Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
With the amount of subsidies Cleveland would have given to Amazon and the lack of forward-thinking local leadership, I don't think our existing population would benefit, ...
And the lack of visionary leadership is exactly why Cleveland isn't competitive for these kinds of bids, anyway. ...
With due respect, I have to disagree... completely.
First, the presumptive aim of such corporate relocations/expansions isn't necessarily to provide good jobs for the existing populace, but to attract prime talent from around the globe. Where would the absolute best - the one percent of the one percent of the one percent, who are on track to become billionaires, to be the great and enduring household names in investment, in commerce, in science and technology, in the arts, in literature, architecture, medicine and so forth - people who have the money and the passion and the opportunity to live anywhere on earth - where would they want to live? I'm talking about the high school kid who represented the United States at the international mathematics Olympiad, winning a gold medal... and who then goes on to get his PhD in math at Stanford, at age 21, proving a theorem that has eluded mathematicians for 300 years... the Karl Gauss of our day. How to lure this kid away from his NYC hedge-fund job, where he earns the equivalent of $20M/year advising HSBC (an English bank) in London on quantitative finance? Easy: you offer him an even more lucrative and prestigious job in NYC.
Second, while good local government is assuredly helpful, there's little that good government can do to overcome the impositions of geography, climate and culture. No amount of wise leadership in Cleveland can move the city to an ocean coast. There are just some factors that can't be overcome, however honest, intelligent, ambitious and innovative our leaders happen to be.
Third, there's the Matthew effect: prosperous and appealing cities just keep getting even more prosperous and appealing, while every other place settles further and further into stagnation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bjimmy24
Going along with Urban Peasant's assessment, I do think it's time to stop pitching a low cost of living as a plus. It kinda does come off a bit loser-ish. Continuing the job interview analogy, it's kinda like going to an interview and instead of talking about your skills and background, you say "I'll do this job for 10k cheaper than anyone else!"
Here's another peasant with the same view, but for different reasons.
Low COL almost invariably means muted long-term increase in real-estate prices. Investment-oriented high-earners care about opportunity costs, not monthly expenses. It makes perfect sense to buy a five-million-dollar 700 ft^2 condo in Manhattan, if that condo will appreciate to $10M in a decade. It makes no sense to buy a $150K 2000 ft^2 house on a 1-acre lot in the Midwest, if that house will still be $150K in a decade.
Going along with Urban Peasant's assessment, I do think it's time to stop pitching a low cost of living as a plus. It kinda does come off a bit loser-ish. Continuing the job interview analogy, it's kinda like going to an interview and instead of talking about your skills and background, you say "I'll do this job for 10k cheaper than anyone else!"
I think COL discussions should be framed more along the lines of "family friendly prices" or something like that.
I don't agree with this as Cleveland's amenities are far superior to other cities with a similar cost of living in the U.S. Salaries for national talent aren't much different. Cleveland corporations do perhaps have to pay a weather premium for those with adverse perceptions of Cleveland winters, or those who want to live closer to magnificent outdoor attractions.
BTW, I've had several friends move to Colorado to be closer to the skiing, hiking, etc. The numbers of friends moving to CO actually compare to those whom I have known who moved to Florida. The only complaint of those moving to CO is the dry, brown (not green) climate. I know one westerner who returned to the East in the early summer and who said, and not jokingly, that all of the greenness hurt her eyes.
Also, owning or purchasing property in coastal cities in coming years may be akin to playing a high-stakes game of musical chairs called "When to Get Out."
Now here's my "Cassandra prediction."
I watched the New York City episode of the PBS series "Sinking Cities." It had some great information, but the episode was actually very inadequate as there was no discussion of even the accelerating rate of sea level rise let alone that the problem isn't "Sinking" as much as inundation. I was surprised to learn that NYC already is in the process of building a 15-foot sea wall around Manhattan!
Then I thought of the work of Harold Wanless, chairman of the geological sciences department at the Univ. of Miami and an expert on sea level rise. He says the RATE of global sea level rise is doubling every 7-8 years. He expects at a minimum 15 feet of sea level rise in southern Florida by 2100, but notes that it could be much, much more if the doubling continues unchecked. Wanless is focused on accelerating ice melt, especially in Greenland. Here's the thing to me: a respected scientist says that based on the empirical data set the sea level rise rate is doubling every 7-8 years. This should be easily verifiable, and, if Wanless is correct, we should be in crisis mode. We are not, but don't think that the "smart" money, which IMO doesn't include Trump, isn't already on top of this issue.
Now consider the recent U.N. climate change panel report which noted its already apocalyptic projections didn't include any negative feedback loops!!! IMO, one of the scariest negative feedback loops is the triggering of a massively vicious methane feedback loop, resulting from the thawing an release of the earth's massive stores of frozen methane. See post 26 in this thread.
There are indications that this vicious methane feedback loop already is underway. The NYC 15-foot sea wall may be entirely inadequate. NYC perhaps should be building coastal dikes with ocean locks, much as exist in the Netherlands. The PBS episode well explained, examining Hurricane Sandy and other historic NYC hurricanes, that protection already is needed against hurricane storm surges not even considering future sea level rise.
Having been professionally involved in real estate, I've seen massive increases in real estate prices in reaction to changes in base inputs, such as in Denver which suffered an energy bust and boom cycle in the late 20th century. My expectation is that Cleveland at some point in the next 20 years will experience a real estate price boom that is unimaginable due to mounting cognizance of the consequences of fossil fuel consumption on the world's environment. It's not just the worries over actual inundation, and the ongoing loss of beaches, coral reefs, etc., it's the sheer cost of dealing with these consequences amid likely plummeting tax bases and revenues.
What will be the reaction when PBS airs the Miami episode of its "Sinking Cities" series on Nov. 21? Compared to the problems facing Miami, with porous, soluble, limestone base rock, NYC might as well be located, say in Ohio.
Anyway, my thoughts. I likely won't be around to see if I'm right, but I wouldn't be surprised to see increased interest in Cleveland and other Great Lakes cities among sophisticated investors in the coming decade. Also, consider that Cleveland winters are expected to become less severe with each passing year, even as the environment in southern locations become hotter and even more humid. Note that Wanless discusses the slowing of the Gulf Stream, which removes great amounts of heat from the tropics around Florida....
With due respect, I have to disagree... completely.
First, the presumptive aim of such corporate relocations/expansions isn't necessarily to provide good jobs for the existing populace, but to attract prime talent from around the globe.
Then I don't care about them. I couldn't give less of a damn about the future of one person or a handful of people with extreme access when our actual, existing population faces serious problems that need to be addressed first. If the city was functioning properly on a fundamental level, it would have a climate suitable to organically grow this type of talent. There's no context in which these types of great minds can be adequately served by a place that also has a 13% infant mortality rate.
If a company isn't going to be directly benefiting the population then we shouldn't be subsidizing it with public resources. The benefits don't trickle down unless there is a significant slate of community benefit agreements. However, there aren't any CBAs when the entirety of civic leadership would do anything to land the bid. Companies like Amazon depend on that imbalance of bargaining power.
Prime global talent will improve conditions for people who already have resources and are connected, to some degree, to global networks. Obviously that is good for those demographics, but it isn't addressing the root causes of why certain cities such as Cleveland need such significant investment and how a huge portion of the population has been systematically removed from these networks over generations. Unless you just replace everyone and turn the city into someone else's city, these schemes don't have any real merit. Any Amazon-type situation is just going to be an exacerbated version of the disconnect we see between places like the Clinic and the surrounding neighborhood with no access.
Then some of us "expatriates" have to ask that uncomfortable question. Why won't we move back to Cleveland? I don't ever see myself moving back to Akron. Don't get me wrong my days in Akron and Dayton shaped who I am but I doubt I'll ever move back to Ohio. Life is so much better for me than when I was there. The opportunities were so much better to come across, relative to my education, or lack of it. I can see why a lot of Ohioans are down here. Its just easier in a lot of ways; expensive yes but money is not everything.
No hate on Cleveland but why would you expect some company to do something you're not willing to do yourself?
Cleveland did not have the resources to play that game that other cities competing for the headquarters had. Simple as that. We wanted to see the headquarters located in Hampton Roads but I can almost guarantee that our pitch was about as embarrassing, if not more, than what Cleveland offered. And Cleveland is an established name, an established brand, whereas cities down here not so much because it is primarily people in or fans of the military that know about this place.
With due respect, I have to disagree... completely.
First, the presumptive aim of such corporate relocations/expansions isn't necessarily to provide good jobs for the existing populace, but to attract prime talent from around the globe. Where would the absolute best - the one percent of the one percent of the one percent, who are on track to become billionaires, to be the great and enduring household names in investment, in commerce, in science and technology, in the arts, in literature, architecture, medicine and so forth - people who have the money and the passion and the opportunity to live anywhere on earth - where would they want to live? I'm talking about the high school kid who represented the United States at the international mathematics Olympiad, winning a gold medal... and who then goes on to get his PhD in math at Stanford, at age 21, proving a theorem that has eluded mathematicians for 300 years... the Karl Gauss of our day. How to lure this kid away from his NYC hedge-fund job, where he earns the equivalent of $20M/year advising HSBC (an English bank) in London on quantitative finance? Easy: you offer him an even more lucrative and prestigious job in NYC.
Second, while good local government is assuredly helpful, there's little that good government can do to overcome the impositions of geography, climate and culture. No amount of wise leadership in Cleveland can move the city to an ocean coast. There are just some factors that can't be overcome, however honest, intelligent, ambitious and innovative our leaders happen to be.
Third, there's the Matthew effect: prosperous and appealing cities just keep getting even more prosperous and appealing, while every other place settles further and further into stagnation.
Here's another peasant with the same view, but for different reasons.
Low COL almost invariably means muted long-term increase in real-estate prices. Investment-oriented high-earners care about opportunity costs, not monthly expenses. It makes perfect sense to buy a five-million-dollar 700 ft^2 condo in Manhattan, if that condo will appreciate to $10M in a decade. It makes no sense to buy a $150K 2000 ft^2 house on a 1-acre lot in the Midwest, if that house will still be $150K in a decade.
Again, I think the whole idea of competing with these elite cities is silly. The gap between elite cities and the rest has widened so far that the battle is lost. Amazon never seriously considered CLE or a majority of other cities on the list. You articulate why that is so.
I guess my question is, does CLE need to attract the 1%? Should CLE seek to foster a booming real estate market? Should CLE strive to become an elite city?
I'd say it shouldn't, even if it could. We didn't move here from the Bay Area because we were seeking amazing returns or a plush lifestyle. We moved here BECAUSE low COL and the relative normalcy that surrounds that. The whole idea of using your primary residence as an investment vehicle doesn't exist anymore but for the privileged few anyway. So I wouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water and disregard low COL as a value point. Especially, in today's market.
I'm sure we are not alone in thinking a nice home on an acre near a major city in the Midwest for less-than 250k offers a far better QOL than a tiny little shoebox in SF, NYC, etc. for greater-than 500k. Different priorities.
I also don't see weather as a major disadvantage. Sure, California has some great weather. NYC doesn't. Texas doesn't. DC... meh. Denver and Seattle... meh. Chicago and Minneapolis have arguably worse weather than CLE. People who think Arizona and Florida have great weather are crazy in my eyes. So to me, unless you're talking about coastal California, it's really a wash. Mountains and the Ocean... now those are undisputed.
I just don't think CLE solves its problem by figuring out ways to attract swaths of outsiders. Much less a bunch of 1%'s. CLE solves its problems through good old conversation and collaboration. The problem is too many folks are silo'd in their own little in-group (race, industry, private/public, side of town, suburb/city, etc) to do that effectively. There is too much infighting and division.
I guess the real question is... is attracting global, mega-corporations the only way we can envision building a "strong economy"?
EDIT: I'm also not worried or concerned about natives who moved away and can't envision ever moving back. Like... great, you found a happy place. Stay there. I also can't ever imagine moving back to the Bay Area.
I guess the real question is... is attracting global, mega-corporations the only way we can envision building a "strong economy"?
No.
Take the long view. Be the best city it can be. The authenticity is a big appeal. So even if Cleveland does not become that city in my lifetime that is okay. It wasn't that city when I was born anyway, the cities height was before a lot of us were ever considered.
The rest will follow. Only places in the Midwest people are talking about in that same breath are Chicago, maybe Columbus. People love Detroit for the low COL. Not sure how long they can expect that low COL if the city rebuilds. Not sure how long people can realistically expect it in Cleveland. It costs money to rebuild.
Then some of us "expatriates" have to ask that uncomfortable question. Why won't we move back to Cleveland? I don't ever see myself moving back to Akron. Don't get me wrong my days in Akron and Dayton shaped who I am but I doubt I'll ever move back to Ohio. Life is so much better for me than when I was there. The opportunities were so much better to come across, relative to my education, or lack of it. I can see why a lot of Ohioans are down here. Its just easier in a lot of ways; expensive yes but money is not everything.
No hate on Cleveland but why would you expect some company to do something you're not willing to do yourself?
Cleveland did not have the resources to play that game that other cities competing for the headquarters had. Simple as that. We wanted to see the headquarters located in Hampton Roads but I can almost guarantee that our pitch was about as embarrassing, if not more, than what Cleveland offered. And Cleveland is an established name, an established brand, whereas cities down here not so much because it is primarily people in or fans of the military that know about this place.
Norfolk? No thanks, and for many reasons but especially this:
Take the long view. Be the best city it can be. The authenticity is a big appeal. So even if Cleveland does not become that city in my lifetime that is okay. It wasn't that city when I was born anyway, the cities height was before a lot of us were ever considered.
The rest will follow. Only places in the Midwest people are talking about in that same breath are Chicago, maybe Columbus. People love Detroit for the low COL. Not sure how long they can expect that low COL if the city rebuilds. Not sure how long people can realistically expect it in Cleveland. It costs money to rebuild.
I'd agree. And things are cyclical. You once couldn't pay someone to move to NYC or Boston. They were horribly depressing and dangerous places. DC too. Atlanta? Houston? C'mon.
And then places like Detroit and Cleveland were once epicenters of culture and industry.
Honestly, the idea that our (national) economy has infinite growth potential is ludicrous. Most of Silicon Valley (really, the entire "new economy") is built on speculation of future returns and the consolidation and monopolization of markets. Same with much of the financial sector that has reignited NYC, Boston and to a degree the Sunbelt. If Amazon get's broken up by congress (which is really why they chose NYC and DC = power centers), if the financial sector see's a return of major regulations, if access to technology and media continues to be democratized, if the rest of the world calls their debts and turns their nose up at the US, if climate change becomes more evident in real terms... all of which WILL HAPPEN... the world begins to look very different, very quickly.
I guess Norfolk is like Houston and New Orleans in that respect.
The city does not have the land to house those headquarters, and did not make a bid. The bid actually came from Virginia Beach, which is next door.
What are your other reasons; out of curiosity.
I greatly utilize Cleveland's great cultural amenities (University Circle is one of my favorite places on the planet, and I've traveled) and enjoy Cleveland's pro sports teams. I actually like winters, maple sugar season, etc. And living in Lake County, the likes of the excellent Lake Metroparks, Mentor Headlands Beach State Park, great nature preserves (Mentor Marsh, Mentor Headlands Dunes, Mentor Lagoons) and Holden Arboretum are great joys right at my doorstep that I utilize year round (I still will hike out on Lake Erie ice while I still can if Feb. is sufficiently cold). Mentor is the sixth largest retail center in Ohio and the northern Ohio upscale shopping mecca of Beachwood Place and Legacy Village is a short drive away.
Greater Cleveland's greatly superior medical services are important to me. I enjoy the region's very good highway network, and day trips to the likes of northwest Ohio nature preserves, the Mohican region, Presque Isle State Park, Cedar Point, and Ohio Amish Country, let alone weekend trips to the likes of Niagara Falls or the New River Gorge in WV (Norfolk is even closer to the latter, which is one reason I mention it; take a rafting trip that includes Jump Rock as it will bring out the Huck Finn in you).
I use continuing education programs at Lakeland Community College, and greatly enjoy Greater Cleveland's magnificent library systems.
I also greatly enjoy Cleveland's people and diversity, ethnic and otherwise. I would miss all of the Italian, and now Mexican, restaurants, let alone the Hungarian cuisine at the Balaton. I'm a 15-minute drive from very good veal Wienerschnitzel. How about you??? As a foodie, Ohio City's Market District is a great draw.
There are other things which I enjoy, but Norfolk offers these as well. I often think of relocating to D.C. region because I'm an immense history buff, but I would target a place like Rockville, MD (which I've considered and researched), rather than Norfolk. History, nothing else, would be the attraction of such a move; I've spent days at Gettysburg, but hardly visited other battlefield parks in the region.
I'm curious. How often do you get back to Cleveland? When was the last time you explored the Market District, University Circle? Cleveland has changed immensely in the last 20 years.
Last edited by WRnative; 11-14-2018 at 10:24 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
