Economy Archives - Page 12 of 14 - Colorado-based Business and Economic Research

Michael Porter Highlights Colorado’s Strengths and Weaknesses in New Study

March 8, 2011May 31, 2014 horvath Leave a comment

Harvard Business Professor Michael Porter is widely recognized for his research in the competitiveness of cities, states, regions, and nations. His studies have emphasized clusters, specialized skills, infrastructure, and commerce as distinguishing factors that delineate the prosperity of these areas.

Most recently Porter measured the performance of clusters within each of the states at the National Governors Association Winter Meeting 2011 (February 26). At that meeting he talked about strategies that would allow the states to become more competitive in the future .

In addition, Porter prepared economic profiles for each of the 50 states. The 50-slide PowerPoint presentations, which were released at the NGA meeting, are formatted in a way that allows for easy comparisons between the states.

For example, it is to match Colorado’s biotech cluster against others in the nation. In 2008, Colorado was ranked 25th in biopharmaceuticals, with 2,032 employees and 11th in medical devices with 13,440 workers.

Each presentation begins with a performance snapshot with a position and trend ranking, by quintile, in five key areas. As well, Porter identified the “strong” clusters for each state.

Colorado’s overall prosperity rating was in the second quintile; however, it was rated in the 4th trend quintile. Essentially the state has strong output per capita; however, it is trending downward. This might suggest Colorado’s competitive position might be in jeopardy.

A second area of possible concern is labor mobilization (labor force/civilian population). On a positive note, Colorado is in the top ten; however, it is in the fourth trend quintile. Again, this is a strength that is trending downward.

There is better news for Productivity (average private wages) and Innovation (Patents per 10,000 workers). Colorado was ranked in the second quintile in both strategic categories. From a trend perspective it was also in the second quintile. These are areas where the state has maintained its strengths and remained competitive.

Finally, the state was ranked in the second quintile for cluster strength and in the top trend quintile. This points to increased strength, as defined by greater market share, in its “strong clusters”.

Porter identified Colorado’s top five clusters as:
• Business Services
• Distribution Services
• Entertainment
• Oil and Gas Products and Services
• Aerospace Vehicles and Defense.

The presentation highlights subtle strengths and weaknesses not mentioned in this brief overview. As such, it is recommended reading for any one interested in understanding the opportunities and challenges Colorado might face moving forward.

Has the Colorado Job Creation Machine Stalled?

March 3, 2011May 31, 2014 horvath Leave a comment

Most analyses of Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) employment data report net change in the number of workers. For example, Colorado lost about 25,000 jobs in 2010.

BLS also produces data series, based on the Quarterly Census of Employment (QCEW – private sector only), that report the following employment flows:
• employees added (establishments were opened); in 2009 this total was 101,869.
• workers added (firms currently in business); in 2009 this total was 369,773.
• employees lost (establishments contracted); in 2009 this total was 472,895.
• workers lost (firms closed); in 2009 this total was 111,574.
The sum of the first two categories measures gross job gains, whereas the sum of the latter two categories is gross job losses. In 2009 there was a gross gain of 471,642 jobs and a gross loss of 584,469 jobs.

The net change in employment is the difference between job gains and job losses. In 2009 the net change in employment was -112,827 workers. Total QCEW private employment for 2009 was 1,828,955 workers.

The magnitude of the net jobs lost is striking. It is a result of reduced job creation and increased job losses – the perfect storm on steroids. It should also be noted that in both 2008 and 2009 more jobs were lost by firms closings than were added by firms that were opened.

The following points stand out in an analysis of the jobs gained and jobs lost data:
• During the “go-go 90s” there was a high level of gross jobs lost and an even higher level of gross jobs added. There was a high level of job churn accompanied by strong net gains in employment.
• For the period 2002 through 2004, weak gross job gains were offset by much stronger gross job losses. There were net job losses of about 50,000 workers for this period.
• Gross job gains were comparatively weak for 2006 through 2008, although the state added about 170,000 net jobs over that period. There was a net increase in employment because of a decline in the number of gross jobs lost. In other words, job churn subsided. Workers were content to stay in the jobs they held at the time and fewer jobs were created, which increased competition for the available openings.
• It is especially disturbing to see the decline in the number of employees working for firms that were opened.
At this point, data for 2010 is available through mid-year. The good news is that there seems to be significant improvement in the number of gross jobs lost. On the downside, there is not corresponding improvement in the number of gross jobs gained.

For the moment it appears that Colorado’s wild-west entrepreneurial job creation machine seems to have stalled!

Hickenlooper Proposes Closure of Fort Lyon Correctional Facility

February 22, 2011May 31, 2014 horvath Leave a comment

Governor Hickenlooper recently proposed closing the Fort Lyon Correctional Facility as part of cost cutting measures to bring the state budget into balance. The facility employs roughly 200 workers.

For those in the metro area companies come and go and the loss of a company with 200 employees often goes unnoticed, unless a person works there. Approximately 1.2 million people work in the Denver-Aurora-Broomfield MSA, so a loss of 200 jobs would be 0.02% of total employment- not even a bleep on the radar. Bent County residents obviously have a different perspective.

A short lesson about the county will provide insight into their point of view. Bent County is located in Southeast Colorado east of Pueblo, between Otero and Prowers County. Approximately 6,500 people call the county home. Between 2000 and 2009, Bent County population actually increased by about 650 people, or an annualized rate of 1.2%. While this is less than the rate of growth for the state, at least it is positive. Not all rural counties in Colorado have seen their population expand over the past decade.

A review of Census data (Quickfacts) shows that there are about 2,000 households in the county and 2,400 housing units. There is a higher concentration of minorities (Black, American Indian, and Hispanic – terms used by the Census Bureau ).

About 65% of the population (which include prison inmates) are male. As is the case with many other rural counties, Bent has a lower concentration of people under the age of 18 and a higher percentage of workers over the age of 65.

In 2008, median household income for the county was about $33,000 compared to $57,000 for the state. As might be expected from these income levels, approximately 29% of the population lives below poverty level.

With that background let’s look again at the importance of the correctional facility. Fort Lyon is Bent County’s second-largest employer. (Note: Many Colorado rural counties are the home to correctional facilities).

Data from the Colorado Office of Labor Market Information (QCEW) reported that in 2009, Bent County has 1,303 covered workers (workers on payrolls who paid unemployment insurance) in 88 establishments. Only 560 are private sector employees.

At that time the top employment sectors were as follows: local government (451), state government (234), retail (68), hotels and restaurants (65), federal government (58), health care and social assistance (49), and finance and insurance (45). In December, 2009 the county unemployment rate was 8.7% (LMI). The loss of 200 employees in this economy would be devastating!

Should Governor Hickenlooper rescind his recommendation to eliminate the Fort Lyon facility? If so, what other programs can be cut or eliminated to keep the facility in operations? There is no right answer and there is no winner in this situation.

It’s a tough time to be a governor!

Colorado’s Bottom-Up Economic Development Strategy

February 11, 2011May 31, 2014 horvath Leave a comment

The first week in February Governor Hickenlooper (call me “John”) hosted the ninth stop in his Bottom-Up Economic Development tour across Colorado. For about two hours, the region’s top economic developers discussed job creation, economic development, and steps for increasing government efficiencies.

The most frequently discussed topic was transportation and the top priority was to complete FasTracks in a timely and cost effective manner. In addition leaders made a case for completion of the final leg of the beltway (between Broomfield and Golden) around the city, expansion of commercial air, maintenance of our bridges and highways, and reduction of congestion along I-70 into ski country.

Panelists felt that innovation and the attraction/retention of primary jobs was critical if we are to maintain our regional and national competitiveness. They also cited the need to have a well-trained workforce and an efficient, accountable, and adequately funded education system. As well, it is imperative that Coloradans work together to maintain the quality of life that makes the state so attractive. This will require leaders to address issues related to our water supplies, develop parks and recreation areas, invest in infrastructure, and utilize the state’s unique assets to attract commerce.

The metro area’s economic diversity was evident as leaders spoke in support of industries and clusters endemic to their region. For example, they addressed the need for the state to be more “military-friendly”, consider construction of nuclear power plants, understand the importance of refineries, realize the value of our construction and extractive industries, and support gaming and tourism.

As the Bottom-Up discussions continue, it would be beneficial to reflect on past economic-development successes. For example, consider the public-private partnership, the former Colorado Advanced Technology Institute (CATI). During the late 1980s, CATI was established to guide the development of science and technology and the growth of select high-tech clusters. Specifically, the group’s work laid the groundwork for the state’s photonics, materials, hardware, software, telecommunications, and bioscience clusters. While it may not be appropriate to resurrect CATI as it existed, there is merit in having the an organization that would fill many of CATI’s roles in fostering long-term growth.

Four years ago, a state job cabinet was formed, town meetings were held across the state to gather input, and plans were put in place. While that effort was well intended, it did not have the desired impact. Hopefully this Bottom-Up Planning approach with be more successful.

A well-thought out economic development plan couldn’t come at a better time. Colorado employment remains below the 2001 peak and it will be years before state payrolls return to the pre-Great Recession high mark.

Impact of Tax Reduction Package (Tax Holiday) on Colorado

January 28, 2011May 31, 2014 horvath Leave a comment

The recent tax cut package passed by Congress is expected to raise real GDP by .6 to 1.2% points depending on the economist making the projections. As a result, projected Real GDP growth for the nation is expected to be in the range of 2.3% to 4.0%.

The lion’s share of the benefit lies in the short-term reduction of the Social Security payroll tax rate paid by
employees. For 12 months, that percentage will be reduced from 6.2% to 4.2%.

This is often referred to as the FICA tax holiday. The federal government does not actually make payments, they simply collect less revenue.

The following is a back-of-the napkin look at the impact of this part of the tax holiday on Colorado:

Let’s start with the following assumptions:
• Colorado has a covered workforce of 2.2 million people.
• Total covered wages are approximately 100 billion.
• About 85% of the workforce (private sector + federal employees) pay FICA taxes.

From these assumptions we can derive the following:
• About 1.87 million workers will benefit from the tax cut (2.2 million *.85).
• The total wages impacted will be $85 billion ($100 billion total state wages *.85)
• The “cost” of the program to the federal government for stimulus in Colorado, or the maximum amount of
stimulus for Colorado is $1.7 billion ($85 billion *.02)
• Each worker will receive about $900 per year, or $75 per month ($1.7 billion/1.87 million workers).

To calculate the impact to the state it is necessary to make another set of assumptions.
• Because payments are disbursed over a period of a year, rather than in a lump sum; it will be assumed that
slightly less than 1/3 will be invested, saved, or used to reduce debt.
• Slightly more than 1/3 will be used to purchase services (doctors, dentists, massages, etc.).
• Slightly more than 1/3 will be used for retail purchases.
• The Colorado sales tax rate is 2.9%.
• Because Colorado is a home rule state, sales tax rates for cities and districts vary based on location. For
ease in computation it will be assumed that the average rate of combined municipal and district sales taxes is 5.1%.

From this set of assumptions the final set of calculations show the following:
• $500 million will be invested, saved, or used to pay down debt (this will benefit the consumer).
• $600 million will be used to purchase services (sales taxes are not paid on these expenditures).
• $600 million will be used to purchase retail goods (sales taxes will be paid on these expenditures).
• The state will receive $17.4 million in additional sales tax revenue ($600 million * .029).
• The municipalities and special districts will receive about $30.6 million in additional sales tax revenue
($600 *.051).

Let’s put this $1.2 billion “investment in the Colorado economy” in perspective.
• The 2009 Real GDP for Colorado was about $252.7 billion. The $1.2 billion infusion of money into the
Colorado economy is approximately .5% of the 2009 Real GDP. Total costs of the program (to the federal government) are almost $1.87 billion.
• The state is facing a shortfall of about $1 billion. The tax holiday will generate about $17 million.

While these efforts to jump start the economy will provide some assistance in the short-term, there will be a
significant long-term cost to the federal government for the program. Will this effort to stimulate the economy
result in sustained economic growth or will it simply be a variation on past themes and only have a short term impact? How will this stimulus effort shape the discussion for the upcoming 2012 elections? These and other questions will be answered over the next 18 months.

The Economy Has Been Tough…

January 22, 2011May 31, 2014 horvath Leave a comment

Over the past two years, 150,000+ Coloradans have lost their jobs, the value of many 401Ks decreased by 40 to 50%, home owners have lost their mortgages and businesses have shut down. Rather than belabor this and other dismal data, the following quips have been pulled from a variety of sources to provide a lighter and less rigorous view of the country’s economic fortunes.

The state economy has been so bad that…

• A woman on the Western Slope ordered a hamburger at a fast food restaurant and the clerk behind the counter chimed in, “Are you sure you can afford the fries to go with that?”

• Coloradans have begun to receive pre-declined credit card offers in the mail.

• A farmer on the Eastern Plains received a note from the bank with a check marked “Insufficient Funds.” He called the bank to ask if that meant him or them.

• Two college students on the Auraria Campus were actually seen talking to each other, they couldn’t afford the cell phone plan that allowed them to send text messages to each other.

• A major corporation held a conference at one of Colorado’s finest mountain resorts. The recreational activities included a water balloon toss and squirt gun fight instead of river rafting; as well, the company golf tournament was held on the front nine at the miniature golf course. Awards were handed out at a wiener roast (that included smores) that evening.

• Parents in Denver’s wealthier suburbs have had to fire their nannies…in the mean time they learned how many children they had, what their names were, what grade they are in, and what schools they are attending.

• A resume-toting job applicant in Boulder was actually reported wearing a tie to a job interview – it matched his shorts and Birkenstocks. Despite the extra effort, he didn’t get the job.

The Great Recession officially ended in June 2009. In the 18 months that have passed, unemployment rates have risen (as expected), but other indicators suggest that better economic conditions lie ahead. Hang in there.

University of Northern Colorado Economic Forecast Points to Slow Growth in 2011

January 18, 2011May 31, 2014 horvath Leave a comment

The economic outlook for Northern Colorado matches that of the state – a slow but, painful recovery, according to Dr. John Green regional economist. In his annual forecast, Green pointed to 3.0% Real GDP growth this year with the possibility of a negative quarter.

On a sobering note he indicated that the labor supply will exceed demand – at least until the last of the baby boomers retires (2029). Green also indicated that the computer revolution has decreased the need for certain occupations, which will maintain a high level of competitiveness in the job market.

Green was not particularly optimistic about the housing market. He felt the housing supply was too high, further price declines are possible, mortgage rates are expected to rise, and that problems within the financial/mortgage industry will remain a problem. Finally he expects inflation to higher in both 2011 and 2012.

Locally, Green’s economic model pointed to flat employment growth in Northern Colorado. He felt that a more likely scenario was for employment to recover slowly throughout 2011 and 2012. Growth will be led by agriculture, the biosciences, clean energy, retail and the hospitality sectors. (On a positive note, NPR recently reported that Vestas plans to add 60 employees at its Windsor facility and begin operations in Brighton in 2011. The Windsor facility has a workforce of about 700 workers).

The high levels of foreclosures will prevent the housing market from gaining momentum. In addition, Green reported that houses under $280,000 are moving whereas more expensive ones are not. On the commercial side, construction is likely to resume in late 2011 at the earliest. Lastly, the number of bankruptcies are on the rise in Northern Colorado.

The NCBR Economic Forecast was held on Jan 6, 2011 at the University of Northern Colorado campus and also featured Mark Snead, Vice President, Economist, and Branch Executive Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City – Denver Branch and Sandra Hagen Solin of The Capitol Solutions Team .

Health Care Adds 15% of Colorado Jobs in Past Two Decades

January 13, 2011May 31, 2014 horvath Leave a comment

In a state that regards its tourism and high tech cluster as primary drivers of the economy, it is somewhat surprising to note that the Health Care and Social Assistance (HCSA NAICS category) has accounted for 15% of net jobs added between 1991 and 2009. The sector has been recession proof, adding jobs every year during this period and it currently employs one-in-ten Colorado workers.

HCSA is divided into four distinct groups: hospitals, physicians, nursing homes, and social care. Physicians, or ambulatory care account for about 36% of total HCSA workers, followed by 29% at Colorado’s 90 hospitals.

Roughly 19% of workers are employed at nursing and residential care facilities with the remaining 16% in social assistance programs. The latter category includes service providers ranging from Head Start programs to commercial child care centers.

Population growth has been the driving force behind the steady expansion of the sector. Two of the four sectors are increasing at about the rate of population growth while the other half is expanding at a more rapid pace.

With continued population growth is on tap for the state over the next decade, increases in HCSA employment are likely to continue. Issues facing the sector include:
• Double-digit cost increases for health care coverage
• Change in the manner in which health care is distributed
• Increased emphasis on quality of service provided
• Changes in government health care policy
• Changing demographics
– Aging Baby Boomers
– Increased life expectancy
– Increasing number of minorities
– Rise in frequency of diseases, such as diabetes
– Increased number of lower income families
• Supply of nurses and dental hygienists
• Matching supply and demand for nurses and health care employees, particularly in rural areas
• Saturation of hospitals in some metropolitan areas
• Impact of efficiency gains on employment
• Continued population growth
• Increased demand for specialized medical care

While other sectors that have diminished in importance over time, that is not likely to happen for Health Care.

Colorado Legislative Council – State Economic Update December 2010

January 8, 2011May 31, 2014 horvath Leave a comment

The recovery of the Colorado economy continues to lag that of the nation, as evidenced in the December 20 release of Focus Colorado: Economic and Revenue Forecast , a quarterly publication of the Colorado Legislative Council . Many of the key economic indicators for the nation were revised upward while there were mixed results in the Colorado update.

The following discussion highlights revisions to key 2011 Colorado indicators:
• With Real GDP growth of 2.9% (U.S.),state employment will increase by 0.9%, slightly less than the September projection. This equates to 19,900 jobs.
• The most notable change is an increase in the 2011 unemployment rate. It was revised upward from 7.6% to 8.4% (Many economists in the state expect this rate to exceed 9.0% and possibly push past the national rate at some point this year).
• With more people on the payrolls, personal income is expected to post a modest increase of 3.1%.
• On the other hand Wage and Salary income will record a meager increase of 1.4%.
• Despite the increase in wages and personal income, projections for retail sales growth was revised downward from 3.1% to 2.5% (It should be noted that this rate of growth does not reflect changes associated with the tax reduction plan passed by Congress).
• On a positive note, the number of home permits was bumped up from 11,200 to 17,200. Continued subpar construction growth is projected beyond 2011 despite population increases in the range of 90,000 to 100,000 people per year.
• Finally, the projection for CPI growth remained at 1.9% for 2011; however, it is expected to ramp up by at least a point in 2012.

Positive factors not mentioned above include:
• Permitting in the oil and gas industry turned upward at the end of 2009 and have continued in that direction.
• While there is optimism within the industry about Colorado’s housing market, it is not yet reflected in the data. If it is any consolation, home prices are faring better in Denver than many other parts of the country.
• Foreclosures remain high, but they are on a downward path.

On the other side of the equation:
• Colorado’s financial sector is plagued with troubled mortgages.
• To illustrate that point, 27% of Colorado insured banks were not profitable at the end of September 2010. This compares to 20% nationwide.
• The state’s lending institutions have high exposure to troubled commercial real estate than other banks in most other states.

While there is good news in the most recent update, it should not be forgotten that the Lost Decade concluded with state employment at a level below the peak in 2001. Despite employment gains this year, it is likely that June 2001 peak employment will be reached again in 2012.

Impact of Tax Reduction Package on the U.S.

January 3, 2011May 31, 2014 horvath Leave a comment

Congress recently passed a tax cut package designed to stimulate consumption. Most economists believe it will have a positive impact on the economy. In the case of the Conference Board, they recently raised their forecast for 2011 Real GDP growth from 1.7% to 2.3% based on the projected impact of this tax package. At the other end up the spectrum, economists foresee an impact greater than 1.0% points which will push output growth above 3.5%.

The most significant portion of the package is the reduction in the Social Security payroll tax rate paid by employees. For 12 months, that percentage will be reduced from 6.2% to 4.2%.

The following is a quick-and-dirty look at the cost of this part of the program:
1. Approximately 89% of US covered employees pay social security taxes (130 million workers * 89% = 115.7 million workers).
2. Total covered wages for the workers who pay social security taxes is $5,566.3 billion.
3. The total amount of the reduction in taxes, or payment of benefits, is $111.3 billion (2% *$5.6 trillion).
4. Nationally this equates to a reduction of about $960 per worker per year or an average monthly benefit of about $80.

Previous tax stimulus programs disbursed payments in lump sums. As a result, recipients often used this distribution of funds to reduce debt or invest in savings.

Several factors will likely cause consumers to actually spend more of the current tax cuts. Because the monthly tax payments are spread over a year, the amount received each month is relatively small, approximately $80. Consumers will find it easier to justify spending this amount because the economy is in an expansion mode. In addition the equity markets have risen over the past year, which will give consumers the feeling that they are wealthier. In many cases, consumers have reduced their debt loads and boosted their savings, which will also makes it easier to rationalize spending all or most of the money received rather than saving it.

Given this rationale, it can be assumed that consumers will use 25%, or an average of $20 per person per month, of their tax reduction to increase savings or pay off debt. In other words, consumers will invest just under $28 billion to pay down debt or increase savings.

Likewise, they will spend approximately $83 billion to purchase goods or services. The portion that is used to purchase retail goods will also benefit some state and local governments through the collection of retail sales taxes. As mentioned earlier, the cost of the program is $111 billion and the payback through increased purchases is $83 billion. Time will tell whether this is a good investment.

Will employers treat this windfall to employees as a de facto pay increase and refrain from granting pay increases in a market that already favors the employer? Will this fiscal stimulus foster sustained economic growth or will it only have a short term impact on growth? How will this stimulus effort shape the discussion for the upcoming 2012 elections?

These and other questions will be answered over the next 18 months, when we can look back and see if this effort to bolster the economy really was a difference maker.