jonoh81

As I didn't realistically expect any Ohio city on the list, Columbus is a surprise. That said, that's some stiff competition and I still think that would be one of the least likely winners. The only thing is that perhaps Amazon wants to be somewhere that its presence would make a far larger impact. That would help smaller metro chances.

Denial about what? I'm not arguing Columbus doesn't get state tax money, I'm arguing- factually- that the amount it gets is nowhere near the perception. You seem to care a lot about perpetuating that myth. I wonder why. As to your points... 1. Yes, any state employees would have their pay come from public tax dollars from across the state. Breaking news. That would include any state jobs in other cities outside of Columbus, and at least some of the money paying for the state jobs in Columbus- would come from Columbus taxpayers. 2. OSU employees are NOT state employees. Even if you could somehow prove that the money that OSU receives from the state all goes to pay for employee salaries (which you can't), the listed salary expenditure is 3x the amount that OSU receives from the state. 3. You keep on with this ridiculous point about Columbus being only 20% of the state... of what? Again, are you referring to GDP? That has nothing to do with the allocation of public tax dollars. I have no idea where you're getting this from. Furthermore, the $525 million that OSU gets is about 7.39% of its annual budget, pretty much EXACTLY what I already said it receives. Still not 80% as you stated, is it. And that $74 million for Cleveland State was more than 30% of its own budget. And let's be honest, this is an apples to oranges comparison. OSU's budget is 24x that of CSU's. OSU gives out almost $100 million more just in financial aid than CSU spends on its entire annual budget. They're not even on the same planet of scale. What's interesting is that even though OSU has a budget 24x larger than CSU, it only receives 7x the state aid that CSU does. And CSU receives 4x as much of its budget than OSU from state-allocated funds.

Its 10% unemployment rate at the height of the recession doesn't seem to indicate it's "recession proof". Downturns may not last as long or be as severe in every case, but it goes through them just the same. From what I understand, the state once tried to disperse state-level government jobs more equally across Ohio, but that it was found to be very inefficient to have them all spread out and actually cost the public more to support those jobs than having them centralized in Columbus. According to the city's website, here were all the jobs directly related to government in some way. State of Ohio: 23,859 US Government: 13,800 City of Columbus: 8,500 Franklin County: 7,000 Columbus Public Schools: 6,488 US Postal Service: 3,360 Defense Logistics Agency: 2,600 Total: 65,607 And if you want to include 7% of OSU's employees (given the 7% funding OSU receives from the state), that would be an additional 2,167. Not all of these jobs, of course, would include public funding from all of Ohio. 21,988 of these would be directly paid for by local area taxes. That would leave 45,786. Of those, 19,760 are paid at the federal level, which are paid for by federal-level taxes. No doubt Ohio overall contributed to this pool of taxes, but so did 49 other states. Not all states pay equally, but for simplicity's sake, let's give Ohio a 1/50th share. That would be just 395 jobs that Ohio paid for. Add those 395 to the 23,859 State jobs and you arrive at a possible direct "subsidy" from the state of 24,254 jobs. If we compared that to the 1,097,000 overall non-farm jobs in the Columbus metro, that is just 2.21% of the total metro jobs. Of course, Columbus contributed to paying for at least some of those jobs through its own taxes. The point is... state government is an important employer in Columbus, to be sure. But once one really examines the numbers, Ohio is not subsidizing its economy. Even if we accept the entire 67,774 figure as being subsidized by the state in some way (which they're not), that's 6.12% of the metro economy, meaning 94% is not. By any stretch of the imagination, 94% is FAR more important than 6% when talking about the makeup of an economy. And this is for the actual city. If we used the entire metro, and every government job within it (which again, would include a whole lot of locally-paid city and county jobs), government represents 16.3% of the metro's jobs. Cleveland's would be 12.7%, Cincinnati's would be 11.9%. Basically, I don't know what else to say. People will no doubt continue to believe whatever they want.

Is that MSA? Yes. The BLS does not calculate GDP at the city or county level currently.

If your 7% number is accurate, then take the number of jobs in Columbus MSA and take 7% of it. THAT is the number I'm exactly talking about. I'm not saying Cleveland is subsidizing Columbus Chipotle workers or Cincinnati is subsidizing Columbus McDonalds employees. And please, before you write again, do some reading on the state budget and learn where its funding comes from. As I've said many times now, excluding any federal funds, Ohio-sourced funds comes from ALL of the state, not just Columbus. Like so many people on this issue, you made a bunch of claims you can't prove, and as evidence is presented to the contrary, you slightly tweak your argument to something else. You don't have any information for your payroll claim either. How could you possibly even figure out where any state employee's personal paycheck dollars are even coming from to any specific location? Columbus citizens pay taxes too, do they not? State tax money collected isn't divided into city of origin. It doesn't work that way. Do you truly believe that all that money paid by Columbus residents stays there? Please. This selective thinking that dollars only flow one way, or that Columbus and its residents are nothing but moochers off poor Cleveland or wherever has and will always be BS. We have enough lies coming from our leaders these days, let's try to be a little better. I've shown evidence for my case. Any time you want to show some for yours, we can continue the conversation. Until then, I'm done.

Other cities don't have schools people in small towns like? Only OSU?

Students receiving grants and scholarships are not necessarily receiving them from OSU, nor are grants typically awarded based on school choice, but either student need or academic performance. Those students can choose any school in the state. It's stretching the definition to the breaking point to say that this is public funding for OSU. And federal loans wouldn't directly be Ohio state money at all. Overall, I just think people are trying to find all these ways that Columbus is supposedly stealing from the rest of the state, but the numbers don't really add up to as much as people think.

You specifically said that you thought 80-85% of the funding comes from the State. I provided an article with actual information that shows that is not even remotely true. As to your claim that a similar % of funding for Columbus comes from the rest of the state, you have already admitted you have no proof for that. I don't take suppositions as proof. Your GDP argument makes literally no sense. Let's review. In 2016, Ohio's GDP was $626.622 billion. Here were the metro GDPs in 2016 in billions. Cincinnati: $132.010 Columbus: $130.758 Cleveland: $129.440 Dayton: $40.572 Akron: $37.300 Toledo: $33.158 Youngstown: $19.966 And % of total state GDP Cincinnati: 21.07% Columbus: 20.87% Cleveland: 20.66% Dayton: 6.47% Akron: 5.95% Toledo: 5.29% Youngstown: 3.19% Total of the major metros: 83.5% So right off the bat, your numbers are wrong. Furthermore, all of the 3-Cs have roughly the same % of the state total. Columbus is higher than all but Cincinnati, and only barely below it. For your theory to work out, that would mean that only Cincinnati receives less state help. But of course, it doesn't work that way at all. These GDPs are economic outputs. They do not represent the difference between what they produce an what they receive. Going even further, the number of state jobs within Columbus represents less than 7% of the total non-farm jobs in the metro area. That means more than 90% of all jobs there are not under state payrolls. Simply put, you're wrong from every conceivable angle.

So now tuition from students not from Columbus counts as public funding? Talk about trying too hard.

http://www.dispatch.com/article/20120611/NEWS/306119689 This article is from 2012, but it says that OSU receives only 7% of its funding from the State, and that it was a decline from as much as 25% in 1990. That's a far cry from 80%. It also shows that OSU is becoming less reliant on state funds over time. Furthermore, that 7% likely includes dollars paid by Columbus citizens, so it's highly likely that the rest of Ohio contributes even less than that percentage.

I know people *love* to make these claims, but I've never once seen anyone post any factual data to back this up. We do know from the BLS data that Government jobs in all 3-Cs exceed 100K, and the actual % of government to total jobs in any of them are just a few % points different top to bottom. I've never seen any data whatsoever that OSU is subsidized mostly from money outside of Columbus. Where is your "80-85%" number coming from? Federal jobs and city and county jobs are not relevant here. Cleveland would logically have more federal jobs than Columbus because its bigger. Now regarding the main point here. I don't have any OSU data. But state data is easier to get (in theory). Here's the logic: State employees eat in local restaurants, buy home repairs, buy homes, cars, etc. They play a big part in supporting and growing the local Columbus economy. MOST state employees live an work in Columbus---especially the higher paid ones. Yes there are state offices in other cities and interstate snow plow guys around the state. But the bulk of the state payroll is in columbus. Where does that money come from to pay that payroll? Ohio income tax and the commercial activities tax or other business taxes. Ohio's GDP is about $525B. Columbus's GDP is about $125B. So Columbus is about 24%. So 76% of the the money is coming from places outside of Columbus---like Cincinnati, CLE, Toledo, Youngstown, etc. So these other cities are supporting Columbus. A small piece trickles backs to payroll in other cities like snow plow guys, park rangers, BMVs, etc. the bulk--and higher paid salaries--are in Columbus. Wait, what? 76% of Ohio's GDP is not related to Columbus, so that means Columbus is receiving 76% of its money from elsewhere? Huh? GDP is the measure of economic output. Columbus is responsible for a piece of that output, just as Cleveland, Cincinnati and the rest of Ohio are responsible for their own contributions. You're making a leap to something that is unrelated to GDP- allocation of statewide tax dollars. I just wanted to know where you got your 80-85% figure in OSU funding. If you don't have any actual data to support that, it's time to stop repeating it. Facts matter.

Both systems have their own flaws. An at-large system doesn't focus on the small-scale as well, and some neighborhoods get passed by more often than others. On the other hand, they're not prevented from having a unified vision for the city, as there aren't multiple representatives competing for resources. Incidentally, Columbus recently had the chance to leave the at-large system and it was heavily rejected by voters. For the most part, the people like things how they are.

I think I posted those numbers at some point before. Annexation didn't really start until the late 1950s, but I'll go back a few decades earlier. 1930: 290,564 1940: 306,086 1950: 375,710 1960: 389,222 1970: 348,808 1980: 287,089 1990: 268,265 2000: 246,713 2010: 234,582 2016: 243,432 Change by decade 1930-40: 15,522 1940-50: 69,624 1950-60: 13,512 1960-70: -40,414 1970-80: -61,719 1980-90: -18,824 1990-00: -21,552 2000-10: -12,131 2010-16: +8,850 All the numbers are based on the census tracts that existed in the core around 1950, the peak year for urban populations before any annexation or mass suburban movement. The 2016 number is an estimate and is probably too low given that the estimates have places like the Short North losing population for some reason, which is ridiculous. Needless to say, though, Columbus went through the same urban cycle that most major cities did mid-century, though to a somewhat lesser degree than Cleveland or Cincinnati. The urban core likely began to turnaround in the 1980s (as shown by the much slower loss rate) when areas of High Street/Downtown began to be revitalized, but it took a few decades more for that process to spread far enough to other neighborhoods to see overall growth. Sure the core went through the same smaller version of the urban decay cycle. Yet the region as a whole consistently expanded despite what happened at the core. Not the ebb and flow Cincy or C-land regions went through. My point was that if the city had never annexed, Columbus would've been just one more city in the region to be seen as in decline, and it likely would not be as healthy today if it had never happened. Perception is a hard thing to shake. So to me, this just shows that things like OSU and state government, while beneficial, would not have prevented decline. It took extra effort by forward-thinking leadership to keep things moving.

Annexation was the smartest move Columbus ever did. It kept the tax dollars flowing in the lean urban years mid-century and it continued the perception of a growing, healthy city even when maybe it wasn't completely. However, annexation stopped being a significant source of growth back during the Reagan administration, so this can no longer be pointed to as the reason for the growth of the last 30-some years. Also, the fact that Columbus probably would've lost population at some point mid-century without annexation suggests that perhaps being the capital with OSU isn't the panacea some think it is. That's interesting - I have the exact opposite reaction from living in Cincinnati since 1990. I'm frequently happy that we've not diluted the opinions of folks who desire to live in the densest parts of our counties. Even without such dilution, it's still very hard to pursue progressive urban-oriented policies (and funding for them), so I can't imagine how hard it would be with significant annexation of mostly suburban portions of Hamilton county. This could be a Cincinnati issue alone - I don't know, but I'm certainly very happy to trade off the tax dollars for greater autonomy. For example, I very much doubt that an organization like 3CDC could have existed (with it's stated mission), had we pursued an annexation agenda. As a result, I think Over The Rhine would have succumbed to the bulldozers and big-block developments, instead of being preserved. Doesn't Cincy have a well-established somewhat combative relationship between its city and suburbs, though? Columbus doesn't really have that. It has generally good relations between both private/public and urban/suburban interests. That is not to say that having countywide votes can't run into opinion divides or that things like job poaching can't occasionally be an issue, but generally most people (at least leadership) seem to agree on a common vision of a continuously progressing Columbus, as there is an understanding that a strong core city makes for strong suburbs.

Here are Cincy and Cleveland through 2010, anyway. Cincinnati 1930: 450,200 1940: 455,601 1950: 503,998 1960: 498,607 1970: 448,652 1980: 381,268 1990: 365,853 2000: 337,234 2010: 278,509 Cleveland 1930: 904,929 1940: 878,336 1950: 914,798 1960: 877,814 1970: 750,191 1980: 573,667 1990: 495,530 2000: 468,451 2010: 380,891

I think I posted those numbers at some point before. Annexation didn't really start until the late 1950s, but I'll go back a few decades earlier. 1930: 290,564 1940: 306,086 1950: 375,710 1960: 389,222 1970: 348,808 1980: 287,089 1990: 268,265 2000: 246,713 2010: 234,582 2016: 243,432 Change by decade 1930-40: 15,522 1940-50: 69,624 1950-60: 13,512 1960-70: -40,414 1970-80: -61,719 1980-90: -18,824 1990-00: -21,552 2000-10: -12,131 2010-16: +8,850 All the numbers are based on the census tracts that existed in the core around 1950, the peak year for urban populations before any annexation or mass suburban movement. The 2016 number is an estimate and is probably too low given that the estimates have places like the Short North losing population for some reason, which is ridiculous. Needless to say, though, Columbus went through the same urban cycle that most major cities did mid-century, though to a somewhat lesser degree than Cleveland or Cincinnati. The urban core likely began to turnaround in the 1980s (as shown by the much slower loss rate) when areas of High Street/Downtown began to be revitalized, but it took a few decades more for that process to spread far enough to other neighborhoods to see overall growth.

So Trump should be pushing for easy and quick visas for low-skilled workers trying to cross the southern border. 99.5% of these people end up picking our fruit and maybe eventually washing dishes at restaurants. They aren't taking jobs from Trump-country folk, who would never do these jobs even if paid a decent wage. Ironically, the lack of cheap workers willing to take those jobs is only going to accelerate the move to automation. Then, no one gets them, native or immigrant.

America should be exceptional, I agree. A lot of us wouldn't exist if we had always been under a merit-based system. As far as I know, none of my immigrant ancestors were particularly educated or skilled. And if people are so worried about unskilled labor and not enough of those jobs, what would be so difficult about starting national training programs? This country used to be aspirational.

I know people *love* to make these claims, but I've never once seen anyone post any factual data to back this up. We do know from the BLS data that Government jobs in all 3-Cs exceed 100K, and the actual % of government to total jobs in any of them are just a few % points different top to bottom. I've never seen any data whatsoever that OSU is subsidized mostly from money outside of Columbus. Where is your "80-85%" number coming from? I think the benefit of having a flagship state university are hugely important. This is no a knock on Columbus at all. Having a large student body and research capabilities of a large university are beneficial to economic development for the region. Columbus seems to do a good job of leveraging this anchor. It would be hard for Cleveland to replicate that success given the size of that anchor institution. Although, Cleveland is starting to do a good job of leveraging Cleveland Clinic, CWRU, UH and to a lesser degree CSU. I'm not arguing it's not important or not a benefit. But if people are going to claim that it's run mostly on dollars from the rest of Ohio outside of Columbus, I want to see some hard numbers that show this.

Annexation was the smartest move Columbus ever did. It kept the tax dollars flowing in the lean urban years mid-century and it continued the perception of a growing, healthy city even when maybe it wasn't completely. However, annexation stopped being a significant source of growth back during the Reagan administration, so this can no longer be pointed to as the reason for the growth of the last 30-some years. Also, the fact that Columbus probably would've lost population at some point mid-century without annexation suggests that perhaps being the capital with OSU isn't the panacea some think it is.

author=Brutus_buckeye link=topic=10856.msg886012#msg886012 date=1514527278] Sprawl development has nothing to do with how they come up with MSA inclusions. Actually, no. Immigrants typically have lower rates of public assistance than the native population. They also have higher rates of entrepreneurship and lower crime rates. What a weird comparison. There are a lot of major differences between those two places that have nothing to do with immigrants.

I know people *love* to make these claims, but I've never once seen anyone post any factual data to back this up. We do know from the BLS data that Government jobs in all 3-Cs exceed 100K, and the actual % of government to total jobs in any of them are just a few % points different top to bottom. I've never seen any data whatsoever that OSU is subsidized mostly from money outside of Columbus. Where is your "80-85%" number coming from?

Oh, because it's based on Merit and not who you know. Chain Immigration worked in the past, you know when America had factories, made things, and needed unskilled workers that didn't speak English, couldn't read, write, add or subtract. That's not the case any longer, so why shouldn't Immigration be based on merit or skill etc.? Family ties don't cut it anymore; merit and employment skills do. At least illegal immigration will still be OK. It's so weird how the policies that made the US the strongest nation in human history are suddenly no longer acceptable because a few demographics want to bring back the 1950s economy, something that will never come back regardless of immigration.

So you're saying the Cincinnati and Cleveland have no hope for faster/rebounding growth because Johnstown or Wheeling can't get it's act together? And that there are no examples to take from Columbus/Franklin Co.? I don't believe either of those things. Most other cities don't have flat cheap land with nothing on it all over the place. They also don't have OSU, the state capital, and a massive cargo-only airport next to important rail lines that was built with military money all in one place. That's what all the Appalachian cities want and they can't have it. There is no secret sauce. So the lesson for other cities is that there are some things they can't control. I've noticed that some people are unwilling to accept an answer like that because they think everything is controllable, but a lot of things aren't. There are plenty of successful, growing cities that don't match Columbus' circumstances. Honestly, this just sounds like an excuse. Even if a city doesn't have the same things, that hardly means they can't become successful based on their own strengths.

Columbus will not be the largest metro anytime soon. Cin-Day will be over 3 million. Columbus growth could not catch that for close to 100 years 1). Cin-Day isn't an actual metropolitan area (yet). It is two adjacent metropolitan areas in SW Ohio. Columbus will be the state's largest MSA. 2). If Cin-Day DID exist, it currently is around 3.4 million. I suspect that if Cin-Day ever exists (and it's possible it never will), it will become a CSA rather than an MSA.