Skyscrapers in Columbus's Future? (Cleveland, Cincinnati: sales, 2015, unemployment)
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.
It's not "all" anything. But government does prop up Columbus, and MANY other cities (Cleveland included, though certainly not as much) to an impressive degree.
Do you think people are flocking to Washington D.C. for their manufacturing sector?
I think people go wherever the economy is good. It doesn't really matter how dependent a city may be on an industry. People flocked to Detroit when it was known for its manufacturing, and to Cleveland as well, and I would argue that they were far more dependent on manufacturing than Columbus is on government. And even if Columbus relied on government to the extent that some believe, it is far less volatile than any other industry, just because there will always be an inherent need for it. In any case, government jobs are the 3rd largest industry category in Columbus, and it will eventually be 4th, which is the same level it is in Cleveland and Cincinnati.
Government has also grown relatively slowly in terms of total jobs than several other industries.
Since January 1990, total metro jobs gained:
Professional and Business Services: +92,700
Education and Health: +84,900
Trade, Transportation and Utilities: +42,200
Hospitality and Leisure: +42,000
Government: +36,300
Financial Services: +20,500
Other Services: +17,300
Mining, Logging and Construction: +8,100
Information and Manufacturing both saw losses since 1990.
Wow, Cbus is even more of a leech than I thought! Thanks for the article.
People in Columbus should really be wary of all this state influence. It's already easy to see how this affects the thinking on this forum.
And it is amazing how Columbus people will never admit the obvious in relation to state government. Look, I live in a state capital. Boston definitely steals resources from some other, somewhat depressed, cities in MA (Worchester, Springfield, for example). It's not fair. I think we could do without these people: https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/20...arL/story.html .
I don't know why we can't call a spade a spade. It has nothing to do with anything personal.
Because it is BS, as I just proved with actual numbers. Columbus is barely more reliant on government than the other 2-Cs, even being the capital. And its reliance on government is shrinking as other industries are growing much faster. Per your example, you're attempting to call a spade an apple and expect no one to be smart enough to question it.
Spin it any which way you want, yet it still doesn't change the fact that the top 2 employers in the Columbus area are either wholly taxpayer funded (government) or mainly taxpayer funded (OSU). Columbus enjoys a bottom-line economic stimulus from the public sector that neither of the other 2 C's (or any other city) do.
I think people go wherever the economy is good. It doesn't really matter how dependent a city may be on an industry. People flocked to Detroit when it was known for its manufacturing, and to Cleveland as well, and I would argue that they were far more dependent on manufacturing than Columbus is on government. And even if Columbus relied on government to the extent that some believe, it is far less volatile than any other industry, just because there will always be an inherent need for it. In any case, government jobs are the 3rd largest industry category in Columbus, and it will eventually be 4th, which is the same level it is in Cleveland and Cincinnati.
Government has also grown relatively slowly in terms of total jobs than several other industries.
Since January 1990, total metro jobs gained:
Professional and Business Services: +92,700
Education and Health: +84,900
Trade, Transportation and Utilities: +42,200
Hospitality and Leisure: +42,000
Government: +36,300
Financial Services: +20,500
Other Services: +17,300
Mining, Logging and Construction: +8,100
Information and Manufacturing both saw losses since 1990.
But yeah, keep telling yourselves that Columbus lives on government. I wouldn't want inconvenient facts to get in the way of the narrative.
What's the source of your data? The Columbus number seems low. However, if these numbers are just for the respective cities, Columbus given its much larger size than Cleveland and Cincinnati, has a significant number of state jobs reflected even in your statistics.
You still miss the point that the rest of Ohio pays for many of the state jobs in Columbus, creating a massive economic multiplier effect for Columbus. This isn't true in any of the other metropolitan areas of Ohio, where their state taxes likely more than pay for their state jobs. Also, I suspect that the average salaries for the government jobs in Columbus are much higher than in the other metropolitan areas given the high salaries, especially including benefits, of many of the state jobs in Columbus, including professionals and top administrators.
Additionally, there are significant high-paying professional and business service jobs in Columbus that are there because it is the state capital.
Keep pretending that being the state capital isn't a massive stimulus to the Columbus economy, a point noted by an expert in the Dispatch article that I linked in post 47 in this thread. But what does an expert know compared to you???
Spin it any which way you want, yet it still doesn't change the fact that the top 2 employers in the Columbus area are either wholly taxpayer funded (government) or mainly taxpayer funded (OSU). Columbus enjoys a bottom-line economic stimulus from the public sector that neither of the other 2 C's (or any other city) do.
I'm not sure if you know what "spin" means because you can't spin plain numbers. What I posted was reality, and I guess you can try to make excuses for it, but it is what it is. You may not like it. It may directly contradict what you believe, but facts don't change just because you don't like them. It really doesn't matter what the largest employers are or aren't, because the totals in each city are all of similar size when compared to the total jobs. Also, I find it interesting how you think OSU is mainly taxpayer funded, especially, I assume, compared to any other public universities within the state. And how does Cleveland pay for its 136K government jobs? Does Lebron James make large donations to cover them?
Look, I know that this is probably some kind of emotional pride thing where blaming Columbus for all your problems has become a cultural norm. Unfortunately, the evidence just doesn't support you. Have you ever considered that, perhaps, Columbus' leadership over the years have just made many more smart decisions economically? Wild concept!
What's the source of your data? The Columbus number seems low. However, if these numbers are just for the respective cities, Columbus given its much larger size than Cleveland and Cincinnati, has a significant number of state jobs reflected even in your statistics.
You still miss the point that the rest of Ohio pays for many of the state jobs in Columbus, creating a massive economic multiplier effect for Columbus. This isn't true in any of the other metropolitan areas of Ohio, where their state taxes likely more than pay for their state jobs. Also, I suspect that the average salaries for the government jobs in Columbus are much higher than in the other metropolitan areas given the high salaries, especially including benefits, of many of the state jobs in Columbus, including professionals and top administrators.
Additionally, there are significant high-paying professional and business service jobs in Columbus that are there because it is the state capital.
Keep pretending that being the state capital isn't a massive stimulus to the Columbus economy, a point noted by an expert in the Dispatch article that I linked in post 47 in this thread. But what does an expert know compared to you???
www.bls.gov is my source. It is THE source for jobs data.
And they are metro numbers. It is of no surprise you find them questionable when you have built an entire belief system out of being the victim.
The idea that money literally only flows in one direction in regards to state funds has never once been shown to be true. None of you have offered a single bit of proof on that, and until you can, this ridiculous claim will remain in the joke pile.
Oh, you suspect? How about some evidence, chief.
So basically, Columbus cannot claim credit for attracting a single job because there will always be some publicly-funded reason it is located there. Meanwhile, Cleveland and Cincinnati organically created every single job, with not a dime of public money ever. You should probably write a book, because that is literally something no other city in history has ever done.
www.bls.gov is my source. It is THE source for jobs data.
And they are metro numbers. It is of no surprise you find them questionable when you have built an entire belief system out of being the victim.
The idea that money literally only flows in one direction in regards to state funds has never once been shown to be true. None of you have offered a single bit of proof on that, and until you can, this ridiculous claim will remain in the joke pile.
Oh, you suspect? How about some evidence, chief.
So basically, Columbus cannot claim credit for attracting a single job because there will always be some publicly-funded reason it is located there. Meanwhile, Cleveland and Cincinnati organically created every single job, with not a dime of public money ever. You should probably write a book, because that is literally something no other city in history has ever done.
Even if the percentages are correct, the fact remains that Columbus has most of the state's high-paying government jobs, and, as they are funded by the rest of the state, it generates a large multiplier effect for the Columbus economy.
It's also true that there are high-paying private sector jobs tied to the Columbus' status as the capital. Those are harder to quantify, but they certainly exist.
What's a joke is that you deny that the Columbus economy gets a massive shot in the arm from its status as the state's capital relative to Ohio's other metropolitan areas.
Even if the percentages are correct, the fact remains that Columbus has most of the state's high-paying government jobs, and, as they are funded by the rest of the state, it generates a large multiplier effect for the Columbus economy.
It's also true that there are high-paying private sector jobs tied to the Columbus' status as the capital. Those are harder to quantify, but they certainly exist.
What's a joke is that you deny that the Columbus economy gets a massive shot in the arm from its status as the state's capital relative to Ohio's other metropolitan areas.
Can you provide links that show government jobs are generally higher paying in Columbus? Or that it even has the most? I suppose if we are counting all state representatives and their staff being at the Capital, that could be, but I'm more interested in your average government worker. Either way, I'm not seeing the evidence yet. Also, at what level would you consider to be "high-paying"? $100K?
If you can't quantify them, you can't use them to make a point. You're just making an assumption.
Being a capital offers no guarantee on success. State capitals nationally exist in all sorts of economic conditions, population sizes, etc. Columbus is definitely a more successful one, but being a capital alone is not likely to be the reason for that, but rather good historic leadership combined with a lack of reliance on any one industry.
Can you provide links that show government jobs are generally higher paying in Columbus? Or that it even has the most? I suppose if we are counting all state representatives and their staff being at the Capital, that could be, but I'm more interested in your average government worker. Either way, I'm not seeing the evidence yet. Also, at what level would you consider to be "high-paying"? $100K?
If you can't quantify them, you can't use them to make a point. You're just making an assumption.
Being a capital offers no guarantee on success. State capitals nationally exist in all sorts of economic conditions, population sizes, etc. Columbus is definitely a more successful one, but being a capital alone is not likely to be the reason for that, but rather good historic leadership combined with a lack of reliance on any one industry.
Your point about capital cities not necessarily being successful is certainly true. If anyone ever had some sense and got rid of useless stuff, bureaucracies, state subsidized industries of all stripes, in state capitals, then it's level of success will definitely decline. That's not the case at all right now in Columbus though.
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.
