Minnesotans are willing to pay more taxes for more prosperity

[Hermod]

Walter Mondale pretty well epitomizes the liberal politicians of MN from days gone by.

Mondale was "mini-me" to the liberal giant Hubert Humphrey. HH had his name over all of the great social programs. The left just abandoned HH because as VP he supported LBJs war in Vietnam.

[Hermod]

While an individual climate preference is subjective, many more people seem to disagree with you. Tons of retirees for example move to the southeast and southeast every so often simply because of the weather.

But in any event, I agree with what nain rouge said. The "Pure Michigan" collectivist mindset can only get the state so far in terms of being a healthy and attractive place to live or do business.

There is an old joke about an autoworker retiring in Detroit. When he was asked what he was going to do next, he said he was going to tie a snow shovel to the roof of his car and start driving south. When he stopped for gas or to eat and someone asked him "what the hell is that thing on the top of your car?" that is where he was going to live.

[DetroitPlanner]

I think it has to do with all of the freeways that have cut up the City. Ever look at a map of that place? They have to have more lane miles per capita than anywhere else. Allows you to get to Mall of America in mere minutes by car!

[Detroitnerd]

I like the word. It was often used by the characters in Walt Kelly's "Pogo" strip.

Makes sense. As a longtime government employee, your enemy is you.

[ghettopalmetto]

Lot of truth to your points.

Now that we've moved on from industrial to a 'knowledge' economy, a state like N. Carolina [[with a pleasant climate and a lot of top universities which compete very well with those in MI) can compete.

A startup corporation can set up in S.E. MI and pick up talent from UofM and other schools while a N.C. startup has access to Duke, UNC, NCSU, etc. talent.

North Carolina is "pleasant"? Maybe in February! Certainly not today!

This thread is so disgustingly naive, it's not even funny. If climate had a rats ass to do with anything, New York, Boston, and Chicago would have decamped decades ago. I say let the Southern states enjoy their amazing Social Security-based economies. The people Michigan needs are the ones who have 40 years of high earnings ahead of them--not folks on fixed incomes.

[313WX]

North Carolina is "pleasant"? Maybe in February! Certainly not today!

This thread is so disgustingly naive, it's not even funny. If climate had a rats ass to do with anything, New York, Boston, and Chicago would have decamped decades ago. I say let the Southern states enjoy their amazing Social Security-based economies. The people Michigan needs are the ones who have 40 years of high earnings ahead of them--not folks on fixed incomes.

Weather IS a factor. It's naive to say otherwise.

It's just not the only factor people consider when choosing a location. Of course, given everything else Michigan has going against it, the weather can be a deal breaker for many folks [[it's depressing to traverse Detroit's blighted landscape everyday on those cloudy December days).

[ghettopalmetto]

Weather IS a factor. It's naive to say otherwise.

And the South is hot and miserable as hell. If someone can get a good-paying job, they're usually more than happy to buy a fucking coat. Climate, like taxes, is an excuse because it's a simple enough concept for idiots to rationalize.

[313WX]

And the South is hot and miserable as hell.

As stated to another poster, while an individual's preference for climate is subjective, many people disagree with you.

As far as a good-paying job, you might have a point is Michigan didn't have such a limited supply of those. Even then, many companies are having a tough time convincing people to move to Michigan to fill those limited good paying jobs because Metro Detroit has so many man-made problems that haven't been addressed.

Maybe if the weather was nicer, more people would consider dealing with them.

http://rustwire.com/2011/03/11/michi...iving-us-away/

[ghettopalmetto]

As stated to another poster, while an individual's preference for climate is subjective, many people disagree with you.

Funny. I don't see a mass migration of Midwestern-bred geniuses flocking to Arizona, Alabama and Mississippi...or even North Carolina.

[nain rouge]

And the South is hot and miserable as hell. If someone can get a good-paying job, they're usually more than happy to buy a fucking coat. Climate, like taxes, is an excuse because it's a simple enough concept for idiots to rationalize.

I don't know why it's impossible to imagine that the Rust Belt's problems are a combination of simple and complex factors. Analyze what cold weather cities like Boston are doing that Detroit isn't, and then analyze what warm weather cities like Houston are doing that Detroit isn't.

You'll find that most successful warm weather cities are predominately suburban, while successful cold weather cities have a strong urban core. In fact, Michigan is very similar to most Southern states when climate is ruled out. We give out huge tax subsidies and are generally anti-taxes. We believe in sprawl. We're not known as a destination for the creative class. All typical traits of Southern states. So why is the South succeeding while we fail?

[iheartthed]

There is not a single Sun Belt state where median household income is greater than the U.S. as a whole: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ates_by_income

California and Hawaii are the only warm weather states in that group. The highest income Sun Belt state is Texas, but half of the states in the country have higher median incomes than it. High income places tend to be high tax states first, and cold weather states second.

[nain rouge]

A few more years of our One Tough Nerd and we'll be sticking it to Mississippi.

[ghettopalmetto]

You'll find that most successful warm weather cities are predominately suburban, while successful cold weather cities have a strong urban core. In fact, Michigan is very similar to most Southern states when climate is ruled out. We give out huge tax subsidies and are generally anti-taxes. We believe in sprawl. We're not known as a destination for the creative class. All typical traits of Southern states. So why is the South succeeding while we fail?

Yeah, they're not. I don't know where this narrative comes from that the South is "successful", but nothing could be further from the truth. Sure, Houston sits on zillions of gallons of oil, but that's about it. If the South is successful, it's only in the sense that they never had much "success" to begin with...Detroit has lost more than most Southern cities ever had.

Problems with educational attainment, social problems, corruption and crime, are at least as bad in the South as they are in Michigan. Jesus sure as hell ain't "saving" the Bible Belt. That much I know.

[nain rouge]

If the South is successful, it's only in the sense that they never had much "success" to begin with...Detroit has lost more than most Southern cities ever had.

I'm not a big fan of Southern developmental patterns. My point is that the South is eating Michigan's lunch right now. Virginia obliterates Michigan. Texas is doing much better. Georgia just passed us. North Carolina will too, if current trends continue. You're living in the past.

[animatedmartian]

I don't know why it's impossible to imagine that the Rust Belt's problems are a combination of simple and complex factors. Analyze what cold weather cities like Boston are doing that Detroit isn't, and then analyze what warm weather cities like Houston are doing that Detroit isn't.

You'll find that most successful warm weather cities are predominately suburban, while successful cold weather cities have a strong urban core. In fact, Michigan is very similar to most Southern states when climate is ruled out. We give out huge tax subsidies and are generally anti-taxes. We believe in sprawl. We're not known as a destination for the creative class. All typical traits of Southern states. So why is the South succeeding while we fail?

Cold weather cities have sprawl too. Aspects like those are more from a product of when the cities grew. Northern cities experienced growth booms during the earlier part of the 20th century. Most southern cities didn't boom until the later half of the 20th century. Suburban sprawl is a predominantly modern phenomenon that has more to due with terrain than climate.

[nain rouge]

Cold weather cities have sprawl too. Aspects like those are more from a product of when the cities grew. Northern cities experienced growth booms during the earlier part of the 20th century. Most southern cities didn't boom until the later half of the 20th century.

True. And that's the North's strength: historic urban centers overflowing with amenities. That's our distinguishing trait/competitive advantage, except in areas like Cleveland and Detroit, where we couldn't flush that legacy down the toilet fast enough. And you see the results. Even the suburbs of cities like Boston, NYC, and DC benefit immensely from the amenities and wealth those cities bring to the table.

Think about it. If you weren't a Michigan homer, how could you really say Detroit is better than Nashville, for example? From an objective standpoint, Detroit is at a major competitive disadvantage. And our sprawl is losing to Southern sprawl in a major way. The migration patterns are undeniable.

As long as the car is king, there'll be sprawl, but why would an outsider want to set up shop in sprawl built around a giant hole of spreading decay, with snow and cold weather for half of the year? Especially when there are better options?

[animatedmartian]

I don't think I came off as a Michigan homer, I'm just saying weather isn't the driving factor. If it were, then why aren't states like Mississippi and Louisiana seeing the same sort of massive growth?

[313WX]

I don't think I came off as a Michigan homer, I'm just saying weather isn't the driving factor. If it were, then why aren't states like Mississippi and Louisiana seeing the same sort of massive growth?

It may not be a driving factor, but it's still a factor.

[nain rouge]

It may not be a driving factor, but it's still a factor.

Exactly. Sprawl lovers are different from urbanites, and those that prefer there feet in both pools are yet another breed. If someone really loves sprawl [[meaning they don't really care about sidewalks, urban cities, or history), explain to me why they would pick Metro Detroit over the competition?

If you look at recent census data, the areas losing population are overwhelmingly Rust Belt and have deteriorated urban environments. Seriously, for about every Southern metro losing population, there are 5 Rust Belt metros losing population.

[MikeyinBrooklyn]

I'm changing my opinion. Let's double our taxes, and regroup in five years to see how it's going. That meeting will be held in Dallas.

[emu steve]

Weather IS a factor. It's naive to say otherwise.

It's just not the only factor people consider when choosing a location. Of course, given everything else Michigan has going against it, the weather can be a deal breaker for many folks [[it's depressing to traverse Detroit's blighted landscape everyday on those cloudy December days).

It isn't the weather [[unless one is thinking of growing fruits and some veggies). Sure retirees move to warmer climates, but if Detroit was manufacturing 5M cars in MI we wouldn't be having this conversation.

The Midwest and other areas developed because of their location [[for shipping, etc.) and once automobiles started to be built in Detroit [[and Dearborn) why not continue to build them in Flint, Saginaw, Bay City, Lansing, etc. and maybe have assembly plants closer to the customer.

Then, of course, the South decided they wanted in on the action and offered right to work bennies.

And then Mexico came in with sub-South wages and jobs continued to migrate southward out of the country.

ANYWAY, once these rust belt cities lost their jobs THEY WERE DEAD MAN WALKING. It wasn't a case of lowering property taxes, etc.

They lost their good paying jobs, lost their health insurance, etc. etc.

Also there was the other killer SUBURBANIZATION. Folks left big cities and took their $ with them.

Population tanked and real estate tax income dried up faster than a pond in Phoenix.

Free market capitalism is a two-edged sword. It produces inexpensive goods but it can be a JOB KILLER.

Kill jobs and kill the city...

There is a big, big difference between a city like Detroit which decayed and say a young sun belt city which has yet to lose it employment base.

[nain rouge]

Kill jobs and kill the city...

There is a big, big difference between a city like Detroit which decayed and say a young sun belt city which has yet to lose it employment base.

But see, we created at least half the problem ourselves by overdeveloping. If we'd developed within reason, there wouldn't have been half the decay you see today. The region had and has more than enough money to make Detroit a great city. We've just continuously chosen not to. Even when we had tons of factory jobs, we were moving those plants to the suburbs as quick as we could.

To me, deindustrialization is the biggest red herring in the Detroit story. Metro Detroit has over 4 million people. Detroit itself never had more than 1.8 million [[and it was noticeably overcrowded then, with multiple families crowding in dwellings meant for one). So how is deindustrialization the true culprit?

[313WX]

It isn't the weather [[unless one is thinking of growing fruits and some veggies). Sure retirees move to warmer climates, but if Detroit was manufacturing 5M cars in MI we wouldn't be having this conversation...

Sure.

But if there are no jobs and the city/state is broke to the point where the infrastructure is falling apart, then why hang around knowing you will also have to deal with Michigan's relatively rough winters?

[animatedmartian]

Sure.

But if there are no jobs and the city/state is broke to the point where the infrastructure is falling apart, then why hang around knowing you will also have to deal with Michigan's relatively rough winters?

But the same can be said of New Orleans whose average winter time temperature is 50 degrees yet has lost population every decade since 1970. Why would people leave the city if the climate there is so favorable?

[313WX]

But the same can be said of New Orleans whose average winter time temperature is 50 degrees yet has lost population every decade since 1970. Why would people leave the city if the climate there is so favorable?

Weather isn't the ONLY factor people will consider when choosing to live in a location.