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.
"Like the rain, the hipsters, and non-self-serve gas stations, the seeming lack of employment opportunity in Oregon is nothing more than an intrinsic elevated to the status of cultural legend. IOW, a myth with a basis in fact."
I've been following this forum a bit as I'd like to relocate to the NW, and I wonder if Oregon's anti-business climate is also a myth with some basis in fact. Case in point:
Quote:
So many people here rail against anything corporate, claiming the world should be nothing but mom-and-pop setups, even though that doesn't create enough growth.
Just as every person in a city of 600,000 isn't a "hipster," whatever that is, I do wonder what exactly it is that chases business away? I mean, a bunch of people talking does not affect business one way or another. On the other hand, things like tax structures, economic policies, a lack of a skilled workforce, etc. can affect business.
First of all, is the economy as bad as people say? U.S. is at 9.6% unemployment, OR at 10.6%. Yes, I know both are undercounts, I'm just saying comparatively its only a bit worse, that's all.
Second, if it's so bad, what is the cause?
I am unconvinced that growth management is the cause - don't Oregon's laws require a 20-year supply of residential and commercial land be available at all times ... or does Metro somehow get around this? But plenty of dense cities with high land costs are doing well. Atlanta and Houston are certainly not the models, if you've ever seen Houston ...
Taxes? Income taxes are high, admittedly hitting the rich. Property taxes ... low compared to most other states. No sales tax. And if taxes were the cause of bad economies, why is Massachusetts always doing so well? (OK they have plenty of advantages to make up for it). Perhaps b/c the income tax hits the rich, they choose to live elsewhere?
People move to OR without jobs, based on quality of life ... could be a double-edged sword. I understand more than a few bring an entrepreneurial bent. And besides, don't conservatives argue that pop. growth is needed for econ. growth?
Regulation? Aside from limits on pumping your own gas, Oregon to my knowledge does not have the strong unions of some other states, or the overblown regulations you find in CA, NY, etc. Yes, there's liberal "chatter," but overall seems a fairly libertarian bent to me.
Housing costs? Portland's the cheapest on the west coast.
I could honestly buy the cultural argument ... a lot of people move to Portland to live a slower-paced life in a city with reasonable housing costs and good schools. (And Portland was not a sophisticated economic or cultural powerhouse to begin with.) Few would move to SF, NY or Boston with the same goal, perhaps? I'm not convinced this is a bad thing, though. Isn't this why it's so attractive?
Maybe Portland needs the equivalent of a Stanford or UW?
Maybe Portland is simply a second-tier city in a peripheral region, and does not boast the concentration of industry and ambitious people from around the globe that Seattle or San Francisco do. But can something be done to break out of this pattern?
I'd love to hear people's thoughts ...
Last edited by docwatson; 10-11-2010 at 12:35 AM..
Well, lets see. For eight years jobs were sent overseas and the trickle down mentality didn't work, again. The eight year debacle witnessed tax incentives for business to send jobs overseas. Nice, huh? And now the RW whines about jobs? Seems hypocritical. Oh, wait... it is. No wonder, I was referring to the reich wingnuts.
Same with illegals.
Illegals have been pouring into the USA for decades. Why the sudden outrage? Why didn't the RW do something about illegal aliens during the 8yr Shrub debacle?
Oh, wait. Yuppies don't want the jobs that illegals perform in the USA.
Why isn't anything "really" being done about illegals?
My theory is cheaper swimming pool construction costs. Yuppies like swimming pools.
There are jobs available.
They are "beneath" what most citizens are willing to perform.
I've been following this forum a bit as I'd like to relocate to the NW, and I wonder if Oregon's anti-business climate is also a myth with some basis in fact. Case in point:
Just as every person in a city of 600,000 isn't a "hipster," whatever that is, I do wonder what exactly it is that chases business away? I mean, a bunch of people talking does not affect business one way or another. On the other hand, things like tax structures, economic policies, a lack of a skilled workforce, etc. can affect business.
First of all, is the economy as bad as people say? U.S. is at 9.6% unemployment, OR at 10.6%. Yes, I know both are undercounts, I'm just saying comparatively its only a bit worse, that's all.
Second, if it's so bad, what is the cause?
I am unconvinced that growth management is the cause - don't Oregon's laws require a 20-year supply of residential and commercial land be available at all times ... or does Metro somehow get around this? But plenty of dense cities with high land costs are doing well. Atlanta and Houston are certainly not the models, if you've ever seen Houston ...
Taxes? Income taxes are high, admittedly hitting the rich. Property taxes ... low compared to most other states. No sales tax. And if taxes were the cause of bad economies, why is Massachusetts always doing so well? (OK they have plenty of advantages to make up for it). Perhaps b/c the income tax hits the rich, they choose to live elsewhere?
People move to OR without jobs, based on quality of life ... could be a double-edged sword. I understand more than a few bring an entrepreneurial bent. And besides, don't conservatives argue that pop. growth is needed for econ. growth?
Regulation? Aside from limits on pumping your own gas, Oregon to my knowledge does not have the strong unions of some other states, or the overblown regulations you find in CA, NY, etc. Yes, there's liberal "chatter," but overall seems a fairly libertarian bent to me.
Housing costs? Portland's the cheapest on the west coast.
I could honestly buy the cultural argument ... a lot of people move to Portland to live a slower-paced life in a city with reasonable housing costs and good schools. (And Portland was not a sophisticated economic or cultural powerhouse to begin with.) Few would move to SF, NY or Boston with the same goal, perhaps? I'm not convinced this is a bad thing, though. Isn't this why it's so attractive?
Maybe Portland needs the equivalent of a Stanford or UW?
Maybe Portland is simply a second-tier city in a peripheral region, and does not boast the concentration of industry and ambitious people from around the globe that Seattle or San Francisco do. But can something be done to break out of this pattern?
I'd love to hear people's thoughts ...
Its actually an honor to be rich and live in Massachusetts. Most of the rich I knew when I lived there were pretty happy people. The taxes rose in later years, but the rich love their lives there and many would not live anywhere else especially in Cambridge and Brookline and places like that. The education sector is easily one advantage. One of the best school areas in the USA for public schools and for universities. A bit of snobbery comes with that though, thats expected.
As far as your 2nd claim I put in bold, I did not at all notice MA liberal type arguments from Portlanders. It was as you said libertarian mostly. I didnt see this left wing marxism to extremes like one would see going to Harvard Square area in Cambridge. Its definitely minor next to that believe me.
Portland seems to have more of the left libertarian views with fiscal conservatism or spending money with only intentions to truly improve the city. You don't have any stories out there it doesn't seem like the selfish big dig project that Boston had that all their liberals helped **** up. If theres any issues with Trimet, again minor next to issues like the big dig. Trimet is still functioning and functional despite peoples complaints. The train isnt gonna collapse and run off the rails and kill many like how the big dig toppled and coulda killed many commuters. I know I am going on a rant but you get my drift.
Oregon in general has a lot of employers that are very tied to the economic cycle. For that reason, the unemployment rate expands and contracts sharply as the economy expands and contracts.
The tax structure and geography play a part. Oregon's tax structure favors spending (no sales tax), but not saving and investing (the highest capital gains tax in the US), or earning (highest income tax in the country). In economic terms, this is known as raising the "cost of capital." Unfortunately, Oregon's most populated and economically dynamic region, the Portland metro area, is right next to a place with a much lower cost of capital, Washington State. This is why Clark county has had much higher job growth than the Oregon side of the metro area for years. Unless a particular business HAS to be in Portland, they have many reason$ to set up shop across the river instead. Don't discount the income tax differential, 11% vs 0% is HUGE. It is most definitely making effects on economic choices by individuals and businesses. Oregon doesn't have particularly high taxes overall, but the structure of the tax system is asinine.
Oregon's overly active initiative system keeps a constant level of uncertainty in the air. When at any time some silly initiative might come up and change the game for your business outlook, it's harder to make long term investments and planning. So maybe you don't, you go elsewhere. Ditto the tax clawback provision. It keeps the state's budget in a state of constant cliffhanger status, not knowing whether or not there will be enough money from year to year, or what program will be cut or expanded, or what tax.
The tax structure and geography play a part. Oregon's tax structure favors spending (no sales tax), but not saving and investing (the highest capital gains tax in the US), or earning (highest income tax in the country). In economic terms, this is known as raising the "cost of capital." Unfortunately, Oregon's most populated and economically dynamic region, the Portland metro area, is right next to a place with a much lower cost of capital, Washington State ... Oregon doesn't have particularly high taxes overall, but the structure of the tax system is asinine.
Now this makes sense ... I always suspected that those with high incomes (who incidentally decide where companies locate) might want to avoid 10%-11% state income tax, expecially given 0% across the river. (Then again, some western states [CO, ID] have income taxes around 5-6%.) And I didn't know about the cap gains tax - this ought to be uniform across the nation ... I've heard of some OR-WA attempts to harmonize taxation, but doubt these types of changes come easily.
For the middle class it may be six of one or half a dozen of the other between sales, income and property tax.
That said, I'd never want to live in a high property tax environment (my bro in New Jersey pays more in property taxes alone than I pay in rent!) I always felt over-reliance on property tax creates a sense of wage slavery, approaching a taking, b/c even if you lose your job, or choose to simplify your life, start a small business, work part-time, etc., your property tax burden stays the same. (If its a home business, your prop tax can actually go up with the shift from residential to commercial rates!) At least with a 10% income tax, it's 10% of whatever you happen to be earning.
Quote:
Oregon's overly active initiative system keeps a constant level of uncertainty in the air. When at any time some silly initiative might come up and change the game for your business outlook, it's harder to make long term investments and planning. So maybe you don't, you go elsewhere. Ditto the tax clawback provision. It keeps the state's budget in a state of constant cliffhanger status, not knowing whether or not there will be enough money from year to year, or what program will be cut or expanded, or what tax.
Also a good point I hadn't considered. Colorado is experiencing this. All the business interests have been coming out in favor of maintaining govt. funding for education and transportation in thr face of anti-govt ballot initiatives, b/c they see schools, universities and roads as vital for business growth. Admittedly, its self-serving - they are often pushing for more highway interchanges to serve their properties.
Well, lets see. For eight years jobs were sent overseas and the trickle down mentality didn't work, again. The eight year debacle witnessed tax incentives for business to send jobs overseas. Nice, huh? And now the RW whines about jobs? Seems hypocritical. Oh, wait... it is. No wonder, I was referring to the reich wingnuts.
Same with illegals.
Illegals have been pouring into the USA for decades. Why the sudden outrage? Why didn't the RW do something about illegal aliens during the 8yr Shrub debacle?
Oh, wait. Yuppies don't want the jobs that illegals perform in the USA.
Why isn't anything "really" being done about illegals?
My theory is cheaper swimming pool construction costs. Yuppies like swimming pools.
There are jobs available.
They are "beneath" what most citizens are willing to perform.
That might have something to do with it.
Thank you for epitomizing the Portlander mentality to a T. Everything bad in the world is the fault of the right wing Republicans (complete with catchy wordplay like the "Reich Wing" or "Rethuglicans"), and none of the job market issues in the Portland area have anything to do with hostile policies towards businesses that inspire them to set up elsewhere. The local problems are still the fault of Republicans somehow, even though the Dems have a super majority in all facets of government in Oregon,a nd have for quite some time. Everything gets turned into an ideological political debate, all the ails are someone else's fault, class warfare is the way to go, and the government shall set you free. Riddle me this, Skippy: Head to Beaverton and wander the Intel campus sometime. It's like being magically transported to Mumbai. But obviously, since it's obviously all the doing of Republican evils, Merkley and Wyden must be frothing at the mouth livid about Intel's abuse of the H1(b) program, right? Oh, what's that? They're two of the programs biggest backers, you say? Musta been brainwashed by an evil Republican type. I bet that Orrin Hatch got ahold of em. Face it, the area's problems go MUCH deeper than "we hate Republicans and anyone with more money than us!"
Portland: The world's most accepting city...so long as your beliefs are exactly like ours.
Unfortunately, Oregon's most populated and economically dynamic region, the Portland metro area, is right next to a place with a much lower cost of capital, Washington State. This is why Clark county has had much higher job growth than the Oregon side of the metro area for years. Unless a particular business HAS to be in Portland, they have many reason$ to set up shop across the river instead. Don't discount the income tax differential, 11% vs 0% is HUGE. It is most definitely making effects on economic choices by individuals and businesses.
I have to question this particular point. If your reasoning is true, then shouldn't Clark County have more robust job growth than parts of the metro on the Oregon side? In fact, we see just the opposite, the numbers as of September (for August) show that Clark County has a staggering 13.9 percent unemployment rate! (source) The metro as a whole has an unemployment rate of 10.2 percent in the same period. (source) That's a significant difference and not in the direction your hypothesis would suggest. Even more damning is the fact that the 10.2 figure includes the area covered by the 13.9 figure! That implies a far lower unemployment rate if we were to isolate the parts of the metro on the Oregon side only. The tax explanation simply cannot be the main cause.
Job growth and unemployment rates are totally different things.
Job growth measures the total amount of jobs created (or lost) during a period of time. Unemployment rates measure the % of the workforce without a job. It also only counts the people who are actively looking for work as unemployed.
Look at the population growth figures and I think you'll have your answer for why Clark county has higher unemployment rates right now.
Here, this shows that Portland and Multnomah county actually had less jobs in 2009 than in 2001.
BTW, someone else posted this recently, thanks to whomever it was. I also want to mention that I disagree with the contention of the article, which is that the poor job creation is caused by land use regulations. I only post the link for the data.
Last edited by TDNY; 10-12-2010 at 06:24 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.
