Press "Enter" to skip to content

Merry Christmas from California! Happy New Year from the Netherlands!

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! says First District Development Company of Watertown:

Holiday card from First District Development Company in Watertown, produced by California-based Shutterfly, December 2013.
Holiday card from First District Development Company in Watertown, produced by California-based Shutterfly, December 2013.

FDDC's ordered its cards from Shutterfly, based in California. Probably just a courtesy purchase, trying to encourage Shutterfly to move to South Dakota's Rising Star.

Also sending holiday greetings for a bright and prosperous 2014 (because they sure don't want us to think about what they were up to in 2013 and before) is the Governor's Office of Economic Development...

Holiday card from South Dakota Governor's Office of Economic Development, produced by Netherlands-based Vistaprint, December 2013.
Holiday card from South Dakota Governor's Office of Economic Development, produced by Netherlands-based Vistaprint, December 2013.

...which orders its cards from Vistaprint, which is based in the Netherlands.

Funny: I thought GOED wasn't killing the "Made in South Dakota" program until the end of this month.

South Dakota law requires state purchasing agencies to pick resident bidders over non-resident bidders, but only when price, quality, and other aspects of the goods or services sought from the different bidders are equal.

Wait a minute: Joop Bollen is Dutch. Could it be...?

14 Comments

  1. Rorschach 2013.12.27

    Smart shoppers know that they don't have to pay sales tax when they order online from a company without a brick and mortar SD presence. (Another inequity Congress hasn't corrected.)

  2. Testor15 2013.12.27

    It's interesting these agencies are buying from mailing list compilers. When you buy their services, they add you and all the names to their databases to in turn sell the data to anyone with a dime to spare.

    They now have the names and addresses of the very 'marks' good or bad of the agencies. What a bunch of dumbos. They have sold out their bosses and themselves for a cheap holiday card. If our investigators had any moxie, they would be buying the lists from these two online companies to see what they have been up to. Thanks to Ronnie Reagan, the Feds have the ability to buy electronic data and lists. We don't need no courts, we just need a credit card!

  3. grudznick 2013.12.27

    I have a question, Ms. Tyler. Why in the world are state departments sending holiday cards at all? You need to stop this waste and abomination of an insult. State departments should not be sending out greeting cards or wasting time shopping for the no matter where they buy them.

  4. Kathy Tyler 2013.12.27

    That's a really good question! I wonder what money was used to pay for them???

  5. grudznick 2013.12.27

    I'm not a fan of religious holidays, Mr. H. And Obama did not send me a card, so I thank him for that I guess.

  6. caheidelberger Post author | 2013.12.27

    Jenny! Good link! Shutterfly brings 330 jobs now, maybe 1000 total... but ah, Minnesota still plays the incentive game, with a state loan of $1M and the city abating its taxes.

  7. Deb Geelsdottir 2013.12.27

    Yes, Shakopee put a lot of time, money and effort into grabbing Shutterfly. Other, lower tax states, put together pretty good deals too. Shutterfly is not immune to MN's "high taxes." But they also have MN's infrastructure, kept in decent shape with our "high taxes". And a good educational system, paid for with our "high taxes." Many more benefits of "high taxes."

  8. grudznick 2013.12.27

    I'm glad you are happy there, Ms. Geelsdottir. And, you can go to the medieval fair with your puppy in an outfit every weekend!

  9. Deb Geelsdottir 2013.12.27

    I've never been to the Renaissance Festival. Maybe sometime because it's probably fun. But $30+/- is more entry fee than I've been willing to spend. BTW, no dog, a cat-Fuzz Butt and a dwarf hamster- Gina Lollabridgida.

    Wouldn't it be nice if SD taxes covered some of those infrastructure, education, etc., that are major enticements to businesses? But that's not the SD way.

    [Sarcasm on] I can see why they wouldn't want to increase taxes or add a progressive income tax. Look how well that bottom-of-the-barrel strategy is working for the average SD citizen! [Sarcasm off.]

  10. Douglas Wiken 2013.12.27

    " (Another inequity Congress hasn't corrected.)"

    It is no inequity, it is a feature of the US Constitution designed to prevent the border taxes between states that crippled the economy under the Articles of Confederation.

    If there is to be any kind of tax on distant transactions, it should be a federal tax with 90% refunded to states only on the basis of population so that huge databases would not required if every person and seller had to tax and be taxes on the basis of state and local taxes in a particular area and at a particular rate depending on article. The desire for any kind of state consortia to do this is the desire for incredibly intrusive state bureaucracies holding all kinds of information for years and with databases also requiring continuous updating to be correct.

    Correcting a non-constitutional seller's inequity with a barrage of state inequities for buyers is a stupid idea. Brick and mortor stores can compete...if they actually compete. Charging two or three times as much for the same articles or not even stocking them, is not competing.

    The whining is unseemly and unwarranted.

  11. Jim 2013.12.28

    Mr. Grudz, didn't you have a thing with Gina Lollabridgida back in the day?

Comments are closed.