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.
The solution is not to move Govt offices out of DC, but jobs out of places they dont really need to be or let them go to places they dont really need to be by offering them tax benefits or something.
Like Amzn for example, dont need them in NYC and certainly dont need to entice them with generous tax incentives. Let them move to a cheaper city that will be overall cheaper for them since they want to save money.
Baltimore, or Hartford be good places for the Northeast Corridor.
Or for example, all those people moving to the Sunbelt, where there is no water, to take up service jobs never had to move there since the service jobs never had to relocate there either.
I'm with you on not giving Amazon tax breaks to hq in NY. But I don't think we can just rely on Amazon or other private employers. We don't have control of them like we do over our own government. At least we should have the government place its offices where it can serve the people best.
Second, private employers have already demonstrated that they are willing to tolerate a placing their HQ in ridiculously expensive places as long as they continue to like them. If that wasn't the case, so many of them wouldn't be in the Bay or NYC, right now anyway.
I wouldn’t hold my breath about the Federal government moving some of its bureaucracy out of DC, but I’ve always been a firm believer that the Great Lakes cities are poised for a rebound greater than their current revitalization. Chicago aside, Detroit, Cleveland, Milwaukee, Buffalo, and I guess Toledo (if I need 5) are contenders.
Legacy cities with old money that endowed the arts and universities, good housing stock, great suburbs, pro sports, some of the nicest people you’ll ever meet, access to the Great Lakes, and “relatively” reasonable housing prices (and “cheap” for apples to apples comparisons to the coasts).
As this planet gets hotter, the Great Lakes area looks better. It needs some diversity and culture outside of the cities though.
I'm with you on not giving Amazon tax breaks to hq in NY. But I don't think we can just rely on Amazon or other private employers. We don't have control of them like we do over our own government. At least we should have the government place its offices where it can serve the people best.
Second, private employers have already demonstrated that they are willing to tolerate a placing their HQ in ridiculously expensive places as long as they continue to like them. If that wasn't the case, so many of them wouldn't be in the Bay or NYC, right now anyway.
How much can govt jobs provide? And how much taxes can people pay to support those jobs?
Probably not much. The real question though is do people want to support more govt jobs. I doubt they want to. The foundation of America is private businesses.
The one thing govt can do is put restrictions, and limits on what can be where. An example is liquor and cigarette retail licenses in NYC. NYC has effectively put a cap if not trying actively trying to reduce the number already.
How much can govt jobs provide? And how much taxes can people pay to support those jobs?
Probably not much. The real question though is do people want to support more govt jobs. I doubt they want to. The foundation of America is private businesses.
The one thing govt can do is put restrictions, and limits on what can be where. An example is liquor and cigarette retail licenses in NYC. NYC has effectively put a cap if not trying actively trying to reduce the number already.
Those are federal government jobs. They are going to pay for them wherever they are. We need those agencies anyway so we might as well put them the best place we can.
I'm not saying this will solve everything, I'm saying it's a start.
I never understood why so many "legacy cities" with great walkability, transit, and "bones", so to speak, are floundering in terms of revitalization, population growth, etc. Cleveland, St. Louis, and Pittsburgh are all bleeding residents, yet all three have many great walkable neighborhoods where residents can take transit and enjoy the arts, professional sports, concerts, parks, etc. Buffalo seems to be doing remarkably well in terms of turning its population decline around. Same with Cincinnati. What are Buffalo and Cincinnati doing right that Pittsburgh, Cleveland, and St. Louis are doing wrong?
I will say I love how integrated most of Cleveland's suburbs are. While in a Whole Foods parking lot on a day-trip there once as I awaited my fiancé's brief foray into a Walgreens in the same shopping center I was pleased to see roughly 50/50 in terms of white/Black demographics there, and most of the Black patrons were driving expensive vehicles. Pittsburgh doesn't have a large visible Black professional class like this, and it's a shame.
Pittsburgh's urban neighborhoods generally beat most urban neighborhoods in most Rust Belt cities. Only Ohio City (Cleveland), Elmwood Village and Allentown (Buffalo), and Over-the-Rhine (Cincinnati) are comparable to a Pittsburgh neighborhood like Shadyside or Squirrel Hill or Bloomfield or South Side Flats or the Mexican War Streets or East Liberty. With such great neighborhoods why is Pittsburgh's population still in decline? It's not "too many old people", either, because that's what people said in the '90's. Are those geezers from the '90's sill kicking for some reason, and, if so, how do we finally kill them off so our population can grow again?
I would just like to see all the Great Lakes-area Rust Belt legacy cities with great bones bounce back---strongly. That might happen in a few decades once the massive ongoing population growth in the Southwest leads to water shortages. A dispersal of Federal jobs out of the DMV and into Pittsburgh or Cleveland might help turn their population declines around.
As this planet gets hotter, the Great Lakes area looks better. It needs some diversity and culture outside of the cities though.
Many do have that outside of the cities. Detroit has a bunch of diverse and predominantly black or Arab suburbs/adjacent cities in the area(Farmington/Farmington Hills, West Bloomfield, Southfield, Oak Park, Auburn Hills, Mount Clemons, Dearborn, Inkster, Wayne, Garden City, Ecorse, River Rouge, Westland, Novi, Harper Woods, etc.). It is similar for Cleveland, especially in its eastern suburbs, which also may have places with a substantial Hispanic population. Even Buffalo has suburbs/cities such as Amherst, Cheektowaga, Lackawanna, Niagara Falls and even say Lockport with areas that have black, Hispanic, Asian, Native American, Jewish and Arab residents that live amongst each other. There are some others even at the mid sized metro level, but I think many people may not be aware of such places.
Last edited by ckhthankgod; 09-02-2022 at 06:34 AM..
If you really want to spread QOL, and wealth then someone get tech industry to startup elsewhere besides Bay Area. Or create a tech industry that can rival the one in Silicon Valley so not only does Silicon Valley get to soak up all the wealth.
Tech money IS spread out, though. Why do you think cities like Austin or Denver/Boulder are doing great. Even a metro area like Atlanta with a diverse economy get monies from tech presence also.
What's gone in most cities that need "revitalization" are industrial base - tech alone is NOT going to need all those manpower, educated or not. Look at Pittsburgh - gone are the steel mill, replaced with numerous tech/AI/healthcare jobs, and is able to attract younger professionals with its urban amenities and relative low cost of living. But even with all those, Pittsburgh has a long way to go to get back to the full glory.
When it comes to government - there's only so much government jobs can do. Even in DC area the highest paying jobs are NOT federal government employee but rather the contractors, lobbyist firms, lawyers, etc. Take Baltimore - the SSA is located there but that means what? Nothing...
I never understood why so many "legacy cities" with great walkability, transit, and "bones", so to speak, are floundering in terms of revitalization, population growth, etc. Cleveland, St. Louis, and Pittsburgh are all bleeding residents, yet all three have many great walkable neighborhoods where residents can take transit and enjoy the arts, professional sports, concerts, parks, etc. Buffalo seems to be doing remarkably well in terms of turning its population decline around. Same with Cincinnati. What are Buffalo and Cincinnati doing right that Pittsburgh, Cleveland, and St. Louis are doing wrong?
I will say I love how integrated most of Cleveland's suburbs are. While in a Whole Foods parking lot on a day-trip there once as I awaited my fiancé's brief foray into a Walgreens in the same shopping center I was pleased to see roughly 50/50 in terms of white/Black demographics there, and most of the Black patrons were driving expensive vehicles. Pittsburgh doesn't have a large visible Black professional class like this, and it's a shame.
Pittsburgh's urban neighborhoods generally beat most urban neighborhoods in most Rust Belt cities. Only Ohio City (Cleveland), Elmwood Village and Allentown (Buffalo), and Over-the-Rhine (Cincinnati) are comparable to a Pittsburgh neighborhood like Shadyside or Squirrel Hill or Bloomfield or South Side Flats or the Mexican War Streets or East Liberty. With such great neighborhoods why is Pittsburgh's population still in decline? It's not "too many old people", either, because that's what people said in the '90's. Are those geezers from the '90's sill kicking for some reason, and, if so, how do we finally kill them off so our population can grow again?
I would just like to see all the Great Lakes-area Rust Belt legacy cities with great bones bounce back---strongly. That might happen in a few decades once the massive ongoing population growth in the Southwest leads to water shortages. A dispersal of Federal jobs out of the DMV and into Pittsburgh or Cleveland might help turn their population declines around.
Cincinnati was able to show growth because it was one of the few cities that had a net positive natural growth (births > deaths) prior to COVID. Pittsburgh was down the most, and has been net negative for 25 years. Buffalo, St. Louis, and Cleveland were nearly even in birth-death ratio prior to COVID, though the trend was heading toward the negative.
I believe Buffalo's growth has been primarily two-fold: (1) In-state migration, primarily from the NYC boroughs, by people seeking a lower cost of housing; and (2) Buffalo ex-pats returning to the area due to a more favorable economy from past decades, lower cost of housing and living, and opportunities to work from home remotely. Overall, 62 out of the 79 Census tracts in the city showed population growth between 2010 and 2020.
Foreign immigration also played a role, but the actual numbers don't put Buffalo in the top tier of destinations. Pittsburgh is even lower, however. The greatest observable change has been the very large influx of South Asians relocating from NYC and other cities. It the last 10 years home sales to people with South Asian surnames has increased from from few to currently greater than 1/5 of ALL home sales in the city limits.
As far as ex-pats go, the 2 biggest complaints about Buffalo typically are the weather and limited job opportunities. Buffalo's economic future, while not dynamic, is still providing more and better opportunities than in the past. The city itself has been cleaning itself up in the last decade or two, and it has been getting a lot of good press as an affordable climate refuge city with larger city amenities. Work from home remotely has also likely had a big impact - I have 3 relatives who moved here from other states and work remote jobs based out of state, at out of state wages. I think that may be undercounted in local job totals listed. The area is still net negative for out of state domestic migration, and may continue to be because of weather, but in-state and international migration has been shifting overall migration to the positive.
And a comment about the attractive urban neighborhoods in Buffalo - that is NOT where people are moving to - the biggest growth areas have been in the poor and working class neighborhoods, where homes are much more affordable. In a sense the South Asian community has been "gentrifying" areas like Broadway-Fillmore, a former Polish enclave that in recent decades had fallen into poverty, disrepair, and vacancy.
Last edited by RocketSci; 09-02-2022 at 07:51 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.
