Pittsburgh's economy is hot!!!!! (Carnegie, California: unemployment, university, tax)

[pman]

Originally Posted by bradjl2009

Very well said! While I am a Steelers fan and love the rivalry our cities have I think if we each got better governments that were more progressive and got a lot more done, they could collaborate to do something of a BosWash corridor for Cleveland to Pittsburgh.

Bos-Wash isn't just two cities and being progressive hasn't necessarily made them great places to live. Most of the cities are decidedly unfriendly to the middle class. I also think the oft cited megalopolis is misleading. each area is distinctive. Philly is in no way NYC, Boston isn't Washington, and Providence isn't New Haven. Nonetheless, I think there's something to your argument. I think it would help if the Erie cities worked together (Cleveland, Buffalo, Detroit, Toledo, maybe Erie). Pittsburgh is still the gateway to the east and I'd love to see a high speed train corridor linking Chicago-Cleveland-Pittsburgh with the east coast. With a high speed line, it wouldn't be any further by train to Philly than NY is from Boston.

As for diversification, of course it's important (look at Detroit). cities like Phoenix and those in Florida that were heavily based on real estate are stuggling the most. It's worth noting that during the last boom in Florida in the 1920's, it took over 80 years for properties to regain their value).-of course, the same goes for Baltimore. As they say, Pittsburgh has good bones. what you do with that is another story.

[RockLobster]

Pittsburgh is one of those cities people love to compare and contrast it with other cities. Harold Miller is a regional economist that is well versed with metro economies and resides in our fair burgh. He has done a very nice job in breaking down the economic reality that is Pittsburgh along with the so called 'ups and downs', our bright spots and our economic downfalls. He has developed ' Pittsburgh Bench Marks'

Using population and market place cities comparable to Pittsburgh, Mr Miller has brought forth a very interesting read. this can be found in the following fun publication. Look for Regional Indicators tab then Pittsburgh Today.

Pittsburgh Quarterly

His blog which is also updated regularly is found @

Pittsburgh's Future

As many have said in this post. Pittsburgh has faired well against a ill national and world economy. That being said time will tell how deep the larger economic reality will drag Pittsburgh downward.

[bradjl2009]

Originally Posted by pman

Bos-Wash isn't just two cities and being progressive hasn't necessarily made them great places to live. Most of the cities are decidedly unfriendly to the middle class. I also think the oft cited megalopolis is misleading. each area is distinctive. Philly is in no way NYC, Boston isn't Washington, and Providence isn't New Haven. Nonetheless, I think there's something to your argument. I think it would help if the Erie cities worked together (Cleveland, Buffalo, Detroit, Toledo, maybe Erie). Pittsburgh is still the gateway to the east and I'd love to see a high speed train corridor linking Chicago-Cleveland-Pittsburgh with the east coast. With a high speed line, it wouldn't be any further by train to Philly than NY is from Boston.

As for diversification, of course it's important (look at Detroit). cities like Phoenix and those in Florida that were heavily based on real estate are stuggling the most. It's worth noting that during the last boom in Florida in the 1920's, it took over 80 years for properties to regain their value).-of course, the same goes for Baltimore. As they say, Pittsburgh has good bones. what you do with that is another story.

What I meant to compare with BosWash is that we could build up and encourage development between the two cities and bring wealth and good jobs to the area. Have I-76 be like I-95 is to them is what I'm trying to say. I'm glad our city has greatly diversified it's economy; I think we are the most well off in that compared to other Rust Belt cities. It would be great if we could link of and redevelop the Rust Bult citites like you mentioned. IMO it is very dangerous to base an economy off of real estate, because there was no way the growth and development that was being experienced in Florida and the desert southwest (I don't even understand why would anyone would want to live there; talk about nothing but suburbs!) would continue; especially prices getting as expensive as they were when the bubble popped.

[globalburgh]

Originally Posted by Humanoid

In th current economy diversification doesn't really matter. Just as well diversified portfolios are getting killed right now, even areas with well diversified economies are going to get hurt. Personally, I don't think Pittsburgh's economy is that diverse. But even it it was, it doesn't really matter in this environment.

There are data for economic diversification, making what you personally think moot. Economic diversification matters. Economic contraction is uneven. Some sectors will do a lot worse than others. Some sectors may completely collapse. If a region is overly dependent on one of the sectors that completely collapses, that area won't likely be able to benefit from the coming expansion.

In the current economic climate, diversification is MOST important. There is a reason why economists measure economic diversification. What you personally think is what really doesn't matter.

[bradjl2009]

Originally Posted by globalburgh

In the current economy diversification doesn't really matter. Just as well diversified portfolios are getting killed right now, even areas with well diversified economies are going to get hurt. Personally, I don't think Pittsburgh's economy is that diverse. But even it it was, it doesn't really matter in this environment.

So I guess our large universities, UMPC and West Penn, tech companies, banking, mining outside of the city, and some manufacturing isn't diverse enough for you.

[Katiana]

bradj2009, I would like to thank you for starting this thread which offered a good topic to debate. It sure beats talking about restaurants, etc.

[Blackbeauty212]

Originally Posted by Humanoid

The budgetary problems in California are bad...but not that bad. The current deficit is $11 billion and the state isn't on "verge of collapse". Regardless California was ground zero of the housing bubble.

I stand corrected about $50bn its closer to $30bn, my apologies, but Cali is still on the verge of Collapsing no matter how much you want to ignore it.....

PE.com | Southern California News | News for Inland Southern California

Schwarzenegger to declare fiscal emergency

By JULIET WILLIAMS
The Associated Press
SACRAMENTO
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger was expected to declare a fiscal emergency on Monday and call lawmakers into a special session to address California's $11.2 billion budget deficit.
California's revenue gap is expected to hit $28 billion over the next 19 months unless the governor and lawmakers take bold steps. Schwarzenegger and Democrats have proposed a combination of tax hikes and spending cuts, but Republican lawmakers have remained steadfast in their refusal to raise taxes.
Unless budget corrections are made quickly, the state is likely to run out of cash in February.
Moderator cut: shortened, copyright protection

[Humanoid]

Originally Posted by globalburgh

There are data for economic diversification, making what you personally think moot.

Feel free to post data that shows Pittsburgh has a diverse economy.

Originally Posted by globalburgh

Economic diversification matters. Economic contraction is uneven. Some sectors will do a lot worse than others. Some sectors may completely collapse.

My point is not that diversification doesn't matter, rather that its less of a factor right now. This will be the worse crisis since the depression, in this sort of environment diversification tends to matter less. Same goes for diversification in an equity portfolio.

Originally Posted by globalburgh

In the current economic climate, diversification is MOST important. There is a reason why economists measure economic diversification. What you personally think is what really doesn't matter.

No, apparently only what you think matters. There is a reason why economists measure it. But again, my point is that in major contractions its less important. Now, you can pretend as if all economists are going to agree on this point. But you'd be wrong.

[Humanoid]

Originally Posted by Blackbeauty212

I stand corrected about $50bn its closer to $30bn, my apologies, but Cali is still on the verge of Collapsing no matter how much you want to ignore it.....

Its odd that you post an article about it yet misstate the facts again. The current deficit is about $11 billion, the projected deficit over 2009 is around $28 billion. Hence, why he is declaring a "fiscal emergency", so they can fix the budget so the $28 billion deficit will never happen.

Anyhow, the state is not on the verge of collapse. The state spends far too much, it has a huge tax revenue though. The issue is that the unions and special interest groups are very strong in California and this is going to be a fight to the death with them.

Anyhow, these problems will be fixed. California has bigger issues that are going to effect the state over the next decade. The cost of doing business in the state is getting out of hand and the cost of living is too high. Pittsburgh has the first problem and this is one reason you don't see a lot of start-ups in the area. But it doesn't have the second problem. Companies in California are having trouble finding people willing to move here due to the high cost of living, where as Pittsburgh doesn't have that problem. When this occurs the company has really no choice but to diversify out of the area. This is exactly what has happened to all the big tech firms that started in California in the 70's and 80's. I don't think any of them have built or opened new faculties here in over a decade.

Anyhow, I'm not to concerned what happens with California. In 1-2 years I'm unlikely to be here.

[globalburgh]

Originally Posted by Humanoid

My point is not that diversification doesn't matter, rather that its less of a factor right now. This will be the worse crisis since the depression, in this sort of environment diversification tends to matter less. Same goes for diversification in an equity portfolio.

I got your point the first time. Why economic diversification should matter less is left to our imagination. If you could expand upon your equity portfolio metaphor, that might help. I understand the concept of hedging one's bets. In some economic environments, one sector might be down but another is going up. I also understand that in the current economic climate that we might see across the board contraction. But that doesn't make the difference between total economic collapse and a long period of negative growth any less important.

There is treading water and then there is drowning. But if there is some economic theory contending that economic diversification doesn't make a region less likely to drown, I'd like to learn about it. If you feel like explaining it to us simpletons.