Is Columbus approaching the same level as Cincinnati and Cleveland. (Akron: theatre, cost)

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by motorman

Oh, please! Now you're gonna have us all believe that the "3-C's" are virtually equal when it comes to how each of them benefits from Ohio tax-$$?

Sure enough, all "3-C's" employ administrative and judicial personnel, police, firemen, teachers, social workers, and military, etc, by the thousands and, subsequently, the number of public-employees between them may not be radically different.

However and without question, the combined heavy-duty tax-payer money trail leads nefariously into the private chambers and the outstretched hands of Columbus' most powerful political brokers, many of its most influential business tycoons, and a multitude of their friends and families.

So then, how can anyone keep insinuating that Columbus doesn't derive a tremendous advantage of being the state capital--after all, it's a home to Midwestern royalty-of-sorts, a fiefdom where the tail (government) wags the dog (commerce), and a restaurant that serves pure political gravy ($$). Here in Ohio, the three biggest cities may be thought of "as equal, but some more equal than others." Don't think so? Then either inquire about Kasich's lucrative money-laundering machine, JobsOhio, or study this 11/5/13 information:

Where the tax breaks go | Cincinnati.com | cincinnati.com

So maybe the defining question about Cbus really isn't: "What's there to like?" but "What's there not to like?" ( Whadda 'ya think?)

All 3-Cs have over 10% of their total civilian workforce in government jobs. In fact, the entire range for every major metro in the state was between 9.9% and 15.7% in August of this year. I don't think that's a huge range of difference, but you're certainly free to disagree. Government is the 3rd largest individual industry in Columbus, not first. It's also 3rd or 4th in 5 of the other 7 metros in the 10 measured industries by the BLS. You want to act like Columbus is leaps and bounds above all the others, but it's pretty much about where the rest of them are, relative to size.

I'm not sure I get your point about the tax credits. Franklin County is the 2nd largest in the state, soon to be largest. And if you actually break down the tax value to the number of jobs created, Franklin has had a FAR larger return on investment for the money given, which is better for the state overall, not just the Columbus area.

The $69.13 million to Franklin County created 11,415 jobs for an average credit cost of $6,056.
The $49.54 million to Cuyahoga County created 5,645 jobs for an average credit cost of $8,776.
The $25.22 million to Hamilton County created 2,949 jobs for an average credit cost of $8,553.

The real question is: Why does creating jobs cost $2,500 more in Hamilton and Cuyahoga counties??

Also, the new payroll created is also not equal.

In Cuyahoga County, there's a 5.9-fold increase in payroll vs. the tax money spent there.
In Hamilton County, there's a 7-fold increase.
In Franklin County, there's a 7.5-fold increase.

So it appears that, no matter which way you look at it, spending tax money in Franklin County gets the state a better return. That's called good business practice, and frankly, anyone wondering about the supposed discrepancy in spending need look no farther than how their own counties perform.

[motorman]

Originally Posted by jbcmh81

All I'm reading here is you admitting that they're not an MSA. Instead, we should just look at a pretty picture of lights and selectively see what we want. I get it. You want them to be together based on your personal definition. My definition is not the same. It's not that I'm refusing to see something. I just plain disagree with you.

For the record, I wouldn't call them "hard declining" cities, either.

Obviously, we've reached impasse on this one--and that's okay. As you justifiably pointed out, nighttime satellite photos and blobs of light don't ultimately define cities or regions, but as I thoughtfully observed, such photographs do answer legitimate questions onlookers are asking. Let's both move on.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by motorman

Obviously, we've reached impasse on this one--and that's okay. As you justifiably pointed out, nighttime satellite photos and blobs of light don't ultimately define cities or regions, but as I thoughtfully observed, such photographs do answer legitimate questions onlookers are asking. Let's both move on.

Agreed... though I suspect this topic will rear its head in the future

[motorman]

Originally Posted by jbcmh81

...So it appears that, no matter which way you look at it, spending tax money in Franklin County gets the state a better return. That's called good business practice, and frankly, anyone wondering about the supposed discrepancy in spending need look no farther than how their own counties perform.

Whoa! This ambiguous manipulation uses circular motion to such Zen-like degree that my head's spinning and I'm finding myself agreeing with it--ie, the statement supports either of our arguments! Without a doubt, one of the most well-crafted deflections that our "Cbus Spin-Meister" has ever employed.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by motorman

Whoa! This ambiguous manipulation uses circular motion to such Zen-like degree that my head's spinning and I'm finding myself agreeing with it--ie, the statement supports either of our arguments! Without a doubt, one of the most well-crafted deflections that our "Cbus Spin-Meister" has ever employed.

You provided the link to the data. Was I wrong with the math given? If so, I have no problem admitting to making a mistake. Did Franklin County receive more tax money? Yes. Did it create far more jobs for less money per job than the other 2 counties? Yes. Was the payroll return on investment greater than the other 2? Yes. Did the state get back a greater economic return? Yes.

[motorman]

Originally Posted by jbcmh81

You provided the link to the data. Was I wrong with the math given? If so, I have no problem admitting to making a mistake. Did Franklin County receive more tax money? Yes. Did it create far more jobs for less money per job than the other 2 counties? Yes. Was the payroll return on investment greater than the other 2? Yes. Did the state get back a greater economic return? Yes.

I GIVE UP! Not only did you sidestep the entire issue of misuse of tax-$$ within Columbus (and the larger issue of political and business corruption throughout the city), but now you've employed the very link I supplied (demonstrating, all too well, that's something's dreadfully wrong) and literally spun it into an absolutely delightful PR "Cbus Success Story." (Smooth move, my man, smooth move!)

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by motorman

I GIVE UP! Not only did you sidestep the entire issue of misuse of tax-$$ within Columbus (and the larger issue of political and business corruption throughout the city), but now you've employed the very link I supplied (demonstrating, all too well, that's something's dreadfully wrong) and literally spun it into an absolutely delightful PR "Cbus Success Story." (Smooth move, my man, smooth move!)

No man, I'm really confused on how you think taxes were misused here. If anything, they show that, out of the 3-Cs, Franklin County used its given state taxes the most responsibly. If I am somehow twisting the data, I'm at a loss to understand how and would love the details on your perspective.

And happy Thanksgiving.

[motorman]

Originally Posted by jbcmh81

No man, I'm really confused on how you think taxes were misused here. If anything, they show that, out of the 3-Cs, Franklin County used its given state taxes the most responsibly. If I am somehow twisting the data, I'm at a loss to understand how and would love the details on your perspective.

And happy Thanksgiving.

No explanation right now, my eternal adversary; I'm exhausted even thinking about it, heh heh! Just know that I also wish you a happy Thanksgiving (American/Mexican/whatever) and my sure promise that "we'll meet again." (but not today...) Enjoy!

[db108108]

Originally Posted by motorman

Within your own confined Cbus Smoke And Mirrors environs, are you not trying too hard to denigrate those other two-most venerated and cultured Ohio cities?

Needless to say, the high-culture confrontations that routinely erupt between The Cleve and The 'Nati don't include Cbus. Nor do Cleveland's and Cincinnati's battles of downtown superiority, professional sports, and night life include Columbus--but, again, all that might change, if Columbus so wills it. Perhaps not overnight, but neither in the distant future.

Without doubt, Columbus, Ohio has evolved into a major Midwestern city experiencing forward-motion and positive-change. But, then again, so have its two larger, more cultured Ohio rivals--in ways that ought to make this capitol city blink. (If you're from Cleveland or Cincinnati, you know what's meant.) Two "hard declining central cities"?? Oh, yeah, okay...but only in this particular Cbus Smoke And Mirrors wet-dreamer's imagination.

A post so nice you had to respond to it twice?

I really don't understand your circular logic. Let me draw you a map.

Me: Cleveland has declined more than any other large city in the country save St. Louis and Detroit. Cincinnati is no slouch either.

You: But NEO and CIN-DAY!!!

Me: Akron has also declined substantially and so has Dayton.

You: But look at the night lights!!

Me: So miles of sparse suburb somehow make Cleveland and Cincinnati better than Columbus?

You: NEO and CIN-DAY!

Me: Don't you guys complain that Columbus isn't a real city because of those miles of suburb?

And scene.

[1watertiger]

^ ok, so lets just admit columbus is not on the same level ? (those lights do not lie) . otherwise convince us with things we dont know about columbus.