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.
Look at the fastest growing midsized cities list. Des Moines, Madison (WI), etc.
I do wonder if Trump can be semi successful in his tariff war, if maybe some jobs will come back to the rust belt. There is a ton of cheap housing which makes for cheap labor around, and Midwest work ethic is fairly good. That is unless we get a federal $15 min wage passed.
But it's not educated. Speaking for companies I worked for in the past, who had leadership that actually did consider themselves a bit charitable and wanted to help out communities....
...the problem they ran into when thinking about relocating to an already struggling area or an area that's past its prime & visibly in decline, is that there was not the critical mass of college degreed and/or technically skilled workers they needed right away. Yeah there's labor, and yeah it's cheap... but they are also not skilled.
I remember asking for data from the regional universities about their graduates and students, and based on that, the firm determining that they were not producing enough of the majors needed AND finding that the colleges in question were in general enrollment decline because the population of young people was in decline or moving out. So they were not likely to ever produce what the firm wanted to have competitive applicant pools.
It's why I mean by "push for tech companies to move to the rust belt" that there needs to be a comprehensive, multi-faceted investment from both the public and private sectors. We can't just ask companies out of the goodness of their hearts to go locate in places where it would cost them more to do business, with no off-setting advantages.
The education infrastructure in the area simply cannot re-train the local populace overnight, can get overwhelmed if they all slam it at one time, and people who have been working a certain type of job are not academically prepared to be retrained. The investment would have to be over years. I can understand why companies are hesitant to take on that responsibility. Rather than locate in Janesville, better to locate in the Madison area where UW is already producing hundreds of graduates every year who could be applicants to your jobs, at no expense to your company.
Last edited by redguard57; 09-18-2019 at 09:56 PM..
Are you sure the $1000 was tuition alone? Or was it tuition + other costs?
Although you may be pretty close to target, I'd have to look it up. I was just throwing $300 out there in the previous comment to make a point.
However, state schools like Oregon State that often tack on fees and other things, mostly room and board, that can more than double that cost. So if your home of record is within an hour of Corvallis, sure you'll pay close to that 10k because you can save on room and board. But that obviously does not describe its 20,000 students. Basic living costs in a town like that would be at least $6-8k rentshare and whatever you need to eat and live, maybe another 5-8k if frugal? So again, if you're not within driving distance of a school like that already, you've got a problem that a summer job won't fix.
$335/term, ~ $1000 for 3 terms. Books were extra. Fees were less, because football and basketball were not megabuck industries. I don't recall how much fees were. I do remember that student health insurance was $25/term (!).
If the folks couldn't afford the bill, we borrowed money back then too. I also spent a lot of time washing test tubes in the Chemistry Department as part of the work-study program. GI Bill paid $50/month for each month of active duty, and that would be over $400/month today. It was a big help.
Food is cheaper now than it was back then, rent is more expensive, though I spent plenty of time sleeping in an unfinished basement and brushing my teeth in a laundry tub.
But it's not educated. Speaking for companies I worked for in the past, who had leadership that actually did consider themselves a bit charitable and wanted to help out communities....
...the problem they ran into when thinking about relocating to an already struggling area or an area that's past its prime & visibly in decline, is that there was not the critical mass of college degreed and/or technically skilled workers they needed right away. Yeah there's labor, and yeah it's cheap... but they are also not skilled.
I remember asking for data from the regional universities about their graduates and students, and based on that, the firm determining that they were not producing enough of the majors needed AND finding that the colleges in question were in general enrollment decline because the population of young people was in decline or moving out. So they were not likely to ever produce what the firm wanted to have competitive applicant pools.
It's why I mean by "push for tech companies to move to the rust belt" that there needs to be a comprehensive, multi-faceted investment from both the public and private sectors. We can't just ask companies out of the goodness of their hearts to go locate in places where it would cost them more to do business, with no off-setting advantages.
The education infrastructure in the area simply cannot re-train the local populace overnight, can get overwhelmed if they all slam it at one time, and people who have been working a certain type of job are not academically prepared to be retrained. The investment would have to be over years. I can understand why companies are hesitant to take on that responsibility. Rather than locate in Janesville, better to locate in the Madison area where UW is already producing hundreds of graduates every year who could be applicants to your jobs, at no expense to your company.
These are really good points.
I'm from an area like this. Northeast TN has never had a critical mass of knowledge workers. Functionally, our economy is much more similar to the Rust Belt, with a heavy dependence on manufacturing and mining in nearby southwest VA.
Sure, wages here are low and regulations are favorable to business, but like you said, that's not everything. There is one credible state university in the area with a bunch of academically questionable religious schools. Overall, the area has a poor, blue collar, quasi-rural feel that's not going to be appealing to a lot of highly skilled technical workers.
It's a chicken-and-egg deal. Companies don't want to/can't locate to areas with low skilled labor forces and few quality jobs, but skilled job seekers don't want to go to places where their employment options are drastically curtailed.
Im worried about how the next recession will impact the millennials who are still working McJobs and have lots of debt.
The bottom line that Millennials go down to people who are now 23/24. The job market is good. If you're working a McJob at 24 and can't do better in this economy, the problem is on you.
“Much worse” by what measure exactly? How do you personally define “much worse”? The early 80s was 10.7 unemployment at its peak. Great Recession peaked at just over 10, but contracted faster and recovered far slower. It took 51 months for the recovery of the Great Recession return to the number of jobs pre recession. The 1980 recession took 11.
Oh wait, there’s the answer. Your contempt. The lazy millennials and those trips to Europe.
Yawn.
I'm guessing you're a millennial? If so, that means you only lived through one of those recessions. The OP lived through both. They are much more qualified to judge, based on their own experience, which was much worse. You, on the other hand, were raised in the aftermath of that recession, and had a very high standard of living while growing up. It's natural that you would imagine that the only recession you experienced was much worse.
Imagine having the fortune of being able to afford two kids at 28. I can count on one hand the number of my peers (all with professional careers) who have even one child in our early 30s.
Did your wife also work, or did you have the great fortune of being able to afford to support her, too?
It's not "fortune" to be able to afford kids, it's priorities. Those "fortunate" folks lived in much smaller homes, often had only one car, didn't eat out regularly, and usually lived near family that could assist with childcare.
That's simply not the case these days.
Yes, the world is different, but as I do know many professionals in their early 30's that have children, most of them with professional careers, it might be a case of the people you are surrounded with, or the place you live, rather than the unbelievable great fortune of those folks to be able to have kids.
It's not "fortune" to be able to afford kids, it's priorities. Those "fortunate" folks lived in much smaller homes, often had only one car, didn't eat out regularly, and usually lived near family that could assist with childcare.
That's simply not the case these days.
Yes, the world is different, but as I do know many professionals in their early 30's that have children, most of them with professional careers, it might be a case of the people you are surrounded with, or the place you live, rather than the unbelievable great fortune of those folks to be able to have kids.
Thank you for proving my point, that is is not "luck" but rather priorities that bring that great fortune.
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.
