Humorous quotes about the ill effects of taxes abound, but just try to find one about the benefits of government spending or public employment. We also seldom see data-driven measures of public program benefits in the media, but let’s see if we can remedy that by assessing the economic impact of both private and public employment on economic output, using data from a variety of sources.
Property taxes are rising, taking a bigger bite out of household incomes than ever before, and local public spending is out of control—right? Well, maybe…at least that seems to be the view of many Connecticut taxpayers. But is the perception accurate? The only way to really tell is to take a hard look at the numbers.
Under federal and state laws, including Connecticut’s, property connected with illegal activity can be forfeited to the government. A key purpose of forfeiture is to penalize wrongdoing and thereby discourage unlawful behavior. Seized assets also provide a significant revenue source for state, local and federal governments which, among other things, help fund law enforcement initiatives. But this revenue-raising potential also raises the risk of distorting law enforcement activities to maximize the proceeds at the expense of other law enforcement objectives. Though the risk of such distortions exists in all states, it is apparently lower in Connecticut than elsewhere.
H aving worked on the front lines of economic development in Connecticut for 20 years, I can vouch for the challenge of marketing our state to business executives. That’s because Connecticut today lacks a compelling value proposition. Without one, it’s tough to differentiate our state from its competitors, especially those in the Northeast.
