eurokie

AKA the old Viking Hall site, no? Good to hear there's been progress on this project. Undergoing asbestos abatement right now, scheduled for demolition in a few months.

I too love this. But there's no way the stuff east of 25th happens, except perhaps along Lorrain, unless the public housing goes away. Not just because it's scary looking and undesirable (it is a source of crime that has deeply depressed rents along Bridge Ave past 25th for example), but also because they need parking. Unless you could make it market-rate affordable townhomes or something similar for young families who would love the chance to live in Ohio City. I also love that it calls for infill up at that cooky Franklin circle intersection. That is a huge opportunity to reestablish lost sense of place imo.

This. I know I really need to get caught up in this thread (excellent response btw gramarye, I appreciate when people disagree with me intelligibly) - but did I really just wade through 2 pages of "Pure Michigan." Sounds like pure bullsh!t to me. Stop kicking yourselves. How could people from such a nice state (imo) have such an inferiority complex? To the point that they're wishing to become Pure Michigan? I would bring that $40 billion a year figure back down to earth though. Ohio destroys a majority of other states on a lot of things because it destroys a majority of other states in terms of size. Ohio needs to find comparable states to compare itself to, I myself would use Texas and Virginia as model states because they're doing very well and are large states with comparable cities, politics, and demographics.

Seems like a winning proposal to me, although I'd almost rather they had gone with all the parking relegated on one side or the other of the PD station so that the building can frame some kind of intersection. On a side note, today I saw them spraying down the demolition site just down Euclid. Wow, that was fast..

Yeah, I think I've come across a pretty good deal for a beautiful apartment in Edgewater for 600 including this stupid up-charge bc I can only commit to a short lease, but they agreed to waive the 6th month so I'm literally free to find a job anywhere in the world after I graduate. Not a bad deal. I'm still going to tour this apartment in the Birdtown area of Lakewood so I'll decide between the two first thing tomorrow. It astounds me that this is almost case closed, considering I make other big decisions in virtual seconds. Thanks for bearing with my endless inquisitions, hopefully you'll be rewarded by some photos here pretty soon. :D I toured a bunch of units around Shaker and didn't like a single one. I decided Chesterfield is also probably not a wise idea lol. Westside it is for me - my only consolation is that it's not very convenient to the Symphony, should I ever meet a girl who's into good music.

Yeah, right now my fairly unbiased opinion is that Lakewood is the best area in Cleveland. It's hard to go into these other areas looking for places and expecting to feel the same vibe that Lakewood has, and it not being there. I have two questions that I could use some really quick advice on guys. First, is there a doable market during the winter months to sub-lease an apt out come January if I *have* to move away to get a job (which I'd rather stay here longer, but the job market is such that only people willing to move get jobs in my field). If that is a reasonable game plan, I already have a nice apt in Lakewood I'd sign for. Secondly, if not, what do you guys think of the Chesterfield downtown? They would be willing to do a 6 month lease and it's within my budget. That's a pretty big property, so I'm guessing it has a reputation of some kind. I have heard both good and bad things about it.. I overheard a tenant complaining about the pool not working, and apparently the elevators are down in the building. Ugh

Yeah, I just drove through Gordon Square on a quick little night tour through town and I was pleasantly surprised. It's looking very elegant, though there weren't many people out at night, and I love the "overpriced fencing" that others on this board have bashed. :P Not sure what that is. But I was looking at the Plaza Suites, which just cancelled on me because they are surprisingly full now. Which is fair enough because Shaker or Lakewood would probably be better for me anyway. My first impressions of Lakewood tonight are very positive, this is a fantastic, vibrant area. I also fully understand what you guys meant about the Detroit Superior bridge, as I could tell I was uncomfortably close to a bicyclist in my car, although there was no way to create more distance because another car was on-coming. Piss-poor bridge design. The Flats this way - Downtown that way configuration is also bizarre. Making things worse, the "gateway" into downtown awaiting you at the end of the bridge is probably the most dysfunctional downtown space - for a downtown that seems to be very well put together everywhere else.

Thanks guys. So I'll be in town next week. I think I'm going to sign for an apartment around E32/Prospect or a place in Shaker Square, I'm not sure which I'll do. Probably Shaker. I think I'll flip a coin. Too bad every property management company in Cleveland has the worst reviews ever, although some are in the BBB's graces. I'll be staying in Lakewood though. Apparently since the #55 Bus doesn't run on wknds, public transit access from that area has fallen a bit, so I'm not sure I wanna live that far west - but I'm also scheduled to tour apts around Detroit Shoreway. Will be sure to take a bike for a spin, have one full morning of meetings at CSU, etc. I could also use a good recommendation for a downtown lunch spot, preferably around Playhouse Square. Lastly, If you guys want any photos, let me know what and where. I could definitely use a few tips on the most photogenic vantage points, less keen on big towers (ie., what you see from R&R HOF) and more keen on beautiful critical mass density (ie., what you see from the Flats, etc). I definitely plan on getting some photos of the new Uptown development, and anything else this board wants to see. :)

Fantastic photo set.

Excellent rant. The funny thing about "family friendly" nonsense is one of my professors was chatting with me about why she commuted an hour in from Tulsa, rather than living in Stillwater as she was a tenured professor at OSU. Stillwater is a cool college town with all kinds of bars, hipster bars, legendary sports bars, honkeytonks, a few wine bars, coffee bars, tons of great cafes and locally-owned shops, an organic grocer, a Middle Eastern grocer, etc. I was shocked when she said she didn't consider Stillwater family-friendly because it didn't have enough culture for her children to be exposed to..that the culture around OSU was so superficial, like a show being put on for the benefit of all the white people who want lots of "culture" rather than culture. She demanded art in schools, foreign language in elementary schools, diverse communities, gays openly showing PDA, political protests, and so on. To her, she thought that an extremely homogeneous white upper-middle class little enclave on the prairie was sheltering and pulling the wool over her children's eyes, and that was anti-family friendly to her, not the opposite. So she has her family in the big city. That was literally the best explanation I have ever heard of what is "family friendly" but it's such a shame that it's contrary to most people's interpretations. As for Columbus, I agree that Cbus is doing great on young people. It's probably the creative class haven of Ohio, and I say that as someone who is partial to Cleveland having chosen it as my next home. Cincy's streetcar will be a huge boon, and Cleveland has obviously been experiencing a great revitalization. In case it was unclear, and whether the desired model is creative class or family friendly, Richard Florida or Rush Limbaugh, I think that anything happening in Downtown or University Circle does a TON more for Cleveland's economy than anything in Medina or Westlake, et al. Not that those aren't nice places and all, they just don't add any degree of gravitas - that difficult to define, totally subjective oomph that cities need to compete.

Ironically a lot of posts in this thread sort of confirm why Ohio is not growing and not attracting young people. "Creative class? Bah, we don't need no stinkin creative class. Blah, Atlanta is just a sprawly mess and it sucks. And that San Antonio Riverwalk thing, lamooo.." I will say I agree that Ohio has a lot of great things that it could do a better PR job with. For some reason, every time I get on Facebook I get these "Ohio means Jobs" adds. I get it that Ohio has done well with "jobs," however the j-word works best on working stiffs without college degrees. Especially if they could do some more trojan spying and glean a little more about my demographic, they could at the least give me a better-targeted Facebook ad. We'll run through a few posts on here.. Don't underestimate the value of a location being a great place to raise a family. It may not be a factor in your decision making as a single person, but wait until you actually have one. I'd argue at that point it becomes one of the predominant factors. I wouldn't underestimate it, I would throw it out completely. Of course, that's exactly what Atlanta is. You were questioning the growth of Georgia, and I think you answered your own question there. But I'd also say to not underestimate the QoL indicators in Atlanta proper, rather than far-flung suburbs of Gwinnett County, et al. Atlanta is a city that was losing inner city population, and has since added 30,000 new residents in the last 15-20 years, mostly with the condo boom. There are truly world-class amenities like MARTA, Piedmont Park, Emory University, Georgia Tech, etc. that has turned ATL into not just a city of choice for young people, but also a cultural magnet for the entire south. I'm sorry, I read that article, and came away unimpressed. He bases the majority of his point discrediting the creative class on not feeling right in Madison, WI. Oh yeah, forgot to mention that Madison is also a fantastic exemplary city for creative policies. And it's "very gay," to the credit of Richard Florida. I guess 32 Mag has a problem with that? Well that's fine, I wouldn't want you to ever leave America - however I don't think being somewhat worldly is a bad thing, especially in a place. Especially-especially in a place that wants to attract young people after going so long without doing great with that demographic. As for your assessment on European politics, I think you listen to a little too much Rush. The rise of the right-wing in Europe has been impressive but they are still a marginalized political force in all but 3 countries: Switzerland, Austria, and Norway. The Netherlands was governed by a center-right coalition, after decades of left-leaning politics, and it is now turning back to the left-leaning governments. Geert Wilders is a black eye on most of the country. I also take a little bit of offense to your assessment that NL has a ton of poor immigrants dragging the country down who all live in bad areas, which is basically what you said. In Rotterdam I lived in a heavily-Turkish area of the city center that was still a beautiful area. Rotterdam is around 50% immigrant, and there is no way that more than 10% of Rotterdam is impoverished..very clean, modern city. How could I tell it was Turkish? There was a mosque nearby and every morning on my ochtend fietstocht I could smell the delicious Turkish delis baking bread. Yes, getting Turkish food was actually affordable -gasp- unlike the mainstream sports bars I'd also visit. I also think you're ready a ton into my posts - I am white, but I lived in Europe on what was mostly a starving student's budget, with the occasional indulgence. I actually learned Dutch because I couldn't afford all the English-speaking places, for example. So, if you scoff at the notion of being worldly and cultured, discount the creative class, and reassert the importance of "family-friendly" whatever that means, then you're probably exactly what is holding Ohio back to be honest. Which is fine, it's not my home state so I don't feel entitled to make a difference, just my own newcomer's observation based on my own extensive familiarity of economic and developmental concepts. P.S. The Euro crisis is pretty well confined to Southern Europe (which means countries along the Mediterranean Sea). Much of Scandinavia isn't even on the Euro (true). :wink: Ironically a lot of posts in this thread sort of confirm why Ohio is not growing and not attracting young people. "Creative class? Bah, we don't need no stinkin creative class. Blah, Atlanta is just a sprawly mess and it sucks. And that San Antonio Riverwalk thing, lamooo.." I will say I agree that Ohio has a lot of great things that it could do a better PR job with. For some reason, every time I get on Facebook I get these "Ohio means Jobs" adds. I get it that Ohio has done well with "jobs," however the j-word works best on working stiffs without college degrees. Especially if they could do some more trojan spying and glean a little more about my demographic, they could at the least give me a better-targeted Facebook ad. We'll run through a few posts on here.. Don't underestimate the value of a location being a great place to raise a family. It may not be a factor in your decision making as a single person, but wait until you actually have one. I'd argue at that point it becomes one of the predominant factors. I wouldn't underestimate it, I would throw it out completely. Of course, that's exactly what Atlanta is. You were questioning the growth of Georgia, and I think you answered your own question there. But I'd also say to not underestimate the QoL indicators in Atlanta proper, rather than far-flung suburbs of Gwinnett County, et al. Atlanta is a city that was losing inner city population, and has since added 30,000 new residents in the last 15-20 years, mostly with the condo boom. There are truly world-class amenities like MARTA, Piedmont Park, Emory University, Georgia Tech, etc. that has turned ATL into not just a city of choice for young people, but also a cultural magnet for the entire south. I'm sorry, I read that article, and came away unimpressed. He bases the majority of his point discrediting the creative class on not feeling right in Madison, WI. Oh yeah, forgot to mention that Madison is also a fantastic exemplary city for creative policies. And it's "very gay," to the credit of Richard Florida. I guess 32 Mag has a problem with that? Well that's fine, I wouldn't want you to ever leave America - however I don't think being somewhat worldly is a bad thing, especially in a place. Especially-especially in a place that wants to attract young people after going so long without doing great with that demographic. As for your assessment on European politics, I think you listen to a little too much Rush. The rise of the right-wing in Europe has been impressive but they are still a marginalized political force in all but 3 countries: Switzerland, Austria, and Norway. The Netherlands was governed by a center-right coalition, after decades of left-leaning politics, and it is now turning back to the left-leaning governments. Geert Wilders is a black eye on most of the country. I also take a little bit of offense to your assessment that NL has a ton of poor immigrants dragging the country down who all live in bad areas, which is basically what you said. In Rotterdam I lived in a heavily-Turkish area of the city center that was still a beautiful area. Rotterdam is around 50% immigrant, and there is no way that more than 10% of Rotterdam is impoverished..very clean, modern city. How could I tell it was Turkish? There was a mosque nearby and every morning on my ochtend fietstocht I could smell the delicious Turkish delis baking bread. Yes, getting Turkish food was actually affordable -gasp- unlike the mainstream sports bars I'd also visit. I also think you're ready a ton into my posts - I am white, but I lived in Europe on what was mostly a starving student's budget, with the occasional indulgence. I actually learned Dutch because I couldn't afford all the English-speaking places, for example. So, if you scoff at the notion of being worldly and cultured, discount the creative class, and reassert the importance of "family-friendly" whatever that means, then you're probably exactly what is holding Ohio back to be honest. Which is fine, it's not my home state so I don't feel entitled to make a difference, just my own newcomer's observation based on my own extensive familiarity of economic and developmental concepts. P.S. The Euro crisis is pretty well confined to Southern Europe (which means countries along the Mediterranean Sea). Much of Scandinavia isn't even on the Euro (true). :wink: Yep. There's HDI, the GINI Coeffecient, Mercer does a well-known QoL Index.. alternatively infant mortality statistics are also becoming a widely accepted yardstick for holistic public health. But gramarye is also right that it's subjective as to which yardsticks you chose. I think QoL is subjective only in the holistic sense, but very objective if you can narrow down who your QoL pertains to. Obviously retirees and young people have different needs and requirements. I think you need to focus on improving QoL for the demographic that you lack and need the most in order to have growth. What is the point in investing in family friendly if all the kids flee the "family friendly" locales for creative class locales after they turn of age? Often college towns, often large cities, often beach towns, et al. Well why on earth would we ask young people what young people want? Creative class research is best left to angry 60-year old white dudes who fear they've lost their country.

Pathetic It's Georgia, btw. Seriously, you expect me to respect a stat that is extremely counterintuitive based on a link to a page on Amazon where a book written by a Democratic partisan is out of stock? And on what axis is Georgia measured as "more successful" than Ohio? Are they actually that much richer and/or faster growing than we are? Have you been to Atlanta? Indy is a QoL leader. Cities wanting to improve send delegations there. As for Pittsburgh, it is losing people, but not highly-qualified people OR creative class. Pittsburgh is rising as an extremely innovative city, and it's exemplifying how population growth isn't the end all be all. Here I go back to QoL being the bottom line. What is the point of growth for growth's sake? Is there some pagan god named Growth that we're obligated to make sacrifices to or something? Copenhagen and Stockholm aren't growing, but their QoL is so much higher than anywhere in North America. There's not a day that goes by that I don't miss living in Rotterdam. I miss Moscow a lot too, but I know the distinction that made Rotterdam so much more livable, and why I always saw NL as a country where I may seriously settle down some day. That difference is QoL. I am really confident that the future is going to bring America out-smarting and out-innovating even Europe. They've kicked our butt in the last 40 years, economic hiccup aside (one that isn't affecting the higher QoL countries like NL, DEN, SWE). America is embracing QoL and innovation, and those cities that don't hop on board will absolutely be left behind. There will be a new Detroit, and a new Dallas. Who knows, these cities may even swap fortunes (although I know personally know Dallas has more staying power than it gets credit for).

Not entirely true. Architectural services on a project like this will be at least $10,000, not counting project management and AOR duties like construction management that would bring it up to 5-10% project cost (supposed to be 10% but architectural fees have been slashed nation-wide since the Great Recession). This makes me really sad - I am heavily considering a new apt between here and downtown. :|

This has me thinking, could the University System of Ohio do a better job of luring East Coast students? It seems the high cost of Education there combined with the low cost of living here would be a good recipe for major increases in enrollment. [edit: I see that mov2ohio has suggested something along this line] YES. I think this is necessary. Your higher ed system has to be a magnet unless you're already as large as Texas or California. The thing is, east coast states simply aren't known for quality public universities. This is a strategic advantage that Ohio may have against states to the east, while Penn State is good (we'll have to see this fallout's affect on their institutional credit standing), not everyone in PA can attend PSU. Arizona schools are huge on attracting Cali students. Oklahoma and Arkansas schools have made Texas recruiting a gold mine. I know both OU and OSU absolutely depend on getting 4/5 of their team from Texas. Almost every star football player that OSU has produced under Coach Gundy, except Weeden, was recruited from Texas. Also 30% of our school enrollment was from TX, primarily the Dallas area. If Ohio can capitalize on MI, PA, and NY out-of-state students, they can be poised for growth, and potentially retaining those students after graduation. I don't know if OH already does this, but OK and AR schools extend the same in-state tuition rate to TX students with ACT scores over 26 I think. So essentially, any students who can't get into UT-Austin (which leaves tons of high-scoring students) would rather go to OU, OSU, or UofA over Texas A&M or other UT campuses, and can pay the same if not even less. The end result is that the small town residents of college towns like Stillwater, Fayetteville, and Norman always know school is back in session when 10,000 bmw's with TX license plates descend on the town. A lot of the folks taking all of the new high-paying entry jobs in OKC are OSU/OU kids originally from Texas, so for economic development and human capital development, higher ed's ability to draw from Texas is paying dividends. It works similarly as well for Arizona, because it's not just retirees moving to Phoenix, but also Cali kids who matriculate to ASU/UA. It would work for Ohio too. It's very backward to view your higher ed system as a simple infrastructure for residents only. It must be leveraged creatively not just in your in-migration strategy, but also in producing R&D, and other things.

I hear Mobile has leprechauns, so they have that going for them. As for "Right to Work," that is an insane sham. I don't like closed shops... but I don't like placing restrictions on collective bargaining and the fact that R2W simply empowers employers to fire people for trying to organize. If anything, R2W may make a small difference with manufacturing jobs, but will more likely repel skilled labor and people who'd rather move somewhere with less oppressive working conditions. If oppressive working conditions attract jobs, you probably don't want those jobs anyway.

Great activity, do downtown Cleveland's sidewalks stay that busy during the day?

Clueless, I don't think it looks dirty, I think it's textured to add a tactile feel so that the big box facade is somewhat more interactive. I like it, it's almost kinda like a post-modern take on Italian renaissance rustication..

This is actually untrue. I was born and raised in the south, and for years old-school deep south (aka backwards) states like Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Kentucky, Oklahoma, etc. have been trying to figure out how to have the economic growth that exists in other states like North Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, etc. Obviously there's a different recipe for each success story, but low costs was only a marginal factor in TN and virtually negligible in NC and especially TX. Cost of living is actually very high in Dallas, for example, whereas Dallas (Houston being "Oil Capital of the World") is clearly the business capital of Texas, in a diversified sense. I know many of you yankee urbanists like to snicker at the big projects in Dallas, but the reality is that you could be dropped in Dallas and honestly swear you were in Chicago and be confused why so many TX license plates everywhere. Dallas has grown up, and it's become an completely enclosed, gentrified (or ghettofied) city. Economics are, by far, the biggest reason people move. Either for a job, retirement, etc. This simply cannot be overstated. The perception has long been that the South offered a low cost of living, but also a low cost to do business. Attract people, you attract jobs and vice versa. And every cost of living assessment I've seen has states like Texas and NC toward the bottom of costs. Ohio tends to be in the middle on most of these, but if you do a direct comparison, Ohio is on par with most things, and much cheaper on others, like real estate. The secret has and always will be young people - education, and then retaining those graduates produced by the education system. TX reinvested a lot of its oil profits in the 70s into making UT and A&M world-class research institutions. NC just did it without a massive cash influx to begin with, by prioritizing UNC and NCST over anything else. TN's main growth driver is the Nashville area, which is a mecca for research, with Vandy, medical schools, national research center in one of the southern suburbs, etc. Outside of Nashville, TN has benefited from low costs and especially a lack of union workers, as companies like Nissan and Toyota have demonstrated a strong preference to avoid union regions in establishing new manufacturing centers. Unfortunately. Young people are key, I agree, but you still need cost and jobs to attract them. I think you are overstating to some degree what singular institutions really accomplish in terms of long-term growth trends in a state. I'm sure places like Austin are helped by this, in the same way that Columbus is, but on a statewide scale, I don't think it matters nearly as much as being able to provide good-paying jobs for the graduates, no matter where they graduate from. Also, I disagree that unions are necessarily holding back Ohio vs other states. The state residents recently rejected legislation meant to curb union power, and since then Ohio's unemployment rate has dropped 10 straight months and has had the first or second most jobs gained by any state for a couple months already this year alone, including in May. A significant part of these gains was in manufacturing, particularly related to the auto industry. The unemployment rate is also almost a percentage point below the national average, one of the largest spreads in decades. The state is recovering well economically. Certainly moreso than places like NC, which continue to struggle with jobs and too many people moving there expecting the good times to come back at any moment. Education is always the most important factor, and having a highly-qualified (and public health is also a factor, being healthy) workforce. It's all about human capital that sets states apart, very little has anything to do with costs. Having low costs will attract non-union manufacturing (which is still good), call centers, Indian casinos, and low-skill service jobs - this is absolutely not a basis for economic growth. No Fortune 500 companies, R&D companies, innovative tech startups, or anything that can add skilled labor opportunities to your economy, are looking for cheap. They are looking for quality places to locate over cheap places. States trumpeting their low costs over their education and quality of life are actively repelling good jobs, as a matter of fact. That's all my home state does and they will never figure out why it doesn't work and why the economy is still 100% tied to oil despite other states like Texas successfully diversifying. Again, retaining graduates is important, but the only way to do that is to have jobs available in their fields. An educated workforce doesn't do any good if you have no companies to work for. And Ohio's not exactly at the bottom of the education heap, either, so I don't think the problem is that Ohio doesn't have enough college grads. And what's most interesting is that the South, including Texas and NC, have some of the lowest rates of job mobility in the nation, meaning that it's much harder to move up the ladder and gain success in these states vs Ohio. Most people seem to have no idea about that. Then it comes down to an absolute truism when it comes to economic development. Conservatives craft nothing but dangerous, regressive, backward policies and trumpet them as business-friendly. There is a reason that the most economically prosperous places are usually the most progressive (different from "liberal") in their region - NC and VA are a perfect example of how a state that turned progressive left its Dixie neighbors behind in the dust. If you compare the economic benefits of MS to MN, you'll see a very high-cost yet progressive state up against a very low-cost yet regressive state. If you are an R&D company that employs 200 people, but has a major ripple effect in the economy due to your innovations (in other words YOU are the ED cash cow every state is dreaming about), which state are you going to locate in - MS or MN? I would argue that Ohio is far more progressive politically than any of the Southern states. The largest private research foundation in the entire world is in Columbus, and Cleveland has nationally recognized innovative health facilities. It's not like Ohio lacks in the creative. It's just been that the state has seen 30 years of decline because of too much emphasis on too few industries, not to mention being at the butt end of the suburbia movement. Those things are no longer reality, so it remains to be seen if Ohio can continue its momentum and become a state people associate with success instead of burning rivers and industrial rot. I wanted to revisit this post because I didn't get a chance to respond. This is accurate economic development thinking... for 1990. You do however allude to what you're missing, which is the creative economy. Richard Florida has written the book on that, and he's taken exception with a lot of conservative AND liberal economists. I once saw Florida speak in a speaker's series we had in OKC a while ago, where he confirmed something we recognized in the 90s which is that while jobs are an important component of ED, that's more of an end result, rather than a means to an end. You won't attract jobs if you have a low quality of life (QoL) because jobs are very chicken v. egg, people don't just go to jobs, but jobs go to people. Any good ED strategy must begin and end with QoL because above all you want people to take the job in your community, rather than the job elsewhere, because for qualified and skilled labor there are (or should be) abundant job opportunities everywhere. In addition to this, technology and C2C conferencing technology has exacerbated the reality that the creative class (which will be THE key to growth) can work wherever they want, and they don't even have to live where they work. This gets me to probably the most important point that anyone in this thread could possibly make. What is the goal here? Is it to have economic growth or is it to create a high QoL for Ohio residents? What is the point of ED if it doesn't = QoL? In so many European countries they have a high QoL but their population is not growing, despite economic growth (although obviously no economic growth right now due to Austrian-style austerity). I think it's very possible that if you focus on education and QoL, promoting innovation, that you can make Ohio a better place that young people would at least be unlikely to leave. Growth actually leads to more problems, ie., sprawl, infrastructure, etc., that you can avoid as long as you aren't sliding backwards and losing jobs. Unfortunately, Ohio may not be able to avoid population growth if it is enhancing QoL and promoting innovation... What exactly indicates that Ohio lacks in terms of QoL? Competitiveness. It's not that Ohio's QoL is low, it's that Pittsburgh, Minneapolis, and Indianapolis have a higher QoL. Pittsburgh is a great example of a place that has soared in recent years by reasserting its urban parts, and not abandoning its core when it could have easily done so. They have a dynamic mayor, too. Unless you are having a natural gas boom, which is Kasich's modus operandi. Ohio needs to invest its natural gas boom back into education This is what Texas did with its oil profits in the 1970s. Ohio already has a decent higher ed system, both public and private, but you can't have too much of a good thing there. NC is an absolute model system. This is true. A good technical school system is also beneficial, and with vocational education you can partner guys a lot more closely to employees than you can in 4-year colleges. The problem is that while we as a society are probably turning out too many college grads, from a state-by-state economic competitiveness perspective, you can't turn out enough. That's something we'll need to figure out on a national level, and while I certainly would not be pushing all my kids that I may or may not ever have to go to a good college, the state needs to.

Are you kidding me?

In OKC the folks are all pretty livid, on the sports radio channels, on the news programs, any conversations at the lunch counter, etc. Is this justified or are we just being whiny first time losers? I myself am in disbelief that officials can just so easily hand the trophy to LeBron.

Unless you are having a natural gas boom, which is Kasich's modus operandi. Depends. If we really have as much as they think we do, it'll cover 2 or 3 generations of people. That should help us get back on our feet, whichever way we end up going. How so? Nat gas is worthless, and the price is showing no signs of making a comeback. Look at the Chesapeake fiasco.. The 'Chesapeake fiasco' has nothing to do with natural gas being 'worthless' It has a lot more than analysts admit. CHK set out on its growth and expansion plan when nat gas considerably higher, and now it has tanked in the last 1-2 years as oil rose and has stayed decently high. There is no reason for nat gas and crude to move in opposite directions. As for CHK's fiasco, that's a company where if share holders are making money, they overlook all the things they did for sooo long. Here's an example of that logic: "Everybody knew in 2008 Aubrey was America's highest-paid CEO, big deal?" However, when Aubrey momentarily stops making share holders tons of money, they're looking to go on a mutiny all of a sudden. Crazy.

I can't believe that they have literally used a bullet path through this poor girl's neck as an elaborate allusion to the streetcar's nearby route. That is pretty artfully disgusting.

This is actually untrue. I was born and raised in the south, and for years old-school deep south (aka backwards) states like Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Kentucky, Oklahoma, etc. have been trying to figure out how to have the economic growth that exists in other states like North Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, etc. Obviously there's a different recipe for each success story, but low costs was only a marginal factor in TN and virtually negligible in NC and especially TX. Cost of living is actually very high in Dallas, for example, whereas Dallas (Houston being "Oil Capital of the World") is clearly the business capital of Texas, in a diversified sense. I know many of you yankee urbanists like to snicker at the big projects in Dallas, but the reality is that you could be dropped in Dallas and honestly swear you were in Chicago and be confused why so many TX license plates everywhere. Dallas has grown up, and it's become an completely enclosed, gentrified (or ghettofied) city. Economics are, by far, the biggest reason people move. Either for a job, retirement, etc. This simply cannot be overstated. The perception has long been that the South offered a low cost of living, but also a low cost to do business. Attract people, you attract jobs and vice versa. And every cost of living assessment I've seen has states like Texas and NC toward the bottom of costs. Ohio tends to be in the middle on most of these, but if you do a direct comparison, Ohio is on par with most things, and much cheaper on others, like real estate. The secret has and always will be young people - education, and then retaining those graduates produced by the education system. TX reinvested a lot of its oil profits in the 70s into making UT and A&M world-class research institutions. NC just did it without a massive cash influx to begin with, by prioritizing UNC and NCST over anything else. TN's main growth driver is the Nashville area, which is a mecca for research, with Vandy, medical schools, national research center in one of the southern suburbs, etc. Outside of Nashville, TN has benefited from low costs and especially a lack of union workers, as companies like Nissan and Toyota have demonstrated a strong preference to avoid union regions in establishing new manufacturing centers. Unfortunately. Young people are key, I agree, but you still need cost and jobs to attract them. I think you are overstating to some degree what singular institutions really accomplish in terms of long-term growth trends in a state. I'm sure places like Austin are helped by this, in the same way that Columbus is, but on a statewide scale, I don't think it matters nearly as much as being able to provide good-paying jobs for the graduates, no matter where they graduate from. Also, I disagree that unions are necessarily holding back Ohio vs other states. The state residents recently rejected legislation meant to curb union power, and since then Ohio's unemployment rate has dropped 10 straight months and has had the first or second most jobs gained by any state for a couple months already this year alone, including in May. A significant part of these gains was in manufacturing, particularly related to the auto industry. The unemployment rate is also almost a percentage point below the national average, one of the largest spreads in decades. The state is recovering well economically. Certainly moreso than places like NC, which continue to struggle with jobs and too many people moving there expecting the good times to come back at any moment. Education is always the most important factor, and having a highly-qualified (and public health is also a factor, being healthy) workforce. It's all about human capital that sets states apart, very little has anything to do with costs. Having low costs will attract non-union manufacturing (which is still good), call centers, Indian casinos, and low-skill service jobs - this is absolutely not a basis for economic growth. No Fortune 500 companies, R&D companies, innovative tech startups, or anything that can add skilled labor opportunities to your economy, are looking for cheap. They are looking for quality places to locate over cheap places. States trumpeting their low costs over their education and quality of life are actively repelling good jobs, as a matter of fact. That's all my home state does and they will never figure out why it doesn't work and why the economy is still 100% tied to oil despite other states like Texas successfully diversifying. Again, retaining graduates is important, but the only way to do that is to have jobs available in their fields. An educated workforce doesn't do any good if you have no companies to work for. And Ohio's not exactly at the bottom of the education heap, either, so I don't think the problem is that Ohio doesn't have enough college grads. And what's most interesting is that the South, including Texas and NC, have some of the lowest rates of job mobility in the nation, meaning that it's much harder to move up the ladder and gain success in these states vs Ohio. Most people seem to have no idea about that. Then it comes down to an absolute truism when it comes to economic development. Conservatives craft nothing but dangerous, regressive, backward policies and trumpet them as business-friendly. There is a reason that the most economically prosperous places are usually the most progressive (different from "liberal") in their region - NC and VA are a perfect example of how a state that turned progressive left its Dixie neighbors behind in the dust. If you compare the economic benefits of MS to MN, you'll see a very high-cost yet progressive state up against a very low-cost yet regressive state. If you are an R&D company that employs 200 people, but has a major ripple effect in the economy due to your innovations (in other words YOU are the ED cash cow every state is dreaming about), which state are you going to locate in - MS or MN? I would argue that Ohio is far more progressive politically than any of the Southern states. The largest private research foundation in the entire world is in Columbus, and Cleveland has nationally recognized innovative health facilities. It's not like Ohio lacks in the creative. It's just been that the state has seen 30 years of decline because of too much emphasis on too few industries, not to mention being at the butt end of the suburbia movement. Those things are no longer reality, so it remains to be seen if Ohio can continue its momentum and become a state people associate with success instead of burning rivers and industrial rot. I wanted to revisit this post because I didn't get a chance to respond. This is accurate economic development thinking... for 1990. You do however allude to what you're missing, which is the creative economy. Richard Florida has written the book on that, and he's taken exception with a lot of conservative AND liberal economists. I once saw Florida speak in a speaker's series we had in OKC a while ago, where he confirmed something we recognized in the 90s which is that while jobs are an important component of ED, that's more of an end result, rather than a means to an end. You won't attract jobs if you have a low quality of life (QoL) because jobs are very chicken v. egg, people don't just go to jobs, but jobs go to people. Any good ED strategy must begin and end with QoL because above all you want people to take the job in your community, rather than the job elsewhere, because for qualified and skilled labor there are (or should be) abundant job opportunities everywhere. In addition to this, technology and C2C conferencing technology has exacerbated the reality that the creative class (which will be THE key to growth) can work wherever they want, and they don't even have to live where they work. This gets me to probably the most important point that anyone in this thread could possibly make. What is the goal here? Is it to have economic growth or is it to create a high QoL for Ohio residents? What is the point of ED if it doesn't = QoL? In so many European countries they have a high QoL but their population is not growing, despite economic growth (although obviously no economic growth right now due to Austrian-style austerity). I think it's very possible that if you focus on education and QoL, promoting innovation, that you can make Ohio a better place that young people would at least be unlikely to leave. Growth actually leads to more problems, ie., sprawl, infrastructure, etc., that you can avoid as long as you aren't sliding backwards and losing jobs. Unfortunately, Ohio may not be able to avoid population growth if it is enhancing QoL and promoting innovation...

Unless you are having a natural gas boom, which is Kasich's modus operandi. Depends. If we really have as much as they think we do, it'll cover 2 or 3 generations of people. That should help us get back on our feet, whichever way we end up going. How so? Nat gas is worthless, and the price is showing no signs of making a comeback. Look at the Chesapeake fiasco..

Anywhere that is having an oil boom is probably not a long-term model for sustainable economic growth.