First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
Mahatma Gandhi

Job creation and economic development in Tucson (and many other cities) has historically revolved around a few well-worn strategies:

• offer tax breaks, free or cheap land, low taxes, and/or other economic incentives to lure businesses to our area;
• offer tax breaks, free or cheap land, low taxes, and/or other economic incentives to developers to build stuff;
• offer a new stadium with free or cheap rent and/or other economic incentives to lure spring training or other sports teams to our area;
• show pictures of cowboys and pretty sunsets and hope tourists will come;
• build a fancy convention hotel– on the taxpayers’ dime– to lure conventions to our area.

Luckily, the citizens stopped the fancy convention hotel plan last summer, but Tucson and Pima County have jumped on board and spent millions of dollars on these other strategies. And what have we got to show for it? A 23.4% poverty rate, high unemployment, a shrinking workforce, a rising home vacancy rate, home foreclosures in the thousands, and falling home values. Need I go on?

We need some new strategies. To this end Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) Tucson Chapter sponsored a panel discussion on job creation recently. Job Creation in Tucson: Building a Sustainable Future featured talks by Lisette DeMars of Local First Arizona, Melissa Black of the Green Chamber of Commerce, Joe Higgins of Arizona Small Business, and Jim Mize of Pima County employer outreach, plus local business owner Tim Carmichael of La Posada Solar Cogeneration Project.* Rep. Raul Grijalva was on hand to offer his perspective, and The Tucson Progressive gave an economic overview (above).

The focus of the evening was on growing and investing in local business– instead of throwing money and tax breaks to lure businesses here or offering Band-Aid solutions like cutting fees (which often lead to reduced governmental revenue and cuts in jobs and services).

Although the right-wing blog Tucson Choices dissed PDA’s local business focus and dismissed the group as a bunch of intellectuals– the Thinkers of Tucson (hey, thanks)– the evening was filled with creative ideas. Tucson Choices says that local politicians don’t have the time to come up with new ideas, so they listen to Tucson’s Thinkers. I hope they’re right.

To climb out of our current economic slump, Tucson needs to foster out-of-the-box ideas and invest in local innovation– rather than focus on being the low-wage call center capital of the country.

We have businesses that are born and raised in Tucson. They’re not going anywhere. Rather than chasing after the next IBM with tax breaks, the smart investment is to help local businesses grow by offering innovation grants. Instead of offering millions of dollars to lure a large company here, let’s take even 10% of that economic development money and fund local innovation. I’m not suggesting that we give Joe’s Machine Shop $5000 to move into a new building; I’m suggesting we give Joe $5000 – $50,000 to develop the next generation of electric motors. Now that’s business friendly.

In addition, Tucson economic development should play to our strengths. We have a research university and one of the country’s top hospitals– right here in the middle of town. The city should work with the UA and enable increased technology transfer. Research has shown that growing “eds and meds” does foster economic development, provides good-paying jobs, and is a better investment than convention hotels or sports teams.

The entire PDA event can be found on my You Tube channel.

* By the way, PDA invited TREO to join in the panel discussion, but they declined.

Informational tents erected by Connect the Dots, Progressive Democrats of America, Jobs with Justice, and political campaigns drew in many interested people.

Labor Day 2011 in Tucson was a blend of old fashioned games and old fashioned politics.

As a volunteer with the Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) booth, my job was to work the crowd and attach as many “Healthcare not Warfare” stickers to as many people as possible. This task afforded me the opportunity to engage in multiple conversations about universal healthcare, ending US military adventurism, and other political issues with dozens of people during the course of the day.

Two of the more extended and spirited discussions I had on Labor Day were with  Republican City Council candidate Jennifer Rawson and Republican Mayoral candidate Rick Grinnell. (I’m not sure if they were tag-teaming at the Labor Day event, but they passed by the PDA and Connect the Dots booths one right after another. Little did they know what they were stepping into.)

Rawson wandered by first, then Grinnell. They both accepted my “Healthcare not Warfare” stickers, and began to tell me who they were; but, of course, I already knew. I started my conversations with both of them with the same question:

If you are elected as a City Council person [or Mayor], how would you reduce the poverty rate in Tucson?

“Create jobs!” Rawson responded enthusiastically.

“How?” I asked.

At this juncture, Rawson shifted the topic from jobs and poverty to a story about a small business owner who received a bill for $5000 from the city for a light pole erected on her property. Boo hoo for the business owner was Rawson’s message. Of course, she didn’t offer anybackground information on this story– such as whether or not the small business owner has asked the city to erect the light pole on her property. Details, details. Instead she went off on the city and the fees…yada, yada, yada.

“Fix city government. It’s full of corruption. We really need to clean house!” was Grinnel’s answer to the poverty problem. (Well that didn’t answer my question at all. Ironically, when I checked Grinnell’s website today, I realized that he is on the Rio Nuevo Board… hmmm… city corruption… pot calling the kettle black?)

“So, do you want to know my ideas for creating jobs in Pima County?” I asked them both. Not allowing either of them to answer my rhetorical question, I launched into my ideas. I told them both that the Tucson Regional Economic Opportunities (better known as TREO) and the Metropolitan Tucson Convention and Visitors Bureau (MTCVB) were a waste of money because they have been ineffective in their strategies to boost the Tucson economy or create jobs. Here is what I told them…

TREO’s tactic– also employed by economic development groups in dozens of cities– is to chase large corporations and sports teams with tax breaks, free land, and taxpayer-funded facilities (ie, ball parks, industrial parks, convention centers, etc.) This strategy benefits businesses, for sure, but it is was not producing long-term, good jobs in Tucson (remember IBM? remember Wiser Lock? remember spring training?)– or anywhere else– because these companies and sports teams are not loyal to the location. They are just looking for the best deal, and the cities and politicians are so desperate to look successful at job creation that they break the bank with the deals they offer. (I didn’t realize when I was dissing chasing sports teams that Grinnell used to do just that!)

The way to grow jobs– and help small businesses– in Tucson isn’t to give tax breaks to relocating corporations or to excuse fees levied on existing business; it’s to invest in businesses that are “born and raised” in Tucson — like Gadabout, Bohemia, Patio Pools, Technicians for Sustainability, Nimbus Brewery, Thunder Canyon Brewery, eegees, etc. Instead of spending $1 million to bring in another call center or baseball team, why not offer 50 – 100 individual $10-20,000 low-cost loans or grants to different local businesses with innovative ideas or well-crafted business expansion plans? (I’m talking real plans– not just “Hey, if we give you a $5000 tax credit, could you maybe hire someone someday?”)

With a $20,000 investment, would Gadabout start a skin care line? Would Nimbus or Thunder Canyon improve expand distribution to other states or start a spin-off business? Would Technicians for Sustainability start manufacturing their own line of solar shingles? Would Bohemia start marketing local art on the Internet or open another store or reduce their consignment fee (thus helping local artists make more money)? Who knows? At any rate, investment– not giveaways– will grow businesses (and jobs) because it fosters innovation and expansion– not just increased profits for the business owner.

After promoting Local First and trashing TREO’s ineffective strategies, I moved on to MTCVB. Tucson has a vibrant arts and music scene. Our musicians and artists are every bit as talented as Austin’s or New Orleans’. Tucson also has great musical events– the blues festival, the folk festival, Club Crawl, HoCo Fest, just to name a few– and local music in clubs nightly, but you won’t learn about any of these attractions on the MTCVB website. It’s all mariachis, golf, swanky resorts, rodeo, baseball(?), the Gem Show, cacti, and sunsets. On the MTCVB website, the only art represented is David Dominguez Gallery, Tohono Chul Park, the Tucson Museum of Art, and the Open Studio Tour. Huh? No mention of Dinnerware, Raices, the warehouse district galleries, or the Central Tucson Gallery Association. MCTVB is promoting business– not Tucson and Tucson’s cultural, artistic, and musical assets.

TREO and MTCVB should be de-funded, and their missions and tactics re-tooled. Their strategies are not working; it’s time to think forward.

What is our shared vision for Tucson and how do we realize it? Grinnell and Rawson offered me canned Republican answers to my sincere question about jobs and poverty. Is continued Democratic Party rule the answer? I’m not so sure about that; the Democrats have perpetuated the inept policies of TREO/MTCVB. Stay tuned for more…

Teams representing different labor unions prepare to push a giant ball back and forth across the field. Is this game an analogy for the political struggle between local Democrats and Republicans?

Cold beer on a hot day. (Photo Credit: Green Living Network)

Tucson’s weather has been absolutely gorgeous lately, but we all know what’s coming in a few short months… summer!

One of the hallmarks of springtime in Tucson is the 4th Avenue Street Fair. Life is good when you can take a lazy stroll down 4th Ave. with a cold brewski in your hand.

Now a group of whiny bar-owners on 4th Ave. want to take that cold brewski from your sweaty hand, and they have solicited the help of “business friendly” Councilman Steve Kozachik to do it.

According an article in this week’s Tucson Weekly, some 4th Ave. bar owners– led by Scott Cummings who owns O’Malley’s on Fourth– want the Fourth Avenue Merchants’ Association (FAMA) to restrict or stop beer sales at the Street Fair.

As a small businessman, Cummings is a capitalist. Capitalists believe in the free market– right? Wrong. They only believe in competition on the free market when they’re making money. When there is a threat to their profits, they want government intervention or laws that restrict others from making profits.

Cummings, Jill Brammer (from Che’s), and the other whiny bar owners should man up like real capitalists and see the beer booths as a marketing opportunity– rather than competition that should be squashed by regulations.

What marketing advantages do the bars have over the beer booths? Here are some hints…

1. The beer booths generally sell crappy beer and have no variety. Most of the 4th Ave. bars go way beyond Budweiser and offer dozens of beers.
2. The beer booths sell only beer– leaving the wine and alcohol drinkers high and dry– or not high but definitely dry. (Of course, not all 4th Ave. bars have discovered wine yet; some have seriously poor wine selections.)
3. When you’re walking around the spring Street Fair, you can get hot, tired, and hungry. The bars have seats and air conditioning, and a few of them actually sell real food.
4. The music at the Street Fair can be spotty at best. Bars can hire some of Tucson’s best bands to attract customers inside. (A few years ago, Che’s had legendary Tucson bluesman Tom Whalbank playing there during the Street Fair. The place was packed.)

So, 4th Ave. bar owners, rather than look to government intervention or ask FAMA to change a Street Fair model that has been working for years– use a little marketing know-how to set your product apart. The question for Koz is: Which group of businesses are you going to be friendly to? Or what about if everyone involved decided to be consumer friendly? Consumers want choice, quality products, and a good price.

Raytheon– like so many other multi-national corporations– is trying to hold our local government hostage in exchange for corporate welfare. “Give us money, land, and tax breaks and rework your infrastructure to suit us, or we may hire workers elsewhere” is the mantra of corporations and major league sports teams who pit cities against each other to see who will give them the best deal– at the expense of the taxpayers.

And cash-strapped local and state governments trying to “do the right thing” fall for this scam all the time. Currently, our bankrupt state is considering offering million of dollars in tax breaks to unnamed corporations to move here, and now the cash-strapped county and city are considering offering millions to Raytheon and Diamond Ventures.

In Plan aims to assist Raytheon expansion, Arizona Daily Star reports that the county was “stung by Raytheon Missile Systems’ decision to build a new missile facility in Alabama instead of Tucson”, and that this is the reason it is considering going further into debt to help Raytheon expand here. Part of the expansion is $8 million for the purchase of land south of Raytheon– now owned by Diamond Ventures.

I know that the county is considering this in the name of keeping “good jobs” in Tucson, but frankly, this deal is just corporate welfare. According to the Star (quoted below), one of the reasons that Raytheon expanded in Alabama recently instead of here was that there wasn’t enough room physically to expand in Tucson.

Taxpayers need to help facilitate Raytheon’s expansion because one of the reasons Tucson lost out to Huntsville, Ala., for Raytheon’s new missile facility is that Raytheon didn’t have enough room at its south-side site here, [Pima County Administrator Chuck] Huckelberry said.

When it awarded the new facility to Huntsville – which will employ an estimated 300 workers at an annual average wage of $60,000 – in July, Tucson was a finalist. But the company said Tucson was bypassed because of limits to expansion at Raytheon’s current missile plant and a lack of development-ready alternative sites.

Richard A. Mendez, Raytheon’s director of facility management, told the City Council that Raytheon is confined in a box where it is now, which causes problems for the company and limits potential expansion.

If Don Diamond has $8 million worth of land south of the existing Raytheon plant for sale, that sounds like there is room for expansion. This issue is that Raytheon wanted it for free; perhaps you could call it another corporate bailout? Certainly, it is corporate welfare. (Another question is: Where is this land in relation to the TCE-contaminated land near Raytheon, and is it really worth $8 million? From the map on the EPA Superfund website, Diamond’s land is definitely close to the contamination– if not overlapping. What would Diamond do with this land — other than sell it to Raytheon or the Tucson International Airport? No one would want to live between those two noisy and environmentally messy neighbors. And, if Tucson funds the purchase of this land, who owns this wasteland in the middle of no where? The taxpayers or Raytheon?)

I have an alternate proposal for that $40 million. Give most of it– say $30 million– to The University of Arizona to create well-paying, clean, non-violent jobs in research and emerging technologies. The UAFoundation has mounds of data that show small donations that fund pilot research projects help UA scientists gather data to win large research grants. Grant funding and the spin-off businesses that often are created by new research findings provide good-paying jobs, often in emerging industries.

With the remaining $10 million, invest in local small businesses and help them expand. Small businesses created by local residents have an investment in Tucson; they’re not going to Huntsville, Alabama or China. (You’ll note in the Raytheon deal that there is no commitment to stay or expand in Tucson.)

Raytheon and Diamond Ventures should be weened off of the teet of the nanny state. Let them make their own deal without taxpayer funds greasing the wheels. Also, if Raytheon wants the county and city to rework the roads south of town, maybe they’d be willing to pay a bit more in corporate taxes. (I’m sure they’ve got some sort of sweetheart deal now.)

Wry Heat in his column today questioned the plans to rework Pima County’s roads on the south side (at taxpayer expense) to suit Raython and offered alternatives.

I question why Pima County would offer $40 million in corporate welfare to a highly profitable, multi-national corporation whose primary business is fueling violence worldwide. If the county and city want to grow the local economy and create new jobs, invest in research and education at the UA and in local businesses.

Tucson Tea Party– where are you on this? You railed against corporate welfare for the big banks and the auto companies. Where do you stand on using taxpayer funds for corporate welfare for the military-industrial complex? State Senator Frank Antenori, what about you?

IGT staffer Patrick Hartley facilitated the midtown community conversations with the help of intern Kiry Nelson.

Over the years, Tucson has had no lack of planning, but building consensus and getting projects off the ground has been an issue (1, 2, 3, 4).

Tucson’s newest planning effort is Imagine Greater Tucson (IGT). Announced in September 2010, IGT’s initial funding is through matching grants from the Federal Highway Administration and the Pima Association of Government. The grants fund a community planning and research phase which hopes to build consensus and plan for Greater Tucson’s future.

IGT is in the information-gathering phase. As such, they are holding “community conversations” all around the Tucson valley and gathering data through a web-based survey. To date approximately 200 people have participated in a community conversation, and about 600 have taken the online survey.

Last night’s community conversation was held at the Ward 6 office in midtown Tucson, but there are community conversations scheduled for Vail, Sauhuarita, Oro Valley, and the Tucson Foothills in the near future.

About 20 Tucsonans plus a handful of IGT staff and volunteers and representatives from the county participated. Several neighborhood leaders representing the El Rio, Garden District, Rincon Heights, Blenman-Elm, Palo Verde, Arroyo Chico, and Miramonte neighborhoods were present.

Attendees were split into 2 groups, and facilitators led brainstorming sessions and asked attendees what they valued about living in Tucson and what they would like to change.

As a bastion of liberal thinking in the Tucson, there was quite a bit of consensus  in our group. Using free-form conversation and large multi-color stickies, we identified 9 important areas of conversation: Transportation, Education, Political Culture, Built Environment, Economy, Creative Environment, Natural Environment, Outdoor Activities, and Cultural Diversity.

Green stickies represent things attendees value about Tucson, while the pink stickies identify areas to change. Above are stickies for environment, creative culture, and cultural diversity (mostly things we valued). Tucson's creative community (in the center) received universal support (all green).

Once all of the things we valued or wanted to change had been identified in each of these areas, the colored stickies gave a clear picture of our conversation. The group universally valued Tucson’s natural environment and climate (duh), the creative environment, the liberal values (remember we were in midtown), and the multicultural nature of Tucson. Also, universally, the group had many, many things they wanted to change in the areas of transportation, education , p0litical culture, built environment, and the economy.

There was general disgust for Arizona’s state government– saying they are out-of-touch with citizens. Attendees pointed to the disenfranchisement of Tucson voters who are represented by Democrats in the Republican-controlled Legislature. Particularly in the area of education (which had all pink/change stickies), the group said there was a dangerous disconnect between the citizens of Tucson who value education and voted for the sales tax to support education and the Arizona Legislature and Governor Jan Brewer who they fear will give away the money in tax cuts instead of funding the state’s future through support of K-12 and the university system. (Sure enough, there was a story in today’s Arizona Daily Star about tax cuts proposed by the governor. Doesn’t she know we’re broke?)

Also, vilified by the group was the greed of developers and land grabs by mini-dorm builders and the University of Arizona. The group lamented the loss of historic neighborhoods to build cheap student housing and buildings for University expansion. They pointed to empty lots, dilapidated apartment buildings, and sub-standard trailer parks that could be razed for multi-family or student housing– thus filling a need, eliminating blight, and preserving neighborhoods. There was an obvious love-hate relationship with the UA. The group valued education and innovation the University provides but didn’t like the University’s destruction of neighborhoods.

Rather than go into all of the details we discussed– sustainability, water supply, alternative forms of transportation, yada, yada, yada– I suggest you attend a community conversation or check out the raw data collected from the community conversations, which is on the IGT website.

The data gathering phase is projected to last through February 2011, followed by a planning phase (March – October 2011), and a concrete how-do-we-get-there phase (November 2011 – October 2012). I encourage all of you to get involved in this process by attending a community conversation, filling out the survey, volunteering, and/or donating to the cause. IGT will be using sophisticated descriptive data analysis and mapping software to analyse the data gathered.

Unlike the charter change process that brought us the failed Prop 401 initiative, IGT is not an initiative of the local corporatists from Southern Arizona Leadership Council.

Here are the stickies for political culture, built environment, education, and economy (mostly things we want to change). You'll note education (second from right) is all pink/change stickies.

Imaging Greater Tucson also is not to be confused with Imagine Tucson, which appears to be a campaign to encourage local business people to wear US flag pins that say “Imagine”.

Get involved. Let’s create consensus, stop the in-fighting about failed projects and niche issues, and build a future for our children and grandchildren. My new granddaughter was born on Monday, November 29. I want to leave her the legacy of a good education, clean environment, and a stable economy– not the mess we have now. How about YOU?

Earlier this year, Ariana Huffington and other liberals started a nationwide campaign urging Americans to move their money from mega-banks like Citibank and Bank of America to local banks and credit unions. Quoting my original Move your money, pay cash, and buy local article:

Frustrated Americans are bankrolling bank bailouts and funding bonus checks for CEOs with poor performance appraisals, but what can we do about it? How can we voice our anger and frustration? The federal government thinks these banks are “too big to fail.”

Arianna Huffington and her cohorts have given us a way to demonstrate our frustrations. If these non-performing banks are “too big to fail,” make them smaller by moving our money out. The Move Your Money campaign began in December 2009 and has taken off through social media and the Internet.

Last summer, the Democratically-controlled Congress passed financial reform legislation, which prevents banks from fleecing us with exorbitant fees, ends debit card transaction fees,  and adds regulations to prevent the  ”too-big-to-fail” bank scenario, which destroyed our economy and prompted President George Bush and his administration to bail them out in 2008. This financial reform was just the tip of the iceberg on what could be done to create some laws that will prevent Wall Street gamblers wreaking havoc on our economy– again.

Since some of their fees have now been capped, mega-banks are coming up with other ways to steal our money. Here is an excerpt from today’s Arizona Daily Star. [Emphasis added.]

The days when you could walk into a bank branch and open an account with no charges and no strings attached appear to be over. Now you have to jump through some hoops – keep a high balance, use direct deposit or swipe your debit card several times a month.

One new account at Bank of America charges $8.95 per month if you want to bank with a teller or get a paper statement.

Almost all of the largest U.S. banks are either already making free checking much more difficult to get or expected to do so soon, with fees on even basic banking services.

It’s happening because a raft of new laws enacted in the past year, including the financial overhaul package, have led to an acute shrinking of revenue for the banks. So they are scraping together money however they can.

Bank of America, which does business with half the households in America, [move your money, people!] announced a dramatic shift Tuesday in how it does business with customers. One key change: Free checking, a mainstay of American banking in recent years, will be nearly unheard of.

“I’ve seen more regulation in last 30 months than in last 30 years,” said Robert Hammer, CEO of RK Hammer, a bank advisory firm. “The bottom line for banks is shifting enormously, swiftly and deeply, and they’re not going to sit by twiddling their thumbs. They’re going to change.”

In the last year, lawmakers in Washington have passed a range of new laws aimed at protecting bank customers from harsh fees, like the $35 charged to some Bank of America customers who overdrew their account by buying something small like a Starbucks latte.

These and other fees were extremely lucrative. According to financial services firm Sandler O’Neill, they made up 12 percent of Bank of America’s revenue. On Tuesday, the bank took a $10.4 billion charge to its third-quarter earnings because the new regulations limit fees the bank can collect when retailers accept debit cards.

Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan acknowledged in a conference call that overdraft fees were generating a lot of income. But the bank was also losing customers who were often taken aback by the high hidden fees. [Duh.]

Boo hoo, such a sad story from the CEO of Bank of America. Maybe he could have a yard sale or get a second job or retire and enjoy his multi-million dollar, golden-parachute bonus.

I urge you all to move your money (preferably to a credit union), pay cash, and buy local. These big corporations aren’t doing us any favors. In fact, they’re flooding this election with cash (thanks to the Roberts Court) in order to keep Republican puppets– like John “savings-and-loan-crisis” McCain in office– and bring in others like him.

For more stories about big money and the growing wealth disparity in the US, check out these posts.
The ramifications of wealth disparity: Robert Reich gets it

US corporations post ‘near-historic’ profits, as poverty and joblessness increase: Now what?

Big money could bring the end of life as we know it

We want those 8 million jobs back

Arizona residents are literally up in arms over the Arizona Legislature’s passage of SB1070. Protest rallies have continued throughout the week, and more are planned for today and this weekend in Tucson and Phoenix.

The New York Times, The Arizona Republic (not exactly the bastion of liberal thinking), Arizona Congressman Raul Grijalva, Stephen Colbert, and now President Obama have all come out against this legislation which would require Arizona law enforcement officers to ask people for proof of citizenship during legal contacts. If they don’t have proof of citizenship on their person, they are presumed to be illegal.

Saturday, April 24, is Governor Jan Brewer’s deadline. If she doesn’t sign by then, it will become law without her signature. The Derechos Humanos website announced that she will sign the bill Friday morning– while they protest outside.

Will this legislation have the dire economic and social consequences predicted by The Arizona Republic and others? Only time will tell.

This article originally appeared in my Progressive Examiner column. Click on the link and see the video of students chained to the state capitol building.

>Frustrated Americans are bankrolling bank bailouts and funding bonus checks for CEOs with poor performance appraisals, but what can we do about it? How can we voice our anger and frustration? The federal government thinks these banks are “too big to fail.”

Arianna Huffington and her cohorts have given us a way to demonstrate our frustrations. If these non-performing banks are “too big to fail,” make them smaller by moving our money out. The Move Your Money campaign began in December 2009 and has taken off through social media and the Internet. At least two Examiners have encouraged their audiences in Newark and LA to move their money.

For Tucson, I’d encourage people to not only move their money to sound local banks or credit unions but also to buy local and pay cash. These three simple strategies can help us invest in our community and our local businesses.

More money stays in your community if you bank locally and buy locally. The Local First movement has been progressing across the country, with chapters in many state and cities. Yes, Tucson has Starbucks, Target, Safeway, and national chain retail stores, but we also has Epic Cafe, Yikes Toys, several farmers’ markets, and Bohemia. Shopping and dining locally makes economic sense. The Local First Tucson website lists locally owned businesses in every service category. Forty-five cents of every dollar you spend stays in Arizona, when you buy from Arizona businesses.

Pay cash is my third piece of advice. Why pay cash? Because it costs you and the retailer money when you pay with a debit or credit card. Retailers pay 2-5% of the purchase price to the card company when you use a VISA, MasterCard, American Express or other debit or credit card. Two percent of a $10 purchase is only 20 cents. Multiply 2% by millions of transactions each day across the world, and you realize that card companies are making truckloads of money– even before they start charging you interest, annual fees, late fees, or ATM fees for the convenience of using cards. Check out the New York Times video that opened my eyes the insane amounts of money that are being made by cards companies– particularly VISA, the industry leader. Cards are much more convenient than checks or cash, but we are paying dearly for that convenience.

How do we survive in tough economic times and still foster growth locally? Pull money out of those free-loading banks that are “too big to fail”, cancel the credit cards with those mega-banks, and open up an account with a local community bank or credit union. Buy local, pay cash, and live within your means.

This article originally appeared in my Progressive Examiner column.