The Creative Class, blah, blah, blah

[japrovo]

Originally posted by Cardinal
"... there are a handful of people who understand there is no "big fix." [/B]

Amen to that...but trendy buzzwords and branding of the Creative Class by Florida aside, 20-34 year olds are a declining resource--- the age cohort that will be bearing the boomer retirement on their backs. If they stick with the regions they flock to now---and there is a difference in where they tend to settle and its not always about where the jobs are---that will be the cause of headaches down the road for other places as companies in the next generation of growth industries will follow the workers. So I think we get to a big probem rather than a big fix. I don't think that building more bike paths or even support for up and coming arts scenes will do anything for the places that aren't drawing the young. There is path dependency towards some critical mass that you just can't swim against. I don't know what my prescription is for the Charlestowns...encouraging new immigrants maybe?

[Michele Zone]

Originally posted by Howard Roark
Good points all, the bottom line is that there is no magic bullet, but if you have ever read the cries of newspapers editorial pages you would tend to think that a great monument, civic project, or class of people could pull a city out of a funk. The Atlanta Journal Constitiution ran a front page multi-day series 2 years ago on why Atlanta needed a large landmark (ie; Arch, Space Needle, Statue of Liberty, Googenhiem) to define its self, this was jumped on by civic leaders and the ppulace, to date no design (or even clear objective) has risen.

Some random thoughts: "Great Monuments" are usually 'great' not due to their Size, but due to the events that led to them and the human energy poured into them and the real accomplishment they typically represent. The Golden Gate bridge was begun during The Great Depression -- and San Franciscans dug down deep to finance it at a time when everyone was already hurting. It is not simply an engineering marvel that closes the loop on the road system of the SF Bay, it is a tribute to the human spirit. You cannot order something like that the way you order Pizza.

All this talk about trying to lure the creative class as a means to revitalize cities -- I cannot imagine something more likely to repel a person and I can hear the reaction of "The creative class" now: " Excuse me? You want me to move to your city so you can benefit financially from the 'human capital' that I respresent to you?"

It is no wonder our cities are in such trouble. I would think that planners should run a city for the benefit of the people, not the other way around. Yes, money is a factor in all of that and, yes, a city has to survive in order to benefit humans. But treating people like mere commodities is unlikely to promote the 'diverse' and 'open-minded' atmosphere that "these people" crave. A city that is run by open-minded people will promote an open-minded environment. Labeling some people as "The Poor" and some as "The Creative Class" and so forth and then deciding "we want to make these people Go Away and we want to make these other people move here in droves" -- rather than planning to take care of the people already there -- seems completely backwards to me.

I got married at 19 -- to a man who was also 19 and had been working at McDonald's less than 2 weeks and had yet to recieve his first paycheck. I believed in him. I supported him. I met his needs and took care of him. He joined the army and gained rank fast and got over some of the crap he grew up with. He turned into a much better human being than he was when I married him. He is now seen as 'quite the catch' -- but certainly wasn't when I married this long-haired freak of a "Loser" over the objections of my family.

My point: "Human capital" can be Home Grown by meeting the needs of the 'pathetic slobs' you are surrounded by every day. Writing off the 'locals' as 'undesireable' and hoping to 'attract a better class of people' is about as dehumanizing a strategy as I have ever heard of. I have not read Florida's book but I was considering doing so. However, if the tone of this thread is any indication of what his book says, I think I will skip it.

The very last point in the very last post mentioned 'immigrants'. And that is a valid means to grow human capital -- not simply import it. Immigrants often energize an economy. One factor is that they arrive and are 'nothing' but generally have more opportunity in America (or wherever they have moved to) than the place they left. That is typically why they left: oppression, war, etc. was seriously impairing any hope of any kind of future. Additionally, the 'melting pot' effect -- that diversity, of taking someone from a completely different environment and transplanting them -- creates synergy. They see everyday, ordinary things with fresh eyes. They bring with them different experential bases and knowledge bases with which to draw a completely different conclusion about the exact same "facts". Etc.

I think there was one other thing that one other person said to which I had intended to respond. But I cannot remember what that was -- so do not be surprised if I post again on this thread.

[jresta]

of course it will be more immigrants. France just released a report saying that they will need 350,000 new immigrant workers to plug the hole in their pension system. Spain and Italy are in even more trouble (due to negative population growth and low immigration).

The US has always used immigration as a growth tool. The economy needs 3% annual growth to be considered healthy. 3% annual growth means that the economy doubles every 24 years. How long can you grow like that before all the markets within your borders are tapped out? If you don't have the population growth to keep up with it the only way to bring new consumers into your economy is to import them or to conquer them - conquering can be done with missles and guns or with the IMF/ World Bank.

From a planning perspective, given the finite resources and finite land we have, you really have to question the logic of an economy that needs to double in size every generation to function properly.

[jordanb]

Originally posted by Michele Zone
All this talk about trying to lure the creative class as a means to revitalize cities -- I cannot imagine something more likely to repel a person and I can hear the reaction of "The creative class" now: " Excuse me? You want me to move to your city so you can benefit financially from the 'human capital' that I respresent to you?"

Heh, that's what Corporate America has been doing for decades.

It is no wonder our cities are in such trouble. I would think that planners should run a city for the benefit of the people, not the other way around. Yes, money is a factor in all of that and, yes, a city has to survive in order to benefit humans. But treating people like mere commodities is unlikely to promote the 'diverse' and 'open-minded' atmosphere that "these people" crave. A city that is run by open-minded people will promote an open-minded environment. Labeling some people as "The Poor" and some as "The Creative Class" and so forth and then deciding "we want to make these people Go Away and we want to make these other people move here in droves" -- rather than planning to take care of the people already there -- seems completely backwards to me.

Michele, I think this is the most insightful thing I have ever heard you say.

[BKM]

From a planning perspective, given the finite resources and finite land we have, you really have to question the logic of an economy that needs to double in size every generation to function properly.

True, especially when so much of the "economic growth" is focused on socially destructive activities (casinos, military products shipped to our buddies in Pakistan , Israel, and the el Saud family, replacing poorly placed homes in firebelts and coastal barrier islands)

[Michele Zone]

Originally posted by jordanb
Heh, that's what Corporate America has been doing for decades.



Michele, I think this is the most insightful thing I have ever heard you say. [/B]

Yeah, and did you miss the part about 'the creative class' being prone to entrepreunerial activities? A group of people that refuses to be used as a mere commodity by Corporate America is unlikely to turn around and play along with being used as a mere commodity by the municipalities of America.

Additionally, some of the most creative people I know are worth a great deal to the community but are not, themselves, 'rich' in a financial sense. I would like to point out that 'capital' and 'money' are not remotely the same thing. Having actual Capital frequently leads to having money. Having money but no capital frequently leads to poverty, bankruptcy, etc.. (A la the fact that something like 2/3s of all lottery winners are bankrupt within 5 years.)

And "thank you".
-----
BKM, I do not know how to begin to address your comments but they are all wrong. Life is change. Houses do not last forever. Yes, it is stupid to build them on a barrier reef, but I have heard the same thing said about building them in 'flood plains'. People seem to completely overlook the fact that 'flood plains' are where there is water (for both consumption and transport) and fertile soil for growing crops. Historically, most major cities are built on 'flood plains'. Look at a map of the U.S. some time that shows natural disasters. There is no place "safe" to live. If it isn't tornadoes, it's hurricanes. If it isn't one of those, then it is earthquakes. It is a "pick your poison" kind of thing: you can decide which 'natural disasters' you prefer but you cannot escape them altogether.

The human tendency to view all of nature in humanocentric terms and label natural processes as 'disasters' and try to control them is often antithetical to life itself. As one example, some kinds of trees -- like certain species of pine -- can only reproduce in the aftermath of a fire. The cones do not open until the temperature is sufficiently high -- and 'sufficiently high' never occurs in nature except when there is a fire. So, a fire comes through and clears the land, the cones open and release the seeds, the seeds fall on newly cleared ground that has been fertilized by the fire burning everything and this gives them a competitive advantage. Some forests begin to die when you completely eliminate forest fires.

Additionally, if you try to eliminate forest fires, when one does happen, it is usually truly disasterous because of the scale involved, thanks to all that dry underbrush that has been accumulating for years. This was one of the legacies of the Clinton administration and its anti-human "environmental" policies that kept people out of some parts of public land. People who camp act as stewards of the land and clear the dry brush, so that when a fire occurs, it is relatively small. Keeping ALL people out of an area is not necessarily 'good for the environment', contrary to the opinions of some extremists.

Furthermore, all that 'wasteful' spending on 'destructive' military stuff wouldn't seem so wasteful to you if this were a completely pacifist country, like Tibet, taken over by another country that is not pacifist, like China did to Tibet. All those nutty pacificists -- like the Jehovah's Witness I gave a piece of my mind to -- can only afford their silly belief system (in my opinion) because America has a strong military and we are pretty safe here, compared to most people in the world. The world is a violent place and that fact is not going to go away just because you don't like violence. It was violent before humankind began and it will be violent after humankind ceases to exist. Last time I checked, in order for anything to continue to live, something else must die and be consumed -- several times a day, if you are human. (And, sorry, I do not believe that it is any more 'moral' or any way around this law of physics if what you kill and eat is a plant rather than an animal. Vegetarians do not get to escape the laws of physics.)

Still want to have a cup of a coffee with me? (If so, e-mail me and we can set up a time.)

[BKM]

I was yanking the chains. (Being a forum troll). Me bad. Nothing is permanent, everything will be destroyed at one point or another. Heck, I would consider living in my sister's Oakland Hills neighborhood-its beautiful.

I am not really a pacifist. But, I am also deeply suspicious of the empire building planned for us by the current cabal.

I do have a problem with us being the wrold's largest arms merchant-especially when we are selling arms to places like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia and Egypt that hate us deeply (or at least their populations do). All in the name of realpolitic-which always turns around and bites us on the a*&* (Afghanistan-anyone).

I will still hold the line on my "casino" comment. They are vortexes of evil that must be fought.

[Michele Zone]

Originally posted by BKM

I will still hold the line on my "casino" comment. They are vortexes of evil that must be fought.

Hey, I haven't said the first word about casinos. I do not gamble. I don't know where I stand on such things, but, without doing any research, my gut reaction is "Burn them all to the ground". Therefore, without doing research, you aren't likely to hear me talk about casinos, one way or the other (well, I just did -- but "Generally Speaking".)

[SW MI Planner]

There is no place "safe" to live. If it isn't tornadoes, it's hurricanes. If it isn't one of those, then it is earthquakes. It is a "pick your poison" kind of thing: you can decide which 'natural disasters' you prefer but you cannot escape them altogether.

You can in northern Michigan. Yah, it gets quite cold, but there no tornadoes, earthquakes, hurricanes, etc.

[Rumpy Tunanator]

Originally posted by Michele Zone
[B]There is no place "safe" to live. If it isn't tornadoes, it's hurricanes. If it isn't one of those, then it is earthquakes. It is a "pick your poison" kind of thing: you can decide which 'natural disasters' you prefer but you cannot escape them altogether.B]

-No eathquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes here. People will say it snows here 10 months out of the year. Bull malarky! Since when did people become afraid of snow? Is it going to bite you like a 8 foot sewer snake (thanks El Guapo)? No. We get one big storm every so often and the friggin media is all over like lesbians on cherry pie (sorry lesbos).
-I don't see how disasterious this is. When it snows like that every so often we get outside and walk the streets with beer, helping neighbors dig out while getting a buzz. Plus snow = snowboardin, skiing, pegging crows with snow balls, writing you name in the snow with yellow mellow, snow forts, etc. The only disaster that might happen is that the store might run out
of milk and eggs and good beer. Stockpiling beer is the best way to advert a disaster

[jresta]

Originally posted by Michele Zone
All those nutty pacificists -- like the Jehovah's Witness I gave a piece of my mind to -- can only afford their silly belief system (in my opinion) because America has a strong military and we are pretty safe here, compared to most people in the world. The world is a violent place and that fact is not going to go away just because you don't like violence. It was violent before humankind began and it will be violent after humankind ceases to exist. Last time I checked, in order for anything to continue to live, something else must die and be consumed -- several times a day, if you are human. (And, sorry, I do not believe that it is any more 'moral' or any way around this law of physics if what you kill and eat is a plant rather than an animal. Vegetarians do not get to escape the laws of physics.)

wow! How's that for a healthy dose of social darwinism?

1000 lb. bombs don't rain from the sky if no one is building them. People have always fought over resources(power) - no matter what rhetoric it's couched in. It's always been about empire no matter what the scale and whether physical or economic. Rome needed more bread in its basket.
Genghis Kahn was looking for food for his growing population, Napoleon wanted a euro empire, Hitler wanted growing room for his Aryans.

I'm by no means a pacifist, like Zapapta said, "It's better to die on your feet than live on your knees!" But i'd like to think that we're human and are intelligent enough to talk about things and in the worse case can be humble enough to let the other guy fire the first shot.

I say the quickest violent way to peace is to train the gun on the middle man.

[BKM]

No eathquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes here. People will say it snows here 10 months out of the year. Bull malarky! Since when did people become afraid of snow? Is it going to bite you like a 8 foot sewer snake (thanks El Guapo)? No. We get one big storm every so often and the friggin media is all over like lesbians on cherry pie (sorry lesbos).

True, but you all need imported oil-and if that oil is short or a family too poor, you can freeze to death fairly quickly. Can Buffalo or any larger northeastern city heat itself off local wood anymore? Besides, its 75 degrees and beautiful-when compared to the photos you posted, I'll live with the risk

Im not a pacifist, either, jresta. The problem I see is that we HAVE TO change. There are too many people, our wars cause too much environmental and physical damage. Can we? History suggests no, but you can't give up hope,

And I don't mean that I think the military or soldiers are evil. I think they are too often used for evil menas and that not every war or action of my country is good for "national security" or fulfills the "beacon for mankind" the more idelaistic of my conservative brethren claim for this country.

[BKM]

As for laws of physics-well, carrots and lettuce don't scream (like pigs or cattle). And, third world forests are not denuded so that we can all eat $0.99 burgers.

I'm not a vegetarian myself-but I can't dismiss the moral arguments quite so easily.

[Rumpy Tunanator]

Originally posted by BKM
True, but you all need imported oil-and if that oil is short or a family too poor, you can freeze to death fairly quickly. Can Buffalo or any larger northeastern city heat itself off local wood anymore? Besides, its 75 degrees and beautiful-when compared to the photos you posted, I'll live with the risk

-What, no industrial areas where you live? We happen to have some of the most beautifull arcitecture in the world here as opposed to some other places. Besides those pics will be updated once Rumpy's Rampage (copyright, copyright) opens. I don't use oil to heat my house, I use California brush to heat my house (Joke inserted here, take it easy people). Come on, get with the times before Cali sinks into the pacific.

[Michele Zone]

Originally posted by Rumpy Tuna
-No eathquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes here. People will say it snows here 10 months out of the year. Bull malarky! Since when did people become afraid of snow?

People freeze to death in situations like that or die of pneumonia. I find that kind of cold to be quite life-threatening, with my respiratory problems. And you are not exempt from disease, drought, flood, etc. Some things are more likely to be dangerous than others, but nothing is 100% guaranteed to be 'safe'.

Jresta, I do not see where you get 'social darwinism' from my comments. I am well aware of the abuses of the military by the people in power. But it is not all about 'destruction': the military also gave us GPS. National Security is more than just 'war' and 'dropping bombs on people's heads'. My husband flew out last night on short notice to LA in case they need to bring in the troops to help fight the fires because coordinating such things is part of his duties. The military also got called in when racism exploded into a mini civil war in Alabama a few decades back. My first preference is for non-violent means to resolve things. But when the 'other guy' prefers violence, I think it is important to be prepared ahead of time.

BKM, I rarely eat a hamburger. I read all the political stuff in "Diet for a Small Planet". I am well aware that every level of the food web that you go up loses another 90% of the energy of the sun that was originally stored as food energy through the action of chrolophyl turning sunlight into carbs. My point is that, at some fundamental level, it is 'kill or be killed'. People often seem unwilling to see that. But, in my view, folks who want life to be all 'clean' do some of the most horrendous, morally objectionable things in order to avoid seeing such things and having their sensibilities offended.

BTW: Eating meat can be an efficient use of resources if the meat is from cows grazing on grasslands that are not fit to raise crops. It is a huge waste of planetary resources to consume the grain- and soy-fed beef typically produced in America.

[old man]

I did not understand the quote about look at Columbia, SC

"I haven't read Florida but it doesn't take a genius to figure out that - and take a look at what's going on in Columbia, SC - the brain drain will continue in cities that lack a certain QOL."

Maybe being from there I have not noticed, our we doing something good or bad or nothing. Please resond.

[biscuit]

Originally posted by old man
I did not understand the quote about look at Columbia, SC

"I haven't read Florida but it doesn't take a genius to figure out that - and take a look at what's going on in Columbia, SC - the brain drain will continue in cities that lack a certain QOL."

Maybe being from there I have not noticed, our we doing something good or bad or nothing. Please resond.

I must have missed that quote earlier but I would have to disagree with the poster. Columbia is home to the states largest university (stupid Cocks ), has a growing population and is redeveloping areas that would be attractive to young professionals (the Vista comes to mind). Just as an outsider looking in I would say Columbia's doing a fine job. If anything, the city's only real drawbacks are the flat topography and oppressive summer heat. Maybe creative people don't like the humidity.

[ludes98]

Originally posted by biscuit
If anything, the city's only real drawbacks are the flat topography and oppressive summer heat.

Those don't seem to be hurting some of the fastest growing areas. Can you beleive that many people want to live in Las Vegas?

[BKM]

What, no industrial areas where you live? We happen to have some of the most beautifull arcitecture in the world here as opposed to some other places. Besides those pics will be updated once Rumpy's Rampage (copyright, copyright) opens. I don't use oil to heat my house, I use California brush to heat my house (Joke inserted here, take it easy people). Come on, get with the times before Cali sinks into the pacific.

Actually, I find industrial architecture fascinating-over the years my (periodically dormant) photography hobby has moved more and more to industrial ruins. I just had printed a grafitti-covered remnant of the Hercules gunpowder plant-a really cool building.

I was talking about the incredibly oppressive look of the weather. It certainly rains here, and maybe it was just a lighting issue, but I could feel my bone marrow freeze just looking at thos photos

[Rumpy Tunanator]

Originally posted by BKM
I was talking about the incredibly oppressive look of the weather. It certainly rains here, and maybe it was just a lighting issue, but I could feel my bone marrow freeze just looking at thos photos

-Yeah the weather was angry that day, but it wasn't to bad, just a little wet.

[Wannaplan?]

In Michigan, Governor Granholm has started a "cool cities" initiative. Here is an excerpt from a press release, dated September 19, 2003, from the Office of the Governor:

Governor Jennifer M. Granholm today announced that she has asked the mayors of more than 250 Michigan cities to help her focus on ways to make Michigan’s cities more attractive for new jobs and new citizens...

A recent report from the U.S. Census Bureau indicated that more than 33,000 young adults left the southeast Michigan region of the state, alone, between 2000 and 2002...

"Our younger generations hold the key to our economic future," said Granholm. "When young people leave Michigan, they take with them their talent, job skills, solid educations, and economic growth potential. We’re going right to the source to find out what will make them want to stay."

The goals of the initiative are two-fold: first to bring discussions about supporting and investing in cities to a statewide level; and, second, to find out what state tools and resources local citizens think would be most effective in improving their communities...

More at: http://www.michigan.gov/gov/0,1607,7...5516--,00.html

Clearly, either Governor Granholm or someone on her staff has read Florida's book.

In an interesting article that appeared in the local newspaper this week-end, a conservative think-tank, the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, wrote a rebuttal (of sorts) to Governor Granholm's (a democrat) "cool citites" intiative. Here is an excerpt:

The best thing the bureaucrats can do is to perform the core functions of government well — and otherwise get out of the way. With a maze of bureaucratic white elephant schemes, zoning laws, licenses, regulations, a difficult labor climate and an overall tax burden that is still too high, Michigan is its own worst enemy when it comes to fostering entrepreneurship and attracting the talented and creative...

If Gov. Granholm is serious about creating cool cities and attracting entrepreneurs, she could start by relying less on fellow politicians and government commissions and implement the following:

1. ...

2. ...

3. ...

4. Protect property rights by reforming “eminent domain” laws that allow politicians to seize private property for purposes that often look a lot more “private” than they do “public.”

5. Relax historic preservation laws. Often these laws are so complex and time-consuming, they interfere with renovations and make it harder to preserve historic structures.

6. ...

Of course, the most difficult step of all is the one government would have to take once all of the above steps are accomplished: Leave everything else alone. If the story of SoHo is any indication, the private sector will take care of the rest.

You can read more from this article at: http://www.mackinac.org/article.asp?ID=5926

I am perplexed the Mackinac Center article. I am thinking about writing my own response to my local newspaper. I guess I take exception at calling zoning laws a "white elephant scheme" and that they have the lack of insight to compare NYC's SoHo to Flint, Michigan. Two different beasts! Their article is a great example of obfuscation of real planning issues that an uninformed public may take as fact.

[Seabishop]

I hope the Cool Cities initiative doesn't focus too much on superficial coolness. Young people didn't flock to places like Arizona because they're cool but because of JOBS. Flint with new cafes and bike trails still doesn't offer job oppurtunities for a recent college grad.

[jordanb]

Well, jobs go where the workers go. Cities have been trying to attract and keep employers for decades, and it's been pretty futile. Jobs follow workers, for the most part.

Like in Chicago, tech firms were all locating out in the suburbs, like the I90 corridor, throughout the 90s, while the "yuppies" they wanted to hire were all settling in Chicago. Now Motorola, who moved to the suburbs a long time ago citing the need to be closer to employees, is locating engineering offices downtown, citing a need to attract those city dwelling technical people who don't want to put up with a hellish reverse commute.

[Lee Nellis]

I don't know about Soho, but I have watched the re-development of LoDo, Denver's "cool" part of the city, since the time that you were warned not to go out on the streets there (the early '70's). It is crystal clear that had the City stuck to its "basic functions" the redevelopment that has transformed LoDo could never have taken place. Entrepreneurs were/are essential, but they must have a framework within which to work, including everything from a historic preservation code that provides a basis for the tax breaks for easement facades to street improvements to the "free" transit shuttle.

[jresta]

give it a name . . . it's always been around. Before people were calling it the brain drain. Now that governments have decided to be proactive about stopping it they've given it a name.

Unfortunately PA has yet to jump on the bandwagon and they're still sitting around scratching their asses and talking about how the brain drain is killing the PA economy.

p.s. - Phoenix may do a good job at attracting young people just out of school but no one stays there for more than 2 years because it's "like LA, except there's nothing to do"