stop passing the buck.





Anonymous said...

"Fewer regulations can help, as shown by the Reagan era, but also allows misdeeds, as shown by the Reagan era (Google S&L scandal). "

Only 1 scandal during the Reagan Presidency? How refreshing. I've lost track of the present White House's scandals. President Obama's policy's have killed the U.S economy.

I'll take a President with Reagan's philosophy any day.

Huh? said...

Only 1 scandal during the Reagan presidency? Not.
Let's see, Iran-Contra, the HUD grant rigging, the EPA scandal, the mentioned S&L scandal, his Chief of Staff convicted of lying to congress, and there were plenty of others. No presidency is immune from scandal whether real or politically motivated.

Anonymous said...

Wanna read about government intrusion right here in NH?
Read this about a business in Laconia.
http://www.laconiadailysun.com/index.php/newsx/local-news/78586-hathaway-house-under-review

Beware of those Bearing Gifts said...


The $65 billion Department of Housing and Urban Development has been plagued by mismanagement and scandal in recent decades. Numerous HUD secretaries have used their power to enrich themselves or to confer special benefits on people with political and financial connections.

A root cause of HUD scandals is that the department has a large number of costly subsidy programs, and each involves a tangled web of stakeholders. Many HUD programs divide responsibilities between federal, state, and local policymakers, and they involve private interests such as developers and financial companies. The multiplicity of interests and the complexity of the programs create opportunities for people in the public and private sectors to take personal advantage of programs.

Federal housing policies illustrate some broader realities of federal intervention. When making decisions, policymakers usually have political and self-interested ends in mind, not the broad general interest of the public. Also, lofty interventionist visions—such as using the government to boost home ownership—often fail because of the imbalances they create in private markets. Housing was traditionally a private and local concern without federal involvement. The scandals and policy errors discussed here provide good reasons to start dismantling HUD and ending the housing subsidies that have caused so much damage. - See more at: http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/hud/scandals#sthash.1N5vjPep.dpuf

During much of the 20th century, the "public interest theory of government" held sway. The idea was that policymakers—particularly federal policymakers—acted with the best interests of the general public in mind. However, America's experience with a large and scandal-plagued federal government in recent decades has shown that the public interest theory has little real-world explanatory power. Ill-conceived laws get enacted all the time, and government officials often put career advancement, turf protection, and other personal factors ahead of the public interest.

While government officials and advocates for housing subsidies usually paint a romanticized portrait of HUD's programs, the truth is that federal housing intervention has often done far more damage than good. The housing and financial meltdowns of recent years can be partly traced to the distortions injected into markets by federal housing regulations and subsidies through HUD and other agencies. We have learned that when the government intervenes in the housing industry, politically driven decisions lead to corruption and economic distortion, not efficient public policies.

Full article from the CATO Institute can be read here.
http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/hud/scandals

Anonymous said...

Beware, nice of you to paste the opinion of someone in the Cato Institute. Too bad it didn't contain any facts.