There is enough Mansfield guys here for our on thread.
What's your take on the schools threat to eliminate sports?

There is enough Mansfield guys here for our on thread.
What's your take on the schools threat to eliminate sports?

Technically, not a threat. On the other hand, it was conveniently timed with the Selectmen/School Board/Finance Committee meeting last night.

The school can't sacrifice significantly more teachers and they saw that last year, when they did fire a lot of teachers, people in the town weren't outraged because the direct effects on their kids wasn't obvious. Fortunately, stimulus money came in from the state to hire some teachers back.

On the other hand, this will immediately and directly affect the residents kids. It also affects many parent's source for "after school child care". So this is the school's way of saying "hey, we've done all we can with the budget we've been provided. They're your kids, it's your money, you decide."

In my opinion, there's a huge budget gap that needs to be closed. The town doesn't want to fire many more teachers. After school sports and arts programs are elective. Schools are expected to but aren't required to have them. If the residents want a service, they're going to have to pay for it. If they don't want to pay for it (which I feel is an acceptable opinion to have), then they won't get the service.

Several other towns have fee based sports. I think they will change to that policy.

It is not a large amount in the entire budget, so I also believe it is the scare tactic yet again.
bringing the class size up to 32 thats huge.

And turn those damn lights off!!!

And turn those damn lights off!!!

Please tell me you're talking about the stadium lights for the practice field??

Sometimes I'd be driving home at 11pm and see the stadium lights on. Those drove me absolutely insane:fury::fury:

Looks like there should be a Mansfield fling!

BTW - where is Mansfield?

50 teachers have been let go in the last two years, others have been added.

The school system had a 14% increase last year (stimulas money. oh sh$t, we don't get that every year), They pushed off the hard choices thanks to Obama, now we start to see some of the cost of stimulas.

The town employees were asked last year to move to State pension plans, a move that would have saved the town big bucks. They refused.

The town hired a new Athletic Director just last week. Do these people have any clue.

NO to an overide.

Looks like there should be a Mansfield fling!

BTW - where is Mansfield?

18 miles to the right of Cambridge:)

I live and moved to Mansfield because they have good schools, I have young kids. I can understand that there has been a bubble of kids moving through teh schools which has added costs, but we also added Mansfield Commons and Covidien into the town tax pool. they dont send kids to school. I cant understand how that hasnt added lots of $$$ into the town? I can tell you that many of my neighbors are wondering why they would continue to live here if the schools go downwhil, I am one of them.

Please tell me you're talking about the stadium lights for the practice field??

Sometimes I'd be driving home at 11pm and see the stadium lights on. Those drove me absolutely insane:fury::fury:

Yeah dem lights.

And, Buckman has it right.

and thats why we're at SMCS and then Xvarian

Mansfield...call the bluff and refuse any tax increases. If you let tax increases go through, you'll never get it back. But...the economy will improve eventually. Tax increases are never short term solutions.

Stay out of Easton!

Oh yeah

Mansfield...call the bluff and refuse any tax increases. If you let tax increases go through, you'll never get it back. But...the economy will improve eventually. Tax increases are never short term solutions.

The tax increase would legally only be for this year. Prop 2 1/2 limits helps protect the residents in that aspect.

The selectmen need to accept the request from the schools for an override. Then the selectmen would have to vote to present that information to the town for the town to vote on at a special meeting with an open hearing.

At a ton of these meetings, Mansfield Crossing was discussed and voted on. One of the sales to the town was the estimated $1 million in added revenue to the town. What they left out was the requirement to add a handful of police, fire and other town personnel/services - all for a single shopping center. From what I hear, that the added personnel ate up over 3/4s of the money and that's just what was reported.

I've had a theory about this town for the last year. The town government had so much money coming in from Great Woods, an industrial park that was packed full and the revenue that was gained through permitting and taxes from all the new home construction that they didn't have to be wise with their money. The town got two new ambulances, couple new fire engines, expanded high school, redesigned bus pickup/drop-off for grades 6-12 and 4 or 5 repavings of Pratt St between Hope and Franklin St.

There was so much money coming in that they could spend, spend spend and with that, huge areas of waste developed along with massive areas of bloat. Now, that there's significantly less money coming it and a huge bubble of students entering the middle and high schools, they don't know where to gather the funds.

It's absolutely ridiculous that with so many different revenue streams that the town is consistently facing so much hardship. Add in that piece of crap Town Manager that they finally fired and the current state of the town is the result.
:fury::fury:

I agree completely agree with Buckman, No Override and vote them out.

There was so much money coming in that they could spend, spend spend and with that, huge areas of waste developed along with massive areas of bloat. Now, that there's significantly less money coming it and a huge bubble of students entering the middle and high schools, they don't know where to gather the funds.

It's absolutely ridiculous that with so many different revenue streams that the town is consistently facing so much hardship. Add in that piece of crap Town Manager that they finally fired and the current state of the town is the result.
:fury::fury:


You hit the nail on the head here. Because of it's location and good school systems, Mansfield became a place where families wanted to live. The town grew too much too fast, and as a result the schools and infrastructures in the town had to be made bigger to accomodate the influx of people. When the commercial tax revenue decreased, the town lost a ton of money it had counted on. It will come back eventually, though. Just be wary of anyone who tells you the tax increase will only last a year. While it may be true, they'll find another way to get your money. They'll value your property higher or something else.

In Easton our budget is in good shape, but they still somehow raised my property tax in 2009. I can't figure that one out. We may end up going through the same thing as Mansfield in a couple of years. They voted to build a 124 unit 40B apartment complex in town in a historic building and the developer won't have to pay taxes for 5 years on the property (not including the 2 years while it's being built). That's going to be a lot of people being added to schools, etc... without revenue from taxes. After 5 years, it's going to be converted into condos with 20% being kept as 40B housing.

Mansfield is wack.

A big part of the problem is the forced "low income" apartments we had to have per state mandate. The project on West Street alone is killing us. These people add nothing to the tax base and have alot of children. 28% of our population is in school.

A big part of the problem is the forced "low income" apartments we had to have per state mandate. The project on West Street alone is killing us. These people add nothing to the tax base and have alot of children. 28% of our population is in school.


We had to take those to continue to get state matching funding for what portions of our budget?

These people add nothing to the tax base and have alot of children. 28% of our population is in school.

Now if they would just relax the Mortgage requirements for these people so they could buy a house.....Oh, Wait...that didn't work very well before either. :hihi:

Now if they would just relax the Mortgage requirements for these people so they could buy a house.....Oh, Wait...that didn't work very well before either. :hihi:

:rotf2:

A big part of the problem is the forced "low income" apartments we had to have per state mandate. The project on West Street alone is killing us. These people add nothing to the tax base and have alot of children. 28% of our population is in school.

Everyone forgets the strange coincidence of the increased drug problems and crime after the Mansfield Depot was built. Lots of trash came into town with that place.

Everyone forgets the strange coincidence of the increased drug problems and crime after the Mansfield Depot was built. Lots of trash came into town with that place.

Lots of fights I remember that, my wife has experienced overflow from Fridays inside LLBEAN!!

mansfield selectman transfer 890K from various funds to the school budget.

Mansfield will transfer funds to save school sports - The Boston Globe (http://www.boston.com/sports/schools/articles/2010/04/17/mansfield_will_transfer_funds_to_save_school_sport s/)

okay, now the selectman will put the override on the table? Magic money.

mansfield selectman transfer 890K from various funds to the school budget.

Mansfield will transfer funds to save school sports - The Boston Globe (http://www.boston.com/sports/schools/articles/2010/04/17/mansfield_will_transfer_funds_to_save_school_sport s/)

okay, now the selectman will put the override on the table? Magic money.

"In return, the committee will remove a property tax override vote from next month’s Town Meeting agenda."

Like I've been saying and as Miller was quoted, this is only a band-aid. The town keeps putting these band-aids on problems, yet it'll be an issue again next year - or the areas where they "transferred" funds from will be at contention next year. They've basically decided that instead of dealing with the PR backlash, they'll take funds away from areas that won't cause as much long-lasting, bad publicity for them come election time.

Hope we don't get too much snow next year or there will be a whole lot of snow days for the kids.

"In return, the committee will remove a property tax override vote from next month’s Town Meeting agenda."

Like I've been saying and as Miller was quoted, this is only a band-aid. The town keeps putting these band-aids on problems, yet it'll be an issue again next year - or the areas where they "transferred" funds from will be at contention next year. They've basically decided that instead of dealing with the PR backlash, they'll take funds away from areas that won't cause as much long-lasting, bad publicity for them come election time.

Hope we don't get too much snow next year or there will be a whole lot of snow days for the kids.

What they are looking for is about 1.5 million in somewhat painless concessions from the teachers union and town employees. either that or a lot of them will lose their jobs. Kind of a no-brainer.

What they are looking for is about 1.5 million in somewhat painless concessions from the teachers union and town employees. either that or a lot of them will lose their jobs. Kind of a no-brainer.

Doubling their health insurance contribution and taking a one year freeze on wages is far from painless.

Doubling their health insurance contribution and taking a one year freeze on wages is far from painless.

Is is when your job is on the line. Like the rest of us:uhuh:

Is is when your job is on the line. Like the rest of us:uhuh:

Necessary and painless are two separate things. I haven't taken a paycheck at work in almost 3 weeks because it's been necessary... it has been anything but painless though.

It's just another downfall of unions having a lock on public schools. The senior teachers continue to vote against anything that might affect them personally knowing that they have nothing to fear and can't be fired. Just think of how much the quality of school systems would increase if teachers that had been there for 15 years still had to worry about performance reviews - currently, they're all but invincible as long as they don't sleep with their students.

Just another reason why, when I have kids, they'll be going to private school.

Necessary and painless are two separate things. I haven't taken a paycheck at work in almost 3 weeks because it's been necessary... it has been anything but painless though.

It's just another downfall of unions having a lock on public schools. The senior teachers continue to vote against anything that might affect them personally knowing that they have nothing to fear and can't be fired. Just think of how much the quality of school systems would increase if teachers that had been there for 15 years still had to worry about performance reviews - currently, they're all but invincible as long as they don't sleep with their students.

Just another reason why, when I have kids, they'll be going to private school.

You said it JD, couldn't agree more. My kids are done and are now in college. I'm still paying almost $6500 a year in taxes. Somebody besides me is taking the hit this time. It may be selfish but I'm tapped out. Sports will survive or our propery values will drop. I don't care if they do, but the town should.

Necessary and painless are two separate things. I haven't taken a paycheck at work in almost 3 weeks because it's been necessary... it has been anything but painless though.

It's just another downfall of unions having a lock on public schools. The senior teachers continue to vote against anything that might affect them personally knowing that they have nothing to fear and can't be fired. Just think of how much the quality of school systems would increase if teachers that had been there for 15 years still had to worry about performance reviews - currently, they're all but invincible as long as they don't sleep with their students.

Just another reason why, when I have kids, they'll be going to private school.

Mine already are, and if I could somewhere where I could get credit for that cost I would

And unfunded pensions and benefits in the private sector is killin us all

even Howie saw the scam

Mansfield pulls the same old spring tax scam - BostonHerald.com (http://www.bostonherald.com/news/columnists/view.bg?articleid=1248050)

Everyone forgets the strange coincidence of the increased drug problems and crime after the Mansfield Depot was built. Lots of trash came into town with that place.

Bwaaaah.
You could buy craploads of drugs downtown long before the depot was even thought of.

"What they are looking for is about 1.5 million in somewhat painless concessions from the teachers union and town employees. either that or a lot of them will lose their jobs. Kind of a no-brainer."

From a public employee perspective. Why should public employees shoulder the financial burden for the whole community? They teach your kids, provide public safety, repair your streets....all things demanded by the "general public"; yet the general public doesn't want to pay for it....just ask your town employees to take the hit. How many of you would voluntarily reduce your pay, give back negotiated contract provisions and health benefits , take a furlough, etc. if your employer promised to give the $$ savings to your town?

"What they are looking for is about 1.5 million in somewhat painless concessions from the teachers union and town employees. either that or a lot of them will lose their jobs. Kind of a no-brainer."

From a public employee perspective. Why should public employees shoulder the financial burden for the whole community? They teach your kids, provide public safety, repair your streets....all things demanded by the "general public"; yet the general public doesn't want to pay for it....just ask your town employees to take the hit. How many of you would voluntarily reduce your pay, give back negotiated contract provisions and health benefits , take a furlough, etc. if your employer promised to give the $$ savings to your town?

There are many instances of private sector businesses that ask for and get concessions from employees in order to survive. Private sector employees are probably more vulnerable in this respect because their companies can actually go out of business, whereas municipalities don't depend on profitable income, but the taxes imposed on the private sector. So long as there is a private sector to tax, the public sector will exist.

Bwaaaah.
You could buy craploads of drugs downtown long before the depot was even thought of.

I'm sure you're right. The difference was the people supplying the drugs. A whole different "culture" came into town with the Depot. And there is no denying the correlation of the Depot and increased crime along with residual trash that came into the schools.

I'm sure you're right. The difference was the people supplying the drugs. A whole different "culture" came into town with the Depot. And there is no denying the correlation of the Depot and increased crime along with residual trash that came into the schools.

When you say the Depot you mean the Section 8 apt complex

I'm sure you're right. The difference was the people supplying the drugs. A whole different "culture" came into town with the Depot. And there is no denying the correlation of the Depot and increased crime along with residual trash that came into the schools.

So tell me, which 'culture' is this?
Trash is trash man, no matter what 'culture' its from. Get over blaming one 'culture' over another.

There are many instances of private sector businesses that ask for and get concessions from employees in order to survive. Private sector employees are probably more vulnerable in this respect because their companies can actually go out of business, whereas municipalities don't depend on profitable income, but the taxes imposed on the private sector. So long as there is a private sector to tax, the public sector will exist.

Totally agree with your 1st point DB; things are tough for "everyone"...including municipal employee's. A couple of points to consider in your private sector arguement. The "widget co." sells a bunch of widgets to consumers, makes a profit & hires a few employees. Things are lookin good...until the widget market dries up, then with less "demand", less $$ is coming in and something has to give. Maybe it's the co. or the employees that take the hit, regardless it's the reduced demand for the product that causes the problem and it's not really feasible to pass the costs on to the consumer due to decreased demand.
The situation for municipal government isn't the same; generally the demand for services increases, especially in a growing community (Mansfield?) that sees lots of residential development...more kids in schools, more roads to plow, etc. Municipal gov.is not a "profit making" enterprise, it's business is to provide public services at cost. The revenue coming into municipalities is severly impacted by the economy; less state aid coming in & reduced RE tax revenues due to delinquencies resulting from the poor economy, etc. However, municipalities are required by law to submit a balanced budget every year, so with 2 1/2 limitations and reduced revenues there are only so many options. Municipal governments responsibility is to operate as efficiently as possible while meeting the needs of residents, but beyond that when costs exceed revenues who should pay. It's either cut services, make public employees absorb the losses or everyone pays their fair share. Having just gone through the "budget battle" I can tell you that fat in municipal budgets is a thing of the past and the projections for the next fiscal year are worse. If you knew how many municipalities are close to "going out of business" you'd be shocked. It's time for tough "responsible" decisions on everyones part...I'm just glad I drive a 4WD truck and my kid is out of school!

So tell me, which 'culture' is this?
Trash is trash man, no matter what 'culture' its from. Get over blaming one 'culture' over another.

It's not a racial thing, if you're implying that. A bit of that 'big city' attitude came to town along with the completion of those projects - increased crime, increased drugs.

Open up the Mansfield News to the police blotter and half the reports are from that area (if you were to discount events at the Comcast Center). I'd love to see a heat map with a distribution of crime in the town.

I do not intend to make this a racial issue all. As you said, trash is trash.

Totally agree with your 1st point DB; things are tough for "everyone"...including municipal employee's. A couple of points to consider in your private sector arguement. The "widget co." sells a bunch of widgets to consumers, makes a profit & hires a few employees. Things are lookin good...until the widget market dries up, then with less "demand", less $$ is coming in and something has to give. Maybe it's the co. or the employees that take the hit, regardless it's the reduced demand for the product that causes the problem and it's not really feasible to pass the costs on to the consumer due to decreased demand.

Reduced demand is one scenario. The private business offers a specific product for which demand wanes. The business must cut back or fold. The Public sector, as it grows to a complex offering of services, can impose "demands" which not every tax payer wants, needs, agrees with, or ever uses. Once upon a time it was illegal for public sector employees to strike. That was tested when friendly judges were in place, and voila, what was clearly illegal magically became OK. Public sector unions were formed and the ills that plagued the private sector and brought industries to their knees, now filtered into government. Services, especially for those who don't support them through tax donations, became a "demand" in plush times when they seemed affordable, and, voila, that which is encouraged, grows.

Another scenario is the effect of competition in the private sector. Private companies can suffer not only from the loss of demand, but from the inability to compete. The public sector is a monopoly and can dictate not only what is "demanded", but the quality and price. This often leads to not only providing services that the majority of taxpayers don't use, but to providing services at reduced efficiency and quality, and, since there is no alternative, at higher costs. It is a sorry phenomenon that government employees are now on aggregate at the high end in salaries and benefits for similar work.

The situation for municipal government isn't the same; generally the demand for services increases, especially in a growing community (Mansfield?) that sees lots of residential development...more kids in schools, more roads to plow, etc.

If the demand increases due to a growing community of tax-payers, which also includes more jobs and businesses to accomodate them, there should be enough money to cover costs due to the greater influx of revenue. Of course, if the growth is of the non-tax-contributing kind, and if "demands" were created for services to such growth, you have the reverse of private sector solution. You do pass the cost of your loss of revenue to the paying customer and call it his fair share.

Municipal gov.is not a "profit making" enterprise, it's business is to provide public services at cost. The revenue coming into municipalities is severly impacted by the economy; less state aid coming in & reduced RE tax revenues due to delinquencies resulting from the poor economy, etc. However, municipalities are required by law to submit a balanced budget every year, so with 2 1/2 limitations and reduced revenues there are only so many options. Municipal governments responsibility is to operate as efficiently as possible while meeting the needs of residents, but beyond that when costs exceed revenues who should pay. It's either cut services, make public employees absorb the losses or everyone pays their fair share. Having just gone through the "budget battle" I can tell you that fat in municipal budgets is a thing of the past and the projections for the next fiscal year are worse. If you knew how many municipalities are close to "going out of business" you'd be shocked. It's time for tough "responsible" decisions on everyones part...I'm just glad I drive a 4WD truck and my kid is out of school!

So is the answer to pass the higher "costs" (public employee rising pay and benefits) to a dwindling tax base? Is the fair share solely the responsibility of tax payers to see their take home pay reduced so that public employees don't have to suffer that fate?

It's not a racial thing, if you're implying that. A bit of that 'big city' attitude came to town along with the completion of those projects - increased crime, increased drugs.

You mean the same attitude that was there 15 years ago from the wannabes? Same people, same stupid attitude, same run like hell when they realize you don't back down. :rotf2:

Open up the Mansfield News to the police blotter and half the reports are from that area (if you were to discount events at the Comcast Center). I'd love to see a heat map with a distribution of crime in the town.

I do not intend to make this a racial issue all. As you said, trash is trash.

And the other half are where? The middle of town where they've always been.

Open up the Norton paper. Where's all the drug busts? The Glen. Been that way for 20+ years. Norton just learned to keep the undesirables over on the OTHER side of town. :hihi:

So is the answer to pass the higher "costs" (public employee rising pay and benefits) to a dwindling tax base? Is the fair share solely the responsibility of tax payers to see their take home pay reduced so that public employees don't have to suffer that fate?

First, your perception of the current municipal finance situation in most communities is not based on the reality currently on the ground. As you may have surmised, I work in municipal gov't in one of the largest S.S. communities and have daily interaction with most of the surrounding communities. Here's a summary of the "public employee rising pay & benefits" we've had in the past few years...no COLA for 5 years running, increase in our H.C.plan costs, change in our H.C.plan to the state GIC program (to save the community/residents $), increase in our new GIC plan cost twice in 6 months, furloughs ranging from 1/3 weeks and layoffs in the coming year in virtually every dept. I think we've done our part, yet every week we hear the same BS you're preaching .
Just like the private employer, residents (the "ultimate" boss) must decide their priorities. If the employer wants to keep making wigets the costs of running a business must be paid, and decisions must be made on the best way to keep the business running. If residents want to maintain "their" level of services, costs have to be paid or decisions have to be made. If residents feel that they're not getting what they pay for, I agree with you, the changes have to come from the employee side; but if the service provided is good the only fair solution is to share the hit across the board. As I said before, governments job is to provided services "to you" as efficiently as it can, beyond that you only get what you pay for. You want to pay your employees $15 an hr.....you get $15 an hr. employees....and before long the widgets will be made in China and when you call your city clerks office you'll be speaking long distance to someone with an Indian accent.

what if I don't want all the 'services'?
or to continue to pay benefits for life for those that have worked there, and which are unfunded at time of agreement?

And your analogy about widgets is the way the private sector works.
This state has lost almost 17,000 IT jobs in locally run businesses, guess where they went? Actually the hiring 'over there' was almost triple
40-50K new jobs. My raises over the last 5 years hasn't even matched your COLA , I have had my pay cut twice and yes I've had to take furloughs, actually extended ones with no benefits or income.

Come join the 'private sector' you'll see the real world.

First, your perception of the current municipal finance situation in most communities is not based on the reality currently on the ground. As you may have surmised, I work in municipal gov't in one of the largest S.S. communities and have daily interaction with most of the surrounding communities. Here's a summary of the "public employee rising pay & benefits" we've had in the past few years...no COLA for 5 years running, increase in our H.C.plan costs, change in our H.C.plan to the state GIC program (to save the community/residents $), increase in our new GIC plan cost twice in 6 months, furloughs ranging from 1/3 weeks and layoffs in the coming year in virtually every dept. I think we've done our part, yet every week we hear the same BS you're preaching .

[COLOR="navy"]Your community may be different, but here are some reports from the Bureau of Labor Statistics as of December 2009:

Comparison of State and Local benefits to that of the private sector between 2001 and 2009:

The public sector bennies rose 4 times as much as in the private sector, especially since 2004.

As of December of 2009 the cost of Health Care is:
$4.45/hour for the public sector
$3.19/hour for the private sector

Cost for retirement"
$3.19/hour for the public sector
.92 cents/hour for the private sector

Average combined wage packages:
$39.83/hour for public sector ($26.24 in wages/$13.60 in bennies)
$27.49/hour for private sec. ($19.95 wages/$8.05 bennies)

Percent of increase in employer costs between 2000 & 2009:
State & Local--9.8% increase in costs
Private sector--6.9% increas in costs

Average employment rate between 2007-2009
Government--3% avg. unemployment
Private--7.9% (more than twice Govt.)

Just like the private employer, residents (the "ultimate" boss) must decide their priorities. If the employer wants to keep making wigets the costs of running a business must be paid, and decisions must be made on the best way to keep the business running. If residents want to maintain "their" level of services, costs have to be paid or decisions have to be made. If residents feel that they're not getting what they pay for, I agree with you, the changes have to come from the employee side; but if the service provided is good the only fair solution is to share the hit across the board. As I said before, governments job is to provided services "to you" as efficiently as it can, beyond that you only get what you pay for. You want to pay your employees $15 an hr.....you get $15 an hr. employees....and before long the widgets will be made in China and when you call your city clerks office you'll be speaking long distance to someone with an Indian accent.

I was also a municipal employee. So I can sympathize. But I never felt comfortable knowing that I made more money than most of those that paid my salary. Before our division was unionized, we actually were paid closer to a par with the average private employee. But we had far greater security. With unionization, we were transformed from service orientation to labor intensiveness. Our contracts became about our compensation and bennies, not about how we served the public. The rest of the city was unionized shortly before, and we all became about us, and what was once a great city became, between the ravaging of the auto and other industries and the city government, a model of total failure. Detroitified.

After retirement, I work part-time at a local golf course so that I can play for free. It is owned by the city, but is contracted to a private Golf Co. The city could not, because of the cost of its union labor, profitably run the course. It had deteriorated to a cow path. The private co. has managed to make it a golfing jewel and make a small profit.

So, now, yes, tough decisions have to be made. Yes, municipal bankruptcies are imminent. If tough decisions are made, rather than constant, inflationary and debt loading Federal Govt. bailouts, we may slowly return to some sustainable level. If not, in the words of Louis XV--apres moi, le deluge.

what if I don't want all the 'services'?
or to continue to pay benefits for life for those that have worked there, and which are unfunded at time of agreement?

And your analogy about widgets is the way the private sector works.
This state has lost almost 17,000 IT jobs in locally run businesses, guess where they went? Actually the hiring 'over there' was almost triple
40-50K new jobs. My raises over the last 5 years hasn't even matched your COLA , I have had my pay cut twice and yes I've had to take furloughs, actually extended ones with no benefits or income.

Come join the 'private sector' you'll see the real world.

3/4 of those IT jobs were in Burlington. Half of them went out of business or were bought and shipped offshore. The execs got rich and the workers lost jobs.

TI is long gone from the industrial park, hell they sold the Attleboro campus years ago.

3/4 of those IT jobs were in Burlington. Half of them went out of business or were bought and shipped offshore. The execs got rich and the workers lost jobs.

TI is long gone from the industrial park, hell they sold the Attleboro campus years ago.

tell me about it, silicon valley east is in Bangalore now

In all the commotion regarding the big banks and Wall Street the fact that they have moved thousands of jobs off shore never gets any play. Yet the management were paid a large bonus on the "improved results" which partially came from moving jobs overseas. When the bailout came I was hoping that there would be some noise about having a commitment to bring some of that back to the US I guess it is too small an issue in the scheme of things. The bank I used to work at had well over a thousand employees in Bangalore and if you talk to the senior it people they would tell you they savings were insignificant but nobody wanted to tell the emperor that he had no clothes.

In all the commotion regarding the big banks and Wall Street the fact that they have moved thousands of jobs off shore never gets any play. Yet the management were paid a large bonus on the "improved results" which partially came from moving jobs overseas. When the bailout came I was hoping that there would be some noise about having a commitment to bring some of that back to the US I guess it is too small an issue in the scheme of things. The bank I used to work at had well over a thousand employees in Bangalore and if you talk to the senior it people they would tell you they savings were insignificant but nobody wanted to tell the emperor that he had no clothes.

Mosh - please answer the following for me -
You have $10,000 to invest and want to put it into the banking sector. Bank A is locally owned and operated, employees only a US workforce, is not technolgy focused and doesnt offer a lot of innovative ideas but it is relatively profitable and stable.
Bank B is aggressive, and is looking to lead the sector, invests in new technology and is all about cutting costs, do more with less. They outsource tons of work but have the latest and greatest products and technology. As an investor where would you put your money?

People need to realize the goal of a business is to make money, period. they have no social, political or economic obligations. They only have legal obligations and obligations to their shareowners.Ex - the goal of the Boston red Sox is to make money, period. If it became profitable to lose baseball games, they would do all they could to lose them. They have no obligation to anyone but their owners.

As to which company to invest in I think it is governed by what your risk expectations are.
That is not your question though which I believe is whether a company has some greater obligation to factors other than the highest return to its shareholders. Even if you took the strict view that the company's obligation is to return the maximum value to shareholders there would still be some limit on the company's activities. For example, saving money by using a cheaper but potentially more faulty brake system design may make more money for an auto company short term but long term may hurt the company's long term profits as customer may avoid their cars. Does management have a greater duty to the short term holder over the longer term investor? Moving jobs to the third world may save salary expenses short term but in a politically unsettled third world could be more risky and lead to greater costs in the long run. While the bank is free to move those jobs off shore my point was that (i) the rationale (money savings) seemed flawed based on the conversations I had with some of our IT people and (2) the government was in a strong position after the bail out to wrangle from these banks some type of commitment to maintain employment in the US and did not do so. That was an opportunity lost.