Like millions of Americans, Donald and Susan Sutherland love ice cream. In fact, they like ice cream so much they decided to open their own ice cream store in Tempe. What started out as a single Cold Stone Creamery 18 years ago is today a growing company with outlets in 47 states and even the Caribbean.
Everyone can probably agree that the world is a better place with more ice cream in it.
But if you were to listen to Arizona Chain Reaction, we'd all be better off without "chains" like Cold Stone Creamery.
ACR says chains hurt the local economy because they export profits, whereas independent businesses spend profits locally. "When you shop locally owned businesses," ACR says, "your money is recirculated over and over and creates up to 75 percent more tax revenue to our community."
As it turns out, the 75 percent claim appears to be based on a single report on three bookstores in Austin, an underwhelming sample to say the least. What's more, the authors withheld from the report "the underlying data, assumptions and methodology," making the calculations impossible to verify.
On the meta level, if we bought this muddled reasoning, every city and state should pursue economic autarchy. Let's call it a North Korean economic growth strategy. You could say goodbye to companies like Cold Stone Creamery and to the improved products, services and lower costs that accompany competition.
The "shop locally" idea also raises some thorny questions. When does a business become a chain? After it opens a second store, a third store, a 10th? And what about a store founded in Arizona like Cold Stone Creamery? By ACR reasoning, those profits will return to Arizona. Should consumers in Florida have to forgo Arizona ice cream for that reason?
At its core, the assumption that local businesses spend profits in-state while chains export them just doesn't square. Local entrepreneurs can spend profits on Wall Street, just as chains can spend locally. Wal-Mart, for instance, spent $1.5 billion for merchandise and services with 939 suppliers in the state last year.
ACR may not like the "homogeneity" of places like Wal-Mart, but consumers apparently do. Wal-Mart has 70-plus stores in Arizona that handed over $248 million in sales taxes to the state last year. And more than 28,000 Arizonans are employed in local stores. Would these Arizonans be better off without Wal-Mart?
Fuzzy economics aside, there is something to like in the group's appreciation for businesses that "create a unique atmosphere that set Arizona apart." There is something fun in discovering out-of-the-way venues with the character that local entrepreneurs put into their businesses.
But you can take a good point too far. ACR says independent businesses appeal to customers "who value choice, individuality and quality service more than the occasional discount." That's a fine sentiment for those who can afford it.
But there are plenty of consumers who rely on that "occasional discount" to make ends meet. When you have a family to feed and clothe, Target isn't an option, it's salvation.
ACR has backed bills to end what it calls "big-box subsidies," and on that point we agree. Skewing the playing field by subsidizing particular companies is unfair.
On the other hand, backlash against chain stores is so intense in some states that legislators have proposed additional taxes, called the "Big Box Tax," on large stores. That's not right, either.
Fair competition requires a level playing field with all players operating by the same rules. Government should enforce the rules and let the players play.
Perhaps the New Times said it best when it included ACR on a "Best of" list, saying, "We know the nice folks from Arizona Chain Reaction are flipping through 'Best of' right at this very moment, clutching their heads . . . whenever they see mention of a chain store or restaurant. Sorry, guys . . . but sometimes bigger is better. Not always, though. . . . We're still giddy over the impending arrival of Ikea, but we're thankful for you, too, Arizona Chain Reaction."
As one of the fastest-growing states, Arizona has plenty of room for all kinds of businesses. So enjoy your Lux or your Starbucks. I'm going out for some ice cream.
First published in the Arizona Republic, July 31, 2005.
Courts need judges, law books, and maybe a few gavels. But slick public relations campaigns?
Arizona Supreme Court chief justice Ruth McGregor contends that "If the judicial branch is not well or fully understood, and it is not by many, then we need to ask ourselves what we need to do to change the way that we communicate about the courts."
The solution to Arizonans' apparent lack of understanding is a public relations campaign the court calls "Good to Great." To implement the campaign, the court has signed a contract worth up to $108,000 per year with a high-powered public relations firm. The initial work order directs the firm to "develop a new look and functionality" for the court website, and to "develop a communication plan to introduce" the Good to Great strategy to the public and "specific stakeholders groups."
It would seem that it is the court, not citizens, that doesn't understand its role. Arizona expects the state supreme court to interpret the finer points of law and issue well-reasoned judgements that uphold the state constitution.
Spending taxpayer dollars on public relations campaigns is simply poor judgment.
About 15 years ago, the Center for Law in the Public Interest convinced a federal judge that the state should equalize funding for all Arizona public school districts. As a result, today every public school district receives a minimum average of $8,500 per student, and that was supposed to help districts better educate students. Now the Center wants another federal judge to suspend the AIMS graduation requirement for English Language Learners until funding reaches some undefined level of "adequacy."
Arizona taxpayers currently spend about $1.4 billion to educate 161,000 ELL students. That works out to an average of $8,700 per pupil, which is on par with taxpayer subsidies for college students.
At this point, it is legitimate to question the assumption that more money will lead to better education outcomes. Measures that improve accountability, such as vouchers and nationally norm-referenced tests, will help ensure valuable public money spent on ELL programs achieves the goal of providing a solid education.
-Robbie Sherwood: "Federal court asked to waive AIMS test for English learners"
-Arizona Department of Education: Annual Report of the Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction: Fiscal Year 2003-2004
-Vicki Murray: "Learning English involves more than money"
-Arizona Department of Education: 2004-2005 enrollment
What do Florida, Nevada, and Texas have in common (besides the heat)?
A. They are among nine states without an income tax.
B. Since 1990 they have seen twice the job and population growth of states with the highest income taxes.
C. All of the above.
If you answered C, you'd be right. Unfortunately, Arizona is the odd man out.
Arizona expects to run a surplus of more than $200 million this year. But for everyday Arizonans, that's money they won't have to put toward purchasing homes, saving for their children's educations, and starting new businesses. While the state has been flush with cash, Arizonans haven't been given major tax relief in a decade.
It's time to balance the scales.
Eliminating the income tax could give Arizona's economy a major boost. Phasing out both the corporate and individual income taxes could create as many as 14,000 new jobs each year and generate up to $24 billion in personal income growth over 15 years.
Importantly, cutting taxes keeps more money in the hands of the people, where it belongs.
-Steve Voeller: "Time is Right for Substantial Tax Relief"
-Bob Robb: "Fiscal conservatives in Arizona should focus on tax cuts"
-Study: Three Paths to Prosperity: An Examination of Proposals for Fundamental Tax Reform
Recent Facebook Activity
Fifteen Bureaucrats Are Better Than One
Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) have announced that they will not recommend candidates to serve on the Independent Payment Advisory Board, the federal health care law’s panel of 15 bureaucrats tasked with reducing Medicare costs. In a letter to the president explaining their decision, Boehner and McConnell said they “believe Congress should repeal IPAB” and “hope establishing this board never becomes a reality.”Read More >>
Policymakers Need to be Adults when it Comes to Corporate Handouts
Economic development consultants act like children when they talk about attracting new businesses. Maybe a “deal closing” fund can help the state attract high-profile corporate relocations, they argue. Or maybe a special job training grant. Just do it this one time and it will make our state an economic powerhouse. Pretty please!Read More >>
Charter Schools Should have Better Access to Empty Public School Buildings
The wave of school building closures comes at a time when charter schools are disproportionally represented in the list of the top performing schools in the state. As TUSD shutters schools, shouldn’t the district find a way for successful charter schools to move in and give families better options?Read More >>