Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Governor Longley's Architects Of Transformation
12-10-2014, 08:43 PM
Post: #1
Governor Longley's Architects Of Transformation
]John M Daigle, Perry Hudson, Philip W. Hussey, Jr, James L Moody, Sr, P.Andrews Bixon, Rand N.Stowell, Jr Reccomendation to Jame's B Longley, Governor of Maine in the year 1976


John M Daigle was president of Casco Bank Trust Co and Casco Northern Corporation. Perry Hudson was the general manager of New England Telephone. Phillip W Hussey, Jr, owner of Hussey Seating Company. P. Andrews Nixon was the head of the largest distributor of residential heating fuel in New England and the operator of the Dead River chain of 20 c-stores in New England. Rand N Stowel Junior was the CEO, President of United Timber Corp, a family owned forest products company with multiple subsidiaries including wood products manufacturing, saw milling operations and extensive timberlands making it one of Maine's larger businesses. In later years Stowel formed the Predictive Control Systems LLC. In 2001 Stowel was sued by his partner in Predictive Contril Systems for back pay. It would be interesting to apply the reasoning presented by Stowel's legal defense concerning the "corporate veil" to the formation of the the Maine Development Corporation & Maine Capital Corporation and the relationship of those corporations to the use the profit motive of private investors (see below) - but that is for a later post.

I am wondering if James L Moody Sr is actually intended to say James L Moody Jr:


Quote:Moody(Jr), the son of a 1929 Bates alumna who taught school in Gorham, came to Bates hoping to be a teacher, but left eager to join the business world. In 1959, Moody joined Maine based Hannaford Bros. Co. and rose rapidly through the ranks. He served 19 years as chief executive officer and five years as board chairman before retiring fully in 1997. Under Moody, Hannaford grew from a small Maine wholesaler to a $2.9-billion regional grocery retailer.. http://www.bates.edu/news/2001/01/11/moo...essorship/

Ironically, while (assuming Moody Jr was meant), the CEO of Hannaford Brothers was an architect of the new centrally managed economy of Maine, Today the entire retail sector, including Hannaford, are excluded as beneficiaries of the Maine Corporation's wealth redistribution system. In 2014, Governor Lepage's failed jobs bill of was intended for businesses hiring 1500 employees, but excluded the retail sector.

Quote:Transformational business expansion project. "Transformational business expansion project" means the construction, development, rehabilitation, expansion, modernization or acquisition of any building, structure, system, machinery, equipment or facility in a military redevelopment zone, as defined in Title 30-A, section 5250-I, subsection 11-A, that has a projected cost of $50,000,000 or more and the operation of which is projected to result in a net gain of at least 1,500 job opportunities. "Transformational business expansion project" does not include an electric rate stabilization project, as defined in Title 10, section 963-A, subsection 7-A, or a project primarily involved in the provision of housing or retail sales to consumers.

Title 10, section 963-A, subsection 7-A 11-A. Military redevelopment zone. "Military redevelopment zone" means a specified area within a municipality that is contained within a labor market that includes a military facility that sustained a loss of 400 or more employed workers, if the loss was caused by a federal military facility closure or downsizing, during the 5-year period immediately preceding the time of application for designation as a military redevelopment zone, or is projected to sustain a loss of 400 or more employed workers during the 5-year period immediately following the time of application, and has been designated by the commissioner as a military redevelopment zone under section 5250-J, subsection 3-A.
[ 2009, c. 461, §7 (AMD) .]

In other words Governor Lepage's failed jobs bill of 2014 was intended exclusively for the development of the tax payer subsidized city states- or what ever it is that one calls a municipality that serves as an instrumentality of the state- located at former military bases- i.e., the two towns go by the names of the Lorring Development and the Mid-Coast Regional Redevelopment Authority- municipalities, which, unlike other municipalities have their economic development subsidized by state and federal taxpayers- AND - within those two municipalities, economic development of the retail sector is excluded from the benefits of taxpayer wealth redistribution. Hannaford is one of Maine's businesses that currently hires more than 1500 employees but it is unlikely that Hannaford employees earn "above average incomes" and so Hannaford would also be excluded from the state's wealth redistribution policies on that score as well.

To note that in 1976 the Task Force on Economic Development targeted small to medium sized businesses. In 2014 LePage's jobs bill targeted big businesses to which Pine Tree Zone style exemptions would be extended. With the new legislature, I expect to see this bill tried again. Maybe this time around the Maine media will actually report on what is in it, including the fact that it is not intended to benefit the whole economy of Maine- just the economy of the tax payer subsidized municipalities that serve as instrumentalities of the state- call them what you will- city state's - or- the courts of the Kingdom of Maine Inc!

So the 1976 Governor's Task Force were the heads of Maine's Corporate Industries-they who were making recommendations for legislation to the Maine legislature, but unlike the legislature and the Governor, the heads of corporate culture do not take an oath to uphold the Maine Constitution and their recommendations are quite blatantly conspiring to get around the Maine Constitution. The intent to charter corporations by special act of legislation is so clearly stated, that one has to wonder if the task force was even cognizant about what is in the Maine Constitution as they took on the lofty role of advising the legislature on legislation that ought to be passed.


I have received the statute for the Maine Capital Corporation. The following is a quote from the now repealed statute"
Quote:This impediment to the development and expansion of viable Maine businesses
affects all the people of Maine adversely and is one factor resulting
in existing conditions of unemployment, underemployment, low per capita
income and resource underutilization. By restraining economic development, it sustains burdensome pressures on State Government to provide services to those citizens who are unable to provide for themselves. (emphasis mine)

To help correct this situation, it is appropriate to use the profit motive of
private investors
to achieve additional economic development in the State.

This can be accomplished by establishing an investment corporation to provide equity capital for Maine businesses and by establishing limited taxcredits for investors in the corporation to encourage the formation and use of private capital for the critical public purpose of maintaining and strengthening the state's economy.

Well it's a good thing they implemented that- otherwise we might have huge general welfare in this state on top of the huge corporate welfare system needed to sustain Maine's centrally managed economy. The architects of Maine's transformation justified their moves by saying they would save the state money by relieving the state of the burden of providing assistance to the most unfortunate at the bottom of the economic scale. The architects solution for this burden created a new taxpayer burden in support of a system which has aggressively expanded into a corporate welfare system for the upper end of the economy - for those creating jobs providing higher than average incomes. Those citizens who are currently unable to provide for themselves are not likely to find an opportunity in the upper end jobs market- far more likely they might get a foothold on improving their own circumstances by finding a job in the retail sector and other opportunities existing below the upper end of the scale. The burden of both welfare system lands on the middle class - the backbone of a free enterprise system, which promotes opportunities at all levels of the economy for those with individual will and motivation to improve their own circumstances through the application of their own talent and skills.

The language used begs for analysis:

Quote:"It is 'appropriate' to use the profit motive of private investors to achieve additional economic development in the state?"

Is not that already being done and who should know that better that the leaders of private industry in the state of Maine? The profit motive has always been the motivating force of economic development and any economic development which occurs is always "additional economic development". No one can argue the truth of such a statement on its own merits

Quote:syntactic
/sɪnˈtæktɪk/
adjective
1.
Also synˈtactical. relating to or determined by syntax
2.
(logic, linguistics) describable wholly with respect to the grammatical structure of an expression or the rules of well-formedness of a formal system


Quote:Adjectives and Adverbs

Definitions
An adjective is a word or set of words that modifies (i.e., describes) a noun or pronoun. Adjectives may come before the word they modify.
The word "appropriate" is used as a modifier in the first sentence. It does not grammatically apply to the paragraph which follows that sentence which is advocating that the recommended way to use the profit motive of private investors to create additional economic development is to appropriate the use of the taxation system to increase the profit of private investors:
This can be accomplished by establishing an investment corporation to provide equity capital for Maine businesses and by establishing limited tax-credits for investors in the corporation to encourage the formation and use of private capital for the critical public purpose of maintaining and strengthening the state's economy.

Interesting line of reasoning - the tax credit will benefit the profit motives of private investments and this serves a public purpose- but the public has no direct share in the profits. The public purpose is defined collectively as "economic development" - the private profit motive is defined as pertaining to special interests.

The statute establishing the Maine Capital Corporation

This raises another Constitutional question-one pertaining to the power of taxation: The heads of industry are recommending the use of tax credits to benefit the profit motives of private investors- as noted previously- a special contingency which has not sworn loyalty to the Maine Constitution is advising those who have taken such an oath.


Quote:
Article IX.General Provisions.

Section 9. Power of taxation. The Legislature shall never, in any manner, suspend or surrender the power of taxation.

Does a tax credit fall under the definition of suspending or surrendering the power of taxation, especially under the contemporary system in which there is a large network of government by tzars in the form of un-elected boards and administrators of the corporations chartered by special act of legislation?

The architects of Maine's transformation were the leaders of Maine's corporate culture- the biggest and most powerful businesses in the state. Corporate culture is essentially a collectivist culture, while Maine a state once fostered a myth of rugged individualism - now long gone history.

During the election season, LePage went into attack mode against general welfare as he stood on a record of hot pursuit of radically expanding corporate welfare! One can't blame a politician for following the ques. The public is made well aware of general welfare but kept in the dark about the extent of corporate welfare. The media has implemented general welfare as a political talking point, while while preserving the veil that keeps corporate welfare hidden from the public. This is the same media which didn't even comment on the fact that Lepage's jobs bill was for the benefit of the state governed municipalities (legally local governments) only! The city states are separate islands within Maine with bills being developed exclusively for their benefit but paid for by the rest of Maine! It is parsed politically as a "public purpose (read collective) of maintaining and strengthening the state's economy." but the resources all go to strengthening the economy of those state governed municipalities only (once again to special interests). Something is seriously wrong with this picture.

The solution designed by the architects of transformations in the 1970's has become a system that benefits the upper end of the economy only- as if ONLY jobs that provide an income level higher than average for the community in which it resides spur economic growth but this simply is not true. If a business establishes employment at any level, it spurs economic growth but it is seldom the upper end jobs that provide solutions for those currently unable to provide for themselves- pursuant to the justification given by the faction of the economy represented by heads of industry for transforming a free enterprise system into a corporate state. Clearly the solution did not work as the number of people on general welfare has only increased since the free enterprise system was transformed into state corporatism.

[Image: Hegemony.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Contact Us | My Site | Return to Top | Return to Content | Lite (Archive) Mode | RSS Syndication