Martin McIntosh of Bangor, ME Mst77, a guy can dream, can't he??

You raise a very good point about the state and federal interface. While it is expected that Washington will be picking up the burden with new taxes on the wealthy, competiveness on the state tax level is a tremendous incentive for economic development.

My biggest concern is that we have already gone past the tipping point on tax inflow/spending outflow; plus, we've largely decimated our business base via disproportionate taxes, fees and costs. Couple that with a challenging economic environment and the tip will now turn into a deluge.

Hence, I find it remarkable that we continue to elect precisely the same people that created Maine's imbalance in the first place. And it's not like they haven't had years of warning that the tipping point was going to arrive. Moreover, they've had well over a year to watch the impending implosion of a lax regulatory environment (thank you Congress)that permitted lending beyond objective reason. Finally, perhaps the objective factual presence of a huge disparity between tax and economic development climate ratings will somehow, someday arrive in the brains of the elected leaders of the state as being related.

A guy can dream, can't he?

Until then, our company stays in New Hampshire. According to our accountant the bottom line difference is in the thousands per week. Money that we can put to work deveoping new products, expanding and hiring more people to meet demand.

Hannah Pingree--make history. Get to work.report abuse

smallbiz of Bangor, ME I thought I read in a press release that two more wind projects had been approved and I was right: Hannah and Chellie are in public office!report abuse

mst77 of Portland, ME Martin- I agree, a top to bottom overhaul of taxes would be a great thing. Unlikely but great.

Personally, I don't think there's much use in a state overhauling their tax code first, though.

I think it has to start at the federal level, because the budget priorities (spending, as well as taxes) of the federal govt have a profound effect on a state's budget.report abuse

mst77 of Portland, ME Thomas - glad to hear Google has made it to Montville.

You quote the amount of money that the state spends per capita. You then cite the percentage that number represents of every $100 of "personal income earned in the state."

Is there a reason for this statistic? And is there a reason you don't include the profits of businesses within the state? That seems relevant to the discussion of whether the state is spending its money wisely.

More importantly, when you say that Maine ranks "#12 in state and local spending burden", you don't specify what that "burden" means.

And how do we compare among states that face the types of challenges we do in providing services to our citizens: We're rural, we have many senior citizens and retirees on fixed incomes. We have a high level of poverty. We have high levels of obesity, diabetes and other chronic medical conditions, rates of which tend to be higher among older, poorer residents who qualify for state services.

Equally important to measuring how much we SPEND is measuring what we GET for that money.

For example, we could definitely save some cash by cutting services entirely, keeping a handful of troopers around and letting everyone fend for themselves, but there aren't many Mainers who would say that's a good idea. (I happen to agree with them.)

If we did that, would you open a business here?

We could have the abysmal levels of state services that some other poor rural states have, but at what cost?

Have the poor states that gutted their social services and allowed for-profit health insurance companies to jettison all their sick (expensive) subscribers suddenly found themselves prosperous? Of course not!report abuse