Minnesota vs. North Dakota, investors edition

DFL politicians love talking up Minnesota. Increasingly, investors are taking a different view of Minnesota. For quite some time, actually, investors prefer North Dakota over Minnesota. For example, Shark Tank's Kevin O'Leary spent time in North Dakota. O'Leary's team was in Fargo. O'Leary's "team have partnered with North Dakota to invest $45 million into early-stage companies. 'I was amazed at how much interest there was because everybody is beginning to realize there are certain states that we call no-go states. And there are go-to states. And North Dakota is emerging as a go-to state,' said O’Leary."

O'Leary isn't interested in hostile takeovers. That's evidenced by him saying "We’re in this for the long run. And we think that there is a lot more money interested in coming here, but primarily for the competition of states." By contrast, Minnesota's government model isn't built around attracting investors. Minnesota is mostly interested in growing government and raising taxes.

Here's how O'Leary sees things:

O’Leary believes North Dakota has been underinvested. According to O’Leary, that’s because people have not thought about the competition between the states. "You got to think since the 1950s, almost 90% of venture capital went to either Massachusetts or California," said O’Leary.

O’Leary now doesn’t consider those two states investable because of their unstable policies and taxes. However, in North Dakota, O’Leary sees potential. "The more time I spend here the more I see opportunity. So, my job is to tell the story of the state and the story of the policy and the story of the tax strategy here," said O’Leary.

According to O’Leary, North Dakota offers a stable policy and a competitive tax environment for investors and entrepreneurs. "Capital always pursues the path of least resistance. It needs stability," said O’Leary.

The difference between Minnesota and North Dakota, according to O'Leary, is policy:

O'Leary: I'm here in Fargo, a few yards away, Minnesota, a town called Moorhead. Twenty-five years ago, both towns had 50,000 people in them. Now, I don't want to get into politics. I want to get into policy. You've got policy in Minnesota. You've got policy in North Dakota. Twenty-five years later, look at Fargo -- a quarter of a million people, second largest Microsoft campus in the country, massive biotech, pharma businesses, ag-tech, you name it -- arts, massive education infrastructure, wildly successful. Go across the bridge, the place looks like Cuba. There's only 30,000 people living in Moorhead now. It's a wasteland. What's the difference? Policy.

In Minnesota, the DFL says all you need is a great education system. This year, the DFL will undoubtedly spend billions more dollars on whatever Education Minnesota tells them to spend on. The achievement gap will increase. Most likely, more people will leave Minnesota than move into Minnesota.

Meanwhile, North Dakota will grow in population because they have a well-run state with a business-friendly attitude. DFL politicians will spin this but the facts speak for themselves. Fargo is a boom-town. Moorhead is shrinking. People are voting with their mortgages. It's that simple.