City shifts to younger work force, census says (Pittsburgh, York: schools, university)

[Humanoid]

Ahem....officially there isn't a recession yet.

Pittsburgh tends to lag behind other areas because it doesn't partake in the boom times much. Pittsburgh gets effected both by booms and down turns by their residual effects. I really don't know how Pittsburgh will fare in all of this, but calling it now is counting your chickens before they hatch.

Also, I'm so stick of hearing about the Google thing!! If this is all they can come up with....than that doesn't say much for the city.

[globalburgh]

Originally Posted by Katiana

OK, I'm feeling feisty today. One of the problems with the two sentence quote limit that City-Data has is that many quotes are taken out of context. I read the article and started thinking, that a two year drop wasn't all that decisive. Then I came upon this:

On the other hand, a 1.2-year drop in the census estimates is hard for him to swallow. "I don't think the work force has gotten that much younger that quickly," Briem said.

Briem is described as a regional economist for Pitt.

And what else did Briem say? How about Peter Rand, the regional demographer? Talk about taking things out of context. You are cherry picking the narrative to suit your own story.

[Awesomo.2000]

Originally Posted by globalburgh

And what else did Briem say? How about Peter Rand, the regional demographer? Talk about taking things out of context. You are cherry picking the narrative to suit your own story.

Yes that is very typical for this ultra-negative forum. People pick and choose how to minipulate articles and stats to suite their own arguments all the time.

I mean, it isn't rocket science that Pittsburgh's working age is going to get younger. It really is the only way it can go. Also, it really isn't rocket science that it will take a while, and won't happen over night.

However, I am going to use those last two points to point out that this article is wrong, and in fact Pittsburgh's working age is getting older, and soon everything here will be dead and vacant.

[Copanut]

Eventually, I'll be dead and will no longer be able to work.

[Katarina Witt]

Originally Posted by Awesomo.2000

Yes that is very typical for this ultra-negative forum. People pick and choose how to minipulate articles and stats to suite their own arguments all the time.

I mean, it isn't rocket science that Pittsburgh's working age is going to get younger. It really is the only way it can go. Also, it really isn't rocket science that it will take a while, and won't happen over night.

However, I am going to use those last two points to point out that this article is wrong, and in fact Pittsburgh's working age is getting older, and soon everything here will be dead and vacant.

Yes, Awesomo.2000, or is it Stagger Lee? (I've wondered about that for a long time.) You harp on about people needing to be more "positive". This is sheer hypocrisy. Here are some posts you've made on the Denver forum:

Originally Posted by Awesomo.2000

God, there is a difference between smart growth and "dumb" growth.

"People have to live somewhere" is not a good argument for Urban Sprawl.

The above addressed to a post I made.

Originally Posted by Awesomo.2000

why if somebody says something negative about Denver it is like insulting the pope to Catholics or something? Jesus, I spent three years out in the actual city of Denver. It is a great city, but there ARE NEGATIVES. Oh my god, Negatives in Denver???? There cant be!

My number one negative was just infact that. Everybody talked about how great the city was, and how much better it was then everywhere else, when in fact it was just above average.

The sprawl there is seriously horrible. The suburbs are a never ending homogeneous bland as hell urban sprawl hell hole. The suburbs in eastern cities have rings of old school street car suburbs, followed by older ones, than finally by the ones like in Denver. However, in Denver once you get out of the first ring of neighborhoods outside of Downtown it turns into this everywhereville filled suburbian hell.

I lived in Capitol Hill(which is Denver's urban city neighborhood that would be equivalent of a first ring suburb in eastern cities). It was a beautiful neighborhood. However, most neighborhoods are not as strong as they are in the east. I mean where you have tight rowhouse neighborhoods, and then all of a sudden you are in one with huge mansions and so on. In Denver they change slightly. Capitol hill slowly changes into Cheeman, and slowly into the bigger and ugly houses of Country club, then slowly into the trendy wannabe Cherry creek, then all of a sudden, welcome to everywhereville.

I loved my time in Capitol Hill. I lived in big cities, and cities like Denver. No place is perfect (as people in Denver think it is). The big cities have their positives, but also bring negatives being so big. Denver was a good place to live for a few years, however I don't think I could buy a house there. I would have no idea where to buy it, as I like old school neighborhoods. In Denver I would only have afforded to have on in a never ending urban sprawl suburb.

Point is, Denver is not perfect. It is a cool city, but not a perfect utopia in the mountains. As it isn't even in the mountains.

And subdivisions, I honestly challenge you to find ONE post where I said I hate Pittsburgh. One. And despite what you may think, I am not mentally ill, and I'm getting damn tired of you implying I am.

To all of you, if you want to believe the fairy tale that some prima-donna CMU graduates refused to go to Mountain View, California so Google invested millions of dollars in an office in Pittsburgh, go ahead. That doesn't make the urban legend true.

[globalburgh]

Originally Posted by Katiana

To all of you, if you want to believe the fairy tale that some prima-donna CMU graduates refused to go to Mountain View, California so Google invested millions of dollars in an office in Pittsburgh, go ahead. That doesn't make the urban legend true.

As Humanoid is fond of noting, the Pittsburgh branch of Google isn't that big of a deal. However, decentralizing operations is costly and Google did locate in Pittsburgh to be near a major source of IT talent. If Google could attract enough CMU graduates to Mountain View, why bother to take on the costs of opening in Pittsburgh?

[Katarina Witt]

Originally Posted by globalburgh

As Humanoid is fond of noting, the Pittsburgh branch of Google isn't that big of a deal. However, decentralizing operations is costly and Google did locate in Pittsburgh to be near a major source of IT talent. If Google could attract enough CMU graduates to Mountain View, why bother to take on the costs of opening in Pittsburgh?

Because they wanted to decentralize, as you just said.

Royal Pingdom » Blog Archive » Map of all Google data center locations

My issue is not with Google having a center in Pittsburgh; it's just that it's no big deal. They have one in Boulder, Colorado as well. And lots of other places. And why do so many people think they are specifically looking for CMU graduates? California has a lot of excellent home-grown computer schools as well, such as UC-Berkely, Stanford, CalTech, USC, UCLA, etc. Google is not dependent on CMU for its personnel.

[globalburgh]

Originally Posted by Katiana

Because they wanted to decentralize, as you just said.

Royal Pingdom » Blog Archive » Map of all Google data center locations

My issue is not with Google having a center in Pittsburgh; it's just that it's no big deal. They have one in Boulder, Colorado as well. And lots of other places. And why do so many people think they are specifically looking for CMU graduates? California has a lot of excellent home-grown computer schools as well, such as UC-Berkely, Stanford, CalTech, USC, UCLA, etc. Google is not dependent on CMU for its personnel.

Pittsburgh, LA and Chicago are, by far, the three top places to find qualified IT workers. Austin knows this. Go to a job fair at CMU. Google is looking, specifically, for CMU graduates. They have a presence in Pittsburgh because of CMU graduates. Google would like to attract MORE CMU graduates to work for them.

If Google is not dependent on CMU graduates, then opening a branch in Pittsburgh was a dumb thing to do.

[dugdogmaster]

I was trying to prove this, saying this since they opened, and was I was shot down then too. It's no use

[Humanoid]

They have a presence in Pittsburgh because of CMU graduates. Google would like to attract MORE CMU graduates to work for them.

Google doesn't need a field office in the area to attract CMU students. CMU students know about Google and they can easily send someone each year. The idea that Google opened an office in Pittsburgh to "attract CMU students" is fairly absurd and its actually undercutting the city!

I find it absolutely amazing the Google field office comes up so much on this forum. Whether, they are get CMU students or not doesn't even matter. Its just a field office and its not a big deal.

Its also absolutely amazing that again some comments that weren't completely peachy digress into this sort of nonsense. If you don't like the comments ignore them, if you disagree do so in a reasonable fashion without personal attacks. Its really that simple.

God forbidden someone suggests its too early to say whether Pittsburgh escapes the current economic meltdown!