A Cold Flint? Part I: Winners And Losers
By Mitch Berg
It’s the Minnesota left (and RINO-right)’s favorite club-over-the-head line; “if we don’t [fill in the desired spending proposal], the Twin Cities will become a cold Omaha”.
It’s kind of funny, really, since Omaha is thriving these days.
Steve Berg at the MinnPost takes a whack at analyzing the census data – and doesn’t like what he (and, more to the point, his various sources) see:
At first glance, the 2010 Census results seem satisfying and unremarkable. Only upon further review do they reveal unbalanced patterns of growth and wealth that spell trouble for Minneapolis-St. Paul as the metro economy tries to regain momentum.
The official count placed MSP’s 13-county metro population at 3,278,833, up 10.4 percent from a decade ago. That was enough for the Twin Cities to retain its rank as the nation’s 16th largest metro market. While the region grew 40 percent slower than during the go-go ’90s, it still outpaced the 9.7 percent national rate, and it grew faster than all other Midwestern and Northeastern metros in the top 20.
So far, so good.
But there’s “bad” news – or, as Republicans would see it, “reality” and “a changing market” – along with it:
How the region grew should deeply trouble Minnesota’s political, business and civic leaders. Virtually all growth was on the suburban edge, while the central cities and most inner suburbs lost both population and relative wealth. Not only did the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul fail to gain population, they are now fully 30 percent poorer than the metro region as a whole.
The important questions, of course, are “why?” and “what do we do about it?”
And the answers to both – at least as presented by Berg (no relation) are heavily dependent on ideology.
The Twin Cities metro is at a crossroads. The suburbs – especially the commerce-heavy south and chock-full-of-business west – are thriving. The latest census shows the Third and Sixth Congressional districts are booming, while Minneapolis and Saint Paul are stagnant at best – which is good news politically, as the DFL strangleholds on both congressional districts will be diluted, but bad news economically, as the urban areas require more and more life support from the parts of the state that actually work.
So what are the signs? Is there hope? Will Minneapolis and Saint Paul bounce back? Or are they destined to become a cold Flint Michigan?
If you read Berg’s article – drawn from the state’s “urban planning” intelligentsia…:
That’s not a healthy trend. Unless a more balanced growth pattern emerges, one that also includes the metro area’s inner districts, and unless prosperity is shared more broadly, the MSP region will lag behind in competing for the young talent and high-quality jobs needed to keep pace as the economy recovers.
…the signs aren’t good.
More Monday.
April 1st, 2011 at 11:09 am
Didn’t I just say “I will NEVER live in Minneapolis or St. Paul”? Let me revise that. There’s no way in HELL I will ever live in Minneapolis or St. Paul.
April 1st, 2011 at 11:15 am
“unless prosperity is shared more broadly”
Spoken like a good socialist. Thank you for confirming what we know.
Prosperity is not to be “shared”. YOU MAKE YOUR OWN PROSPERITY. AND YOU DON’T SIT ON YOUR FAT ARSE, WAITING FOR GOVERNMENT TO PROVIDE YOUR “PROSPERITY”…you commie idiot stooge.
The DFL is in a pickle. Either they merge some of their Mpls and St Paul districts…or…expand out to the edges of the first ring suburbs, engulfing the libtard areas of GOP districts…making them even MORE GOP.
The smartest thing the DFL could do is merge the 4th and 5th Congressional districts, sending the first ring suburbs into GOP territory. That would put the 2nd and 3rd CDs in-play, even the 6th. Otherwise, they can hold their 4th and 5th seats and kiss-off picking up any seats for a decade or more.
April 1st, 2011 at 11:19 am
People respond to incentives. They also respond to coercion. Guess which of the two will be on offer to alter current trends?
April 1st, 2011 at 11:23 am
Yes, people respond to coercion…..by leaving when they can. It is as if liberals forget why the Berlin Wall was constructed.
I’d love to live in one of those gorgeous old Victorians…..if I had a mayor who didn’t wage war on gun owners (“arrest the gun” policy no matter what the facts), didn’t waste bazillions on water fountains and grass roofs…..
April 1st, 2011 at 11:24 am
One great benefit of the beltway is that you can completely avoid Mpls and StP.
April 1st, 2011 at 11:29 am
As any successful businessman/woman/womyn will tell you, it doesn’t work to treat the symptoms. You need to solve the problem.
Related to that is to keep asking “why?”. Why don’t people and businesses want to move to the central cities (except for well off hipsters wanting to be in the city). If it is crime, then ask why is there crime. If it high taxes and high regulation, ask why.
I say there is no hope. As long as the citizens want people like Phylis Kahn, Dave Thune, Ellison and McCallum ruling over them, there will never be anything good done.
April 1st, 2011 at 11:45 am
I read the linked MNPost article and almost threw up my lunch. Thanks, Mitch!
Here is a link to an article about the Portlands of the world that is definitely something you won’t read about in Mn Post.
http://bit.ly/fjpqi7
April 1st, 2011 at 12:40 pm
BTW, as Flint is already just about as cold as MSP, shouldn’t we say a “sunnier Flint”?
April 1st, 2011 at 12:52 pm
I sent this fabulous quote by Albert Einstein to every libturd that I know, just to see what kind of reaction that I would get:
“We can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.”
Six of the morons thought that it was an April Fool’s joke! Think about that for a second. What does that tell you?
April 1st, 2011 at 12:59 pm
Scott, I view it as a bad day when I have to go inside the 494/694 loop. It’s something to be avoided if at all possible.
I’d love to see the mayors of St. Paul and Mpls. get questioned by a skeptical media about their plans to reverse the stagnation (at best) in their cities. Their policies are turning the metro inside out: businesses are moving outside the core cities leaving the residential housing behind.
Not that I mind. I get better services and lower congestion this way. So I should be telling the Twin Cities core to keep up the good work!
April 1st, 2011 at 1:19 pm
Steve neglected a few things in his analysis.
Denver, Seattle, and Portland all share the fact that they’re geographically constrained to varying degrees and that makes them more amenable to “urban planning” since consumers have far more limited choice. There are no comparable constraints here, and if Steve wanted to make more apt comparisons it would be to places like Omaha and Dallas.
In geographical areas like we have here there is a far freer market for services. Don’t like the cost of putting a business in Mpls? Eagan is far more willing to “put up” with your carbon footprint than MSP would ever be, and they’re less interested in forcing you have multi-cultural compliance officers, too.
That freer market is death to liberal desires to make this place more “core urban” like the coasts. Without something to force people to submit to liberal urban planning you have two choices: reform MSP government to reflect a pro-business agenda (like Dallas), or legally force the suburban areas to artificially raise costs and constrain choice. Guess what the DFL will try?
April 1st, 2011 at 1:26 pm
“We can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.”
Ranks right up there with
“We can’t afford to go back to failed policies of the present”. – Kermit
April 1st, 2011 at 1:42 pm
nerb….they would say all they need is millions more in free money from others, and then their cities would be perfect.
April 1st, 2011 at 2:44 pm
As long as the citizens want people like Phylis Kahn, Dave Thune, Ellison and McCallum ruling over them, there will never be anything good done.
Some people just cannot seem to shake off shackles of oppression.
April 1st, 2011 at 2:54 pm
“Eagan is far more willing to “put up” with your carbon footprint than MSP would ever be, and they’re less interested in forcing you have multi-cultural compliance officers, too.”
True, but for God’s sake don’t venture into Farmington! They have a city council made up of morons led by a brain dead zombie of a mayor! Of course, they are all libturds, which explains a lot!
April 1st, 2011 at 3:44 pm
It would be very interesting to determine how many policemen, firemen, street worker, sewer worker, garbage hauler, and other goverment workers that actually live in the city that employs them. I’ve known a ton of folks over the years that had city jobs but moved to the burbs. What might that say?
April 3rd, 2011 at 7:57 am
I went to the MinnPost article read it and read the comments. All of the ernest hand wringing boils down to restricting by regulation and law where and how we live. They truly believe that and that is frightening.
April 3rd, 2011 at 2:15 pm
Welcome to our New Progressive Society, puffy. It takes a bureaucrat to run a village.
April 3rd, 2011 at 3:12 pm
Flint is already pretty flippin’ cold & with the lake effect, they get more snow too…
I’m more worried that the DFL will turn us into a equally crappy Detroit. They are obviously capable of doing it.
April 4th, 2011 at 7:52 am
Wait a second. I’ve been in Portland, and quite frankly, when I was there, the urban center was NOT thriving. It wasn’t quite like the bad parts of Chicago or Detroit, but you could tell when you were getting in the bad areas. Same thing with Denver.
I’ve wondered since I was a kid why big city politicians never consider why it takes ever larger sums of money to get people to come there. Hello!
April 4th, 2011 at 9:07 am
I don’t mind living in a 600 sq ft house on a 40-foot wide lot, keeps my carbon footprint small and lets me keep better track of my neighbors (I can look right into their windows from mine).
I don’t mind living 5 miles from work and from a major shopping center. I only put on 10,000 miles last year which helped reduce global warming, albeit all city miles so I need a brake job already.
What I mind is not being able to drive on the streets and alleys because either they’re not plowed, or they’ve degenerated into a maze of potholes,
or they’re torn up to build a train, while Roseville’ streets 1/2 mile away are plowed and sanded clean and dry the same day it snows.
On a $148,000 house in St. Paul (a tax assessor’s joke, by the way) I pay $2,400 while my Roseville neighbor pays only $2,000. I pay more taxes but I get less service.
Plainly, the solution is that he should be moving back to St. Paul.
.