Cool happenings in DTD..... (Dallas, Fort Worth: organic, airport, manufactured)

[Treasurevalley92]

Originally Posted by EDS_

Dallas has been a top manufacturing city for many decades. But please continue.

It hasn't. It's just a small part of the mix of industries. It's not a big part of Dallas's cultural identity nor is it the source of wealth for a large portion of our elite.

It's similar to breweries. DFW has breweries, but that doesn't mean that Dallas is top beer-producing city or that it is a critical part of the identity.

[EDS_]

Originally Posted by Treasurevalley92

Literally everyone. At that point, NOLA was the obvious choice as the more established city and banking city at that. Dallas was picked because it was booming and they thought correctly that it would surpass NOLA in importance. Also, Texas banks were booming at that point because they were trying to catch up.




That doesn't make the metroplex a hotbed of Auto manufacturing or make that one of it's historical industries. It's just a small part of the overall mix of companies and businesses.

Dallas has breweries, but that doesn't make it a hotbed for beer innovation. Same difference.

Dude you're going to need to pass a hat to fund the new soles you are going to need after all this dancing.

Keep in mind if NO was cheated bank out of a Fed. by any city(ies) politically those would be Atlanta and/or Richmond. Atlanta + Richmond probably screwged Baltimore over as well.

Some things that helped Dallas:
1. Dallas + OKC + Tulsa + EL Paso + West Texas equaled major ag + trade corridors and even then pols. and the selection committee knew oil would be huge. Further OKC and Tulsa powerbrokers made it clear they'd prefer to be aligned with a Dallas Fed. over Denver, St. Louis or KC.

2. NO was a much bigger city by population but similar to Dallas in terms of banking clout.

3. NO even then was wildly corrupt.

[EDS_]

Originally Posted by Treasurevalley92

It hasn't. It's just a small part of the mix of industries. It's not a big part of Dallas's cultural identity nor is it the source of wealth for a large portion of our elite.

It's similar to breweries. DFW has breweries, but that doesn't mean that Dallas is top beer-producing city or that it is a critical part of the identity.

None of that matters. Dallas/DFW is a very strong manufacturing city/area.

[Treasurevalley92]

Originally Posted by EDS_

This is interesting. Seems like young people like Dallas/DFW despite all the protestations to the contrary.

https://www.dallasnews.com/business/...sionals-region

Thats a trash study. As an economist, you should be embarrassed.

https://www.dmagazine.com/frontburne...quite/?ref=mpw

[Treasurevalley92]

Originally Posted by EDS_

None of that matters. Dallas/DFW is a very strong manufacturing city/area.

It does matter for what I'm talking about.

You want to shift the conversation to raw numbers of manufacturing jobs instead of admitting that it isn't a "manufacturing city/ Region"

Culturally, the difference between industrialists and oilmen are different too. Oil (back in the day) was all about taking massive if somewhat calculated risks and getting lucky. Building a Steel empire or building a Car Company is about managing reliable processes.

The Big Rich were different than other rich people. The things that made them successful are different in a lot of ways than what makes other rich people successful.

[Treasurevalley92]

Originally Posted by EDS_

Dude you're going to need to pass a hat to fund the new soles you are going to need after all this dancing.

Keep in mind if NO was cheated bank out of a Fed. by any city(ies) politically those would be Atlanta and/or Richmond. Atlanta + Richmond probably screwged Baltimore over as well.

Some things that helped Dallas:
1. Dallas + OKC + Tulsa + EL Paso + West Texas equaled major ag + trade corridors and even then pols. and the selection committee knew oil would be huge. Further OKC and Tulsa powerbrokers made it clear they'd prefer to be aligned with a Dallas Fed. over Denver, St. Louis or KC.

2. NO was a much bigger city by population but similar to Dallas in terms of banking clout.

3. NO even then was wildly corrupt.

Dallas banking was growing. It's that simple.

They picked Dallas because it was rapidly growing as a banking centre due to:

1) Oil recently being discovered in large quantities in Texas

2) State banks were recently allowed which Texas, being previously very behind the national average on banks and financial services, was rapidly growing in because of pent up demand.

Side note, Chicago is even more corrupt than NOLA.

[NP78]

Originally Posted by Treasurevalley92

It does matter for what I'm talking about.

You want to shift the conversation to raw numbers of manufacturing jobs instead of admitting that it isn't a "manufacturing city/ Region"

Culturally, the difference between industrialists and oilmen are different too. Oil (back in the day) was all about taking massive if somewhat calculated risks and getting lucky. Building a Steel empire or building a Car Company is about managing reliable processes.

The Big Rich were different than other rich people. The things that made them successful are different in a lot of ways than what makes other rich people successful.

What is the point of this exactly?

I don't really see any evidence you have presented to indicate there is some definable difference between affluent residents and leadership in Dallas and the general group of wealth and leadership in other cities across the country.

It seems that you came up with a theory that sounds good to you, but I don't really see any evidence presented to support it.

In terms of "Manufacturing City/Region", I don't know what it takes to qualify. Data suggests that manufacturing is significant component of the area's economic output but not nearly as high as some other metro areas.

Speaking more specifically, DFW does not have a large segment of what I would term "heavy industry" such as Steel, Chemical, Refining, etc. There are some (Gerdau in Midlothian, etc.), but a very small amount of that type of industry even compared to other metro areas that are not normally associated with that type of industry (the CA metros for example). However, DFW has a very significant sector of what I would term "light manufacturing". This includes the Defense/Aerospace (L3, Bell, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, etc.), Automotive (GM), Building Materials (Johns Manville, James Hardie, Owens Corning, etc.), Food and Beverage, Semiconductor, Pharm, etc. industries. Also, as it relates to Oil and Gas, there are quite a few OEM's focused on that industry (LACT unit fabricators, Frac Blenders, etc.) that have operations in DFW and even though their customers are in the O&G industry they are functionally manufacturers.

[Treasurevalley92]

Originally Posted by NP78

What is the point of this exactly?

The Oil wealthy were different from other super-wealthy people. Their wealth did not depend (directly) on urban organization and structures. It depended on having huge balls and good luck.

I recommend the book: "The Big Rich" on them.

Texas oil millionaires are different. They were more directly political. (Hunts, Murchisons)

Anyway, because of this, they were very into car culture and pushed their cities in that direction even beyond the trends of the time, which themselves were in that direction.

Also side note, the people who settled these big cities were more native and rural than their counterparts who caused the booms in the cities back east and up north, which tended to have large numbers of international immigrants and be more urban, even during a suburban era.

Texas has always been in a love affair with autos. The state has more miles of roads than any other state. Pre-Freeways, Texas was noted for having higher-quality state highways than most states had. This was funded with Oil money.

All this adds up to Texas (Dallas and Houston in particular) not just following the suburban trends of the times, but embracing them with more gusto than just about anyone else....and that required a culture from bottom to top to be enthusiastic about them.

[numbersguy100]

Originally Posted by Treasurevalley92

The Oil wealthy were different from other super-wealthy people. Their wealth did not depend (directly) on urban organization and structures. It depended on having huge balls and good luck.

I recommend the book: "The Big Rich" on them.

Texas oil millionaires are different. They were more directly political. (Hunts, Murchisons)

Anyway, because of this, they were very into car culture and pushed their cities in that direction even beyond the trends of the time, which themselves were in that direction.

Also side note, the people who settled these big cities were more native and rural than their counterparts who caused the booms in the cities back east and up north, which tended to have large numbers of international immigrants and be more urban, even during a suburban era.

Texas has always been in a love affair with autos. The state has more miles of roads than any other state. Pre-Freeways, Texas was noted for having higher-quality state highways than most states had. This was funded with Oil money.

All this adds up to Texas (Dallas and Houston in particular) not just following the suburban trends of the times, but embracing them with more gusto than just about anyone else....and that required a culture from bottom to top to be enthusiastic about them.

There are threads of truth in what you are saying but you are taking a lot of things that are true of most sun belt cities that only took off and expanded in a major way after WW2 (and especially once air conditioning became affordable). Then you are acting like they are unique to Texas. Houston and Dallas are such different oil cities it’s hard to take you seriously when you lump them together. Houston’s money is very much all about people who invented and refined methods of making money off the oil boom where a disproportionate amount of money in Dallas came from people with ranches that simply happened to be located on top of oil. I have always thought this difference has made Dallas more insecure about itself than Houston and most of this isn’t from reading a book but from talking to native Texans who have multiple generations from around the state whose years here have given them this impression. But again, that’s painting with a very broad brush. Dallas has plenty of home grown businesses and industries at this point. Another problem in Dallas (though far from unique to here) is that civic leader both elected and unelected made massive amounts of money on real estate speculation buying land in the sticks and making sure the government would build infrastructure out to that land. I am pretty sure that’s how real estate development in many cities has worked over time because people are corrupt and so are politicians, it’s just that in Dallas it had manifested itself as car-centric development massively subsidized by the government because Dallas was just a baby compared to its east coast peers when cars became ubiquitous.

[eastriver]

Gulf Colorado and Santa Fe Railway,
Texas and Pacific Railway,
Houston & Central Texas Railway,
https://www.loc.gov/resource/g4033d....,0.873,0.436,0

...and more, all intersected in central Dallas in 1886--a full 15 years before Spindletop produced its first oil 290 miles to the southeast (along the Gulf coast). The map in the link is one stored in the (L)ibrary (O)f (C)ongress.

That's a lot of trade and commerce that sprang up because of that national rail network (one that Houston (and a lot of other TX cities) didn't have), and it had nothing whatsoever to do with oil.

This is Houston at the same time:
https://www.loc.gov/resource/g4034h....2,0.442,0.22,0