Statistically, it really doesn't make sense to have asians, indians, latinos, or other ethnic groups on the cabinet. Its sure fine if they are on there im just saying its not like they are being unrepresented. Statistically there should be about 4 or 5 blacks. But there are more factors such as political party, ideology, and maybe who he knows and trusts. I think 1 or 2 blacks would have given him less of an out lash

Why even say it though Kasich?  Now he's got a serious problem on his hands. Hes already under fire for the first all white cabinet in 50 years and then he makes this off the cuff dumb comment. 

 

Whatever his intentions were, he's got a serious PR nightmare at the moment otherwise he wouldn't feel the need to disclose that he appointed a black women the Director of Minority Affairs today when she has had the position for over a month.

 

 

^^ There would be more black Republicans, if there weren't so many Republicans like Kasich who pretend there is nothing wrong with excluding minorities from appointments.

Hence the "lite."  Black militants were fighting for something.  She's fighting for nothing except her own political career.  It's pathetic.

 

I think she spoke well of her constituents, if she doesn't say anythign who will.  Today it's no minorities, tomorrow it's gays, where does it stop?!

MTS, you are like the definition of minority come to think of it. If he put you on the cabinet, I think we would have every minority group covered. But then again I think we would much rather prefer his current group ;)

MTS for Governor 2014

Lol. The republican party would love to have MTS. They would conceptualize it as killing a few birds with one stone.

MTS, you are like the definition of minority come to think of it. If he put you on the cabinet, I think we would have every minority group covered. But then again I think we would much rather prefer his current group ;)

Black, check.  Latin, check  Gay, check.

 

If I were Ohio's Governor, the state would be a much more attractive and fashion conscientious place!  Not to mention a gay mecca and Cleveland would have a Prada boutique!

 

You would have my support!

 

I've noticed a lot of Ohioans generally don't care about their apperence. In a way, it's a breath of fresh air from the "fashion competition" of the east coast, but at the same time, you are quick to be labeled as a 'metro' or gay if you decide to not dress like you just got out of bed.

 

But, that's a different topic for a different thread.

Statistically, it really doesn't make sense to have asians, indians, latinos, or other ethnic groups on the cabinet. Its sure fine if they are on there im just saying its not like they are being unrepresented. Statistically there should be about 4 or 5 blacks. But there are more factors such as political party, ideology, and maybe who he knows and trusts. I think 1 or 2 blacks would have given him less of an out lash

 

Minorities make up what? Probably 2-5% of the Republican Party in Ohio, so I don't think they should be be expected to make up any more than 2-5% of the cabinet positions of the Governor. 

 

As for his statement, it's pretty obvious he meant "your people" in terms of Nina Turners political friends, whom she was trying to recommend.  That's the context the term "your people" applies to in a political scene 99% of the time, but I don't expect his opponents to practice much common sense when it's so easy to cause a stir about it.

Statistically, it really doesn't make sense to have asians, indians, latinos, or other ethnic groups on the cabinet. Its sure fine if they are on there im just saying its not like they are being unrepresented. Statistically there should be about 4 or 5 blacks. But there are more factors such as political party, ideology, and maybe who he knows and trusts. I think 1 or 2 blacks would have given him less of an out lash

 

Minorities make up what? Probably 2-5% of the Republican Party in Ohio, so I don't think they should be be expected to make up any more than 2-5% of the cabinet positions of the Governor. 

 

As for his statement, it's pretty obvious he meant "your people" in terms of Nina Turners political friends, whom she was trying to recommend.  That's the context the term "your people" applies to in a political scene 99% of the time, but I don't expect his opponents to practice much common sense when it's so easy to cause a stir about it.

 

Quoted for truth.

 

For 2006: 83% white; 12% black; and the rest are minimal.

Statistically, it really doesn't make sense to have asians, indians, latinos, or other ethnic groups on the cabinet. Its sure fine if they are on there im just saying its not like they are being unrepresented. Statistically there should be about 4 or 5 blacks. But there are more factors such as political party, ideology, and maybe who he knows and trusts. I think 1 or 2 blacks would have given him less of an out lash

 

Minorities make up what? Probably 2-5% of the Republican Party in Ohio, so I don't think they should be be expected to make up any more than 2-5% of the cabinet positions of the Governor. 

 

As for his statement, it's pretty obvious he meant "your people" in terms of Nina Turners political friends, whom she was trying to recommend.  That's the context the term "your people" applies to in a political scene 99% of the time, but I don't expect his opponents to practice much common sense when it's so easy to cause a stir about it.

 

Sorry, I don't buy it and as a non person of color, you do not understand what that phrase means, when it come out of a white mans mouth directed at people of color as it - like Nina Turner explained - can be taken many ways.

 

It would similar, yet not the same, as you calling me a spic or the n word.

^ You seem to be the only one here, of any color, taking it that way. Granted, most of us are white.

^ You seem to be the only one here, of any color, taking it that way. Granted, most of us are white.

 

Exactly, so how can you relate/understand?

Sherman and HHS78 aren't white, and they seem to have the same take I do. Well...Sherman's take is even more extreme.

 

Do you want me to play my gay card? I could try that, too.

Sherman and HHS78 aren't white, and they seem to have the same take I do. Well...Sherman's take is even more extreme.

 

Do you want me to play my gay card? I could try that, too.

 

Well that's there opinion.  I know I feel.

All I can say is stay tuned!  We got 4 more years of foot in mouth comments from this clown.  Should be painfully entertaining!

Well I feel relate to/understand their opinions.

 

I agree what he said is sh!tty, too. I think that's what counts the most.

Statistically, it really doesn't make sense to have asians, indians, latinos, or other ethnic groups on the cabinet. Its sure fine if they are on there im just saying its not like they are being unrepresented. Statistically there should be about 4 or 5 blacks. But there are more factors such as political party, ideology, and maybe who he knows and trusts. I think 1 or 2 blacks would have given him less of an out lash

 

Minorities make up what? Probably 2-5% of the Republican Party in Ohio, so I don't think they should be be expected to make up any more than 2-5% of the cabinet positions of the Governor.

 

As for his statement, it's pretty obvious he meant "your people" in terms of Nina Turners political friends, whom she was trying to recommend. That's the context the term "your people" applies to in a political scene 99% of the time, but I don't expect his opponents to practice much common sense when it's so easy to cause a stir about it.

 

Sorry, I don't buy it and as a non person of color, you do not understand what that phrase means, when it come out of a white mans mouth directed at people of color as it - like Nina Turner explained - can be taken many ways.

 

It would similar, yet not the same, as you calling me a spic or the n word.

 

As a white guy, I can say that if I said something like that, the way you're taking it isn't the way I would have meant it. 

 

So in this situation, if Kasich would apologize at all, it should be for the multiple unforeseen interpretations of what he said.  Likewise, Turner should apologize for taking it the wrong way; the white/non-white - can't understand/understand thing is reciprocal.  I just don't think the race card should be played so quickly.

 

Kasich wouldn't have made it this far into a political career, even as a Republican, if he were a racist.

Kasich shouldn't worry about people with chips on their shoulder, looking to be victimized for ill perceived and never ending notions of racism at every corner and with every issue.  How many Jews are on his cabinet?  Hispanics?  Indians?

 

The guy explained his comments, which of course the race baiters ignored while hiding within their irrationalities so that Kasich has a no win situation for him. He stays the course and moves on, he's the bad guy; he hires someone black, and it's an empty, token gesture - at least that's the lose-lose impression race baiters are gleefully taking in.

 

Never mind the fact that he did ask two African Americans to join his staff, sure, let's just ignore that little fact.  And never mind that WHO CARES!  This never ending cycle of race, race, race, wah wah wah.  It adds NOTHING except for distractions for a guy trying to bring his state out of its insane debt.

 

 

^ How can you ask others to be more charitable, when you are so uncharitable? It makes no sense.

I'm sorry this is an unforced error by the gov. It really isn't that hard to find a couple of women and a couple folks of color. I'll be honest, so what if it is tokenism. Sometimes tokens are a sign of good faith. It just seems to silly to name nearly all white haired white guys.

Kasich wouldn't have made it this far into a political career, even as a Republican, if he were a racist.

 

I'm not calling Kasich a racist... but I doubt our government is free of racism (looking at you South Carolina)

Sherman and HHS78 aren't white, and they seem to have the same take I do. Well...Sherman's take is even more extreme.

 

Do you want me to play my gay card? I could try that, too.

 

Well that's there opinion. I know I feel.

 

Yes, but that doesn't mean that Kasich is a racist. It's one point to say you are going to hire only those who are qualified and experienced, and not worry about filling quotas or hiring a certain number of people of color, but it's another to say you are hiring only old, white guys. Which he hasn't done.

 

But like most of these discussions, every time a rational argument is made that Kasich is hiring on qualifications, someone comes out with the race card. Again, and again. "You aren't black so you don't know these things!" And so forth. Can't we have a discussion based on the qualifications of an individual, instead of trying to meet a certain quota?

 

Kasich shouldn't worry about people with chips on their shoulder, looking to be victimized for ill perceived and never ending notions of racism at every corner and with every issue. How many Jews are on his cabinet? Hispanics? Indians?

 

The guy explained his comments, which of course the race baiters ignored while hiding within their irrationalities so that Kasich has a no win situation for him. He stays the course and moves on, he's the bad guy; he hires someone black, and it's an empty, token gesture - at least that's the lose-lose impression race baiters are gleefully taking in.

 

Never mind the fact that he did ask two African Americans to join his staff, sure, let's just ignore that little fact. And never mind that WHO CARES! This never ending cycle of race, race, race, wah wah wah. It adds NOTHING except for distractions for a guy trying to bring his state out of its insane debt.

 

Bingo.

Sherman and HHS78 aren't white, and they seem to have the same take I do. Well...Sherman's take is even more extreme.

 

Do you want me to play my gay card? I could try that, too.

 

Well that's there opinion.  I know I feel.

 

Yes, but that doesn't mean that Kasich is a racist. It's one point to say you are going to hire only those who are qualified and experienced, and not worry about filling quotas or hiring a certain number of people of color, but it's another to say you are hiring only old, white guys. Which he hasn't done.

 

But like most of these discussions, every time a rational argument is made that Kasich is hiring on qualifications, someone comes out with the race card. Again, and again. "You aren't black so you don't know these things!" And so forth. Can't we have a discussion based on the qualifications of an individual, instead of trying to meet a certain quota?

 

Kasich shouldn't worry about people with chips on their shoulder, looking to be victimized for ill perceived and never ending notions of racism at every corner and with every issue.  How many Jews are on his cabinet?  Hispanics?  Indians?

 

The guy explained his comments, which of course the race baiters ignored while hiding within their irrationalities so that Kasich has a no win situation for him. He stays the course and moves on, he's the bad guy; he hires someone black, and it's an empty, token gesture - at least that's the lose-lose impression race baiters are gleefully taking in.

 

Never mind the fact that he did ask two African Americans to join his staff, sure, let's just ignore that little fact.  And never mind that WHO CARES!  This never ending cycle of race, race, race, wah wah wah.  It adds NOTHING except for distractions for a guy trying to bring his state out of its insane debt.

 

Bingo.

So you mean to tell me he's exhausted all recruitment areas and all hired are the best qualified??

 

As of right now, I FEEL, Kasich doesn't give a damn about minorities, women and gays!

"Kasich wondered aloud why Cincinnati’s main airport is located in Kentucky and even suggested that business travelers use Cincinnati’s Lunken Airport instead. "

 

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20110201/BIZ01/302010020/Kasich-on-CVG-Get-it-fixed

Business travelers, to an extent, already use Lunken Airport. I believe it was the Enquirer article "Lunken's future tied to its history" posted on April 25, 2010 that had that a growing percentage of business travelers are using Lunken because it is more convenient, quicker and cost competitive for flights that are not a lengthy distance (e.g. Lunken to Pittsburgh, Lunken to Chicago).

 

Side note, they have no official web-site? The Fly Lunken domain name is FOR SALE. Good grief.

Kasich just appointed a non-white as head of JFS.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2011/02/gov_john_kasich_makes_first_mi.html

"Kasich wondered aloud why Cincinnati’s main airport is located in Kentucky and even suggested that business travelers use Cincinnati’s Lunken Airport instead. "

 

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20110201/BIZ01/302010020/Kasich-on-CVG-Get-it-fixed

 

Looks like the pressure got to him.

Some business leaders took Kasich’s invitation to speak up.

 

“We’ve got a brain drain; we’ve got a wealth drain,” said Rob Sibcy, owner of Sibcy Cline real estate agency. “It’s all about taxes.”

 

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20110201/BIZ01/302010020/Kasich-on-CVG-Get-it-fixed

Ohio's state taxes are below average.  It is the local taxes that are high and that is due to policy that started under Rhodes.

 

Not that facts matter to Fox News Kasich and his real estate salesman buddy

Some business leaders took Kasich’s invitation to speak up.

 

“We’ve got a brain drain; we’ve got a wealth drain,” said Rob Sibcy, owner of Sibcy Cline real estate agency. “It’s all about taxes.”

 

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20110201/BIZ01/302010020/Kasich-on-CVG-Get-it-fixed

Ohio's state taxes are below average. It is the local taxes that are high and that is due to policy that started under Rhodes.

 

Not that facts matter to Fox News Kasich and his real estate salesman buddy

 

Not only that, but while high taxes can add to wealth drain, they don't affect brain drain very directly. Young people are simply not that concerned with taxes.

Define "young."  If you mean students in college, then yes, almost none of them know a thing about taxes.  However, that concern starts showing up fairly quickly once they move from the tax-leeching to the tax-paying camp.

 

Also, it affects *employers.*  Maybe that was what you meant by wealth drain.  Yet wealth drain and brain drain are joined at the hip: If an engineer or software programmer graduates from OSU but leaves Ohio to go work at a tech firm in Charlotte or Dallas, then we have lost both brains and wealth.  Maybe the student really didn't care.  Heck, maybe he even wanted to stay in Ohio but couldn't find a decent job here.  Young people often have to go where the job market takes them, and the job market is affected by tax burdens.

No, I mean the crowd of 20-somethings who choose to leave Ohio, or not come back to Ohio, post-graduation. You know, the people who are jetting off to the coasts, where taxes are through the roof compared to Ohio.

 

I know the wealth drain is related, but that's why I said "[taxes] don't affect brain drain very directly", acknowledging there to be some correlation. While much of Ohio has lost a ton of major local businesses, in my Cincinnati-centric view, I see people leaving not due to lack of major firms to work for, and not due to high taxes, but rather the perception that Ohio and Cincinnati are missing some kind of excitement offered by the trendy coastal cities. Look at Portland -- there are no jobs, but I know many Ohioans who have moved there regardless. (Then they typically move away when they've realized the financial doom they are condemned to; if job prospects were their main concern, they'd have been better off staying in Columbus or Cincinnati.)

 

But I am discussing this with someone who claims their high school class didn't jet to the coasts, but stayed in suburban/exurban Columbus.

 

It seems to me there are two ways a city can get ahead: by following the NYC/San Fran/Portland/urban model, in which case taxes don't matter (yes, hyperbole, but...). Or they can go the Houston/Charlotte/sprawlburban model, where the key draw is low taxes and deregulation. Ohio can't really decide which it wants, so it's not successful at either one. I won't even go there, commenting on the merits and problems of the two options. Most people on here, including me, would obviously pick the former.

As a recent Ohio State grad I can tell you that none of my friends or classmates chose where they moved or worked because of taxes.  Nearly all of my good college friends are now out of state either because they couldn't get jobs in Ohio (education majors) or because they wanted to go somewhere "more exciting" which are places like DC, Boston, Florida, Chicago, San Diego. Granted some of them were from out of state originally but I often hear people in their mid-20's talk about their desire to go south or west or to Chicago.

I know at least two people who have moved to Dallas, one directly and one by way of Oklahoma City, following where the job market took them.  One might have stayed and one definitely would have stayed had comparable jobs been available here.

 

Also, moving past the realm of anecdotes: I don't think that there is any doubt that people are still leaving, statistically, notwithstanding the fact that Cleveland has shown surprisingly good job growth in the past year or two.  I don't posit tax burdens (or even tax and regulatory burdens together) as the *only* reason employers are leaving and employees are following.  However, it seems a bit much to write it off as a non-issue.

Some business leaders took Kasich’s invitation to speak up.

 

“We’ve got a brain drain; we’ve got a wealth drain,” said Rob Sibcy, owner of Sibcy Cline real estate agency. “It’s all about taxes.”

 

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20110201/BIZ01/302010020/Kasich-on-CVG-Get-it-fixed

Ohio's state taxes are below average. It is the local taxes that are high and that is due to policy that started under Rhodes.

 

Not that facts matter to Fox News Kasich and his real estate salesman buddy

 

Not only that, but while high taxes can add to wealth drain, they don't affect brain drain very directly. Young people are simply not that concerned with taxes.

 

I disagree with that misleading ending statement.

 

I have opted to purchase a house after renting for two years. I looked throughout the tri-state, from Adams County, Ohio to Cincinnati to Indiana to Kentucky. But after 2 failed house starts, I settled in Northside Cincinnati. Why?

 

Taxes.

 

In Kentucky, where I couldn't work out financing and price for a house in Mainstrasse, I would pay property taxes YEARLY on my 2011 Subaru Outback even as it depreciates, based on current value. That is thousands upon thousands of dollars that goes out of my pocket each year. Property taxes in Covington would be around $2,900 on this house, and there is no tax incentive for me to move there (e.g. tax abatement, since it was fully restored and historic). And it was in the arts district, but not in the CARD loan zone.

 

I looked at another house in Northside Cincinnati. It had no tax abatement since it was restored 10 years prior, so taxes were about $3,500 a year. There are NO taxes on the vehicle after the initial payment, so that was a plus. But the house fell through in inspection.

 

I finally found one in early January that was freshly rehabbed and had a 10 year tax abatement. My taxes for FY 2012 should be about $1,200 based on 2009 assessment values, and there is a 10 year tax abatement at that year. Again, no new taxes on my vehicle for each year I own it.

 

To say young people don't care is a reaching statement. They don't necessarily care when they don't own anything significant, but they do when they buy a vehicle, a house...

Sherman:

 

1) I didn't mean completely, across the board, no one cares...of course some care.

 

2) The broader point stands that you chose to live in the Cincinnati area prior to the considerations you mention. I'm not splitting hairs about choices within a metro region.

 

There is a large contingent of Generation-Y whose primary criterion for where they locate is the experience they believe they will have in that location. Large enough to account for a significant portion of Ohio's brain drain. Large enough that, if the demographic were tapped into, could reverse the trend. Lowering taxes won't bring those people here. That is my main point.

 

I further contend that this demographic is even larger among the highly educated than the general population. (Especially insofar as education-level and class converge, since such a choice is ultimately a luxury.) It would be interesting to see a poll of Gen-Yers which asks why they chose to live where they do, broken down by educational attainment. I think it would be enlightening.

I agree with every single word of natininja's last post. Linking Ohio's brain drain to the economy and taxes is more of a cover-up for other underlying factors. I know a guy who gave up his P&G marketing job for an executive (managerial) position at a Target store in Portland. He actually took a slight decrease in pay to move to an area with a higher COL.

 

I know two other people who moved to Portland, and two others that moved to Charleston, SC. None of them have worthwhile jobs, but the deciding factor in their decision to relocate was the "excitement" and perception of the places they chose to move to. It's almost as if people use the places they move to as a brand. They move to a place so they can boast about living in a hip and trendy area such as Williamsburg in Brooklyn, Mission District in SF, Beacon Hill in Boston, etc.

 

Frankly, I think the main problem with Ohio is low attraction, how it's perceived by others, and the inferiority complex that many of the residents harbor. A lot of people across the country perceive Ohio as being a flat and bland states. Ohio really needs to work on ways to improve on what it has (numerous urban towns and cities, public transit, and the lake and shoreline) and find ways to promote itself in a better light.

 

Unfortunately, Kasich probably will not slow down the mass exodus of young college grads from Ohio, and he might even slightly accelerate it.

agreed. I live in the mission right now, and let me tell you I could sum up this entire city in one word: Gimmick.

 

The people, the "trendy" places, the streetcar.. its all "variations on a theme park". And it makes me sick. People spend 300 dollars on a pair of glasses because they are vintage, or just wear frames without lenses. People dont want to look good here, they want people to think they look good.

 

It is a discussion for a different day.. but I think you are right that Kasich can not do anything about this. Personally, its a reason why I love Cleveland. But, his image is definitely not a great portrayal.

The issue is Quality of Life. An emphasis on cutting taxes leads to cuts in services, park spending, transportation options and education. Those are quality-of-life issues. And young people are not the only ones choosing places to live based on quality of life. Low taxes won't necessarily attract businesses, because businesses need to attract good workers, and good workers don't want to live in places with declining quality of life.

The issue is Quality of Life. An emphasis on cutting taxes leads to cuts in services, park spending, transportation options and education. Those are quality-of-life issues. And young people are not the only ones choosing places to live based on quality of life. Low taxes won't necessarily attract businesses, because businesses need to attract good workers, and good workers don't want to live in places with declining quality of life.

 

YES! I wish a lot of people would see it that way. I'm a fairly firm believer in the "you get what you pay for" saying. A lot of Hamilton County residents complain about taxes while the roads are falling apart, bridges are rusting away, parks being neglected, weeds growing waist high and litter along streets and freeways. Cincinnati is one of the few cities I can truly say where you can see a mattress laying on the side of the freeway for almost a week.

 

Most of the states that have "high" taxes, particulary the northeastern states also have very good services overall, and things are handled and maintained when need be. You won't find nearly as many places in the "highly taxed" coastal areas with infrastructure in such deplorable shape as you find so prevalent in Ohio.

Interesting topic!

 

I split time between Brookly nY and Cleveland (Lakewood actually), where I own my house. I strongly believe that the elements of art, music and community that have gradually made Brooklyn so attractive certainly exist here in Ohio. There is so much potential here, but positive changes seem to occur at such an achingly slow pace for whatever reason. I chalk it up to midwesternness.

 

That demoralizes me, and I know countless others who have opted to move elsewhere even after years of working hard to make Cleveland better. I don't even blame them. Life is short.

 

As far as perception goes, I think Cleveland currently has far too many "red flags" to overcome. The pockets of life are too few and scattered. Visitors to our city who don't know any better cannot avoid a mostly lifeless, blighted, undeveloped waterfront and a downtown that's often completely vacant on weekends.

 

Combined with the legacy of awful public schools, stupid lists in Forbes and the very real issue of corrupt politics, the negative perceptions that we have to overcome loom very large.

 

But I'm still optimistic right now. I'm an excellent tour guide, and every friend who has ever visited comes away loving the authenticity of Cleveland's bars, restaurants, music scene and most of all, the people. There is a sense of awe in the history, the abandoned warehouses, blue coastal views and diversity of culture. So much potential!

 

And to think that just ten years ago in what is today the trendiest section of Brooklyn the mafia was still dumping bodies, burning up stolen cars and shaking down the Brooklyn Brewing Company for "protection" money.

 

There is hope.

 

 

 

 

I agree with every single word of natininja's last post. Linking Ohio's brain drain to the economy and taxes is more of a cover-up for other underlying factors. I know a guy who gave up his P&G marketing job for an executive (managerial) position at a Target store in Portland. He actually took a slight decrease in pay to move to an area with a higher COL.

 

I know two other people who moved to Portland, and two others that moved to Charleston, SC. None of them have worthwhile jobs, but the deciding factor in their decision to relocate was the "excitement" and perception of the places they chose to move to. It's almost as if people use the places they move to as a brand. They move to a place so they can boast about living in a hip and trendy area such as Williamsburg in Brooklyn, Mission District in SF, Beacon Hill in Boston, etc.

 

Frankly, I think the main problem with Ohio is low attraction, how it's perceived by others, and the inferiority complex that many of the residents harbor. A lot of people across the country perceive Ohio as being a flat and bland states. Ohio really needs to work on ways to improve on what it has (numerous urban towns and cities, public transit, and the lake and shoreline) and find ways to promote itself in a better light.

 

Unfortunately, Kasich probably will not slow down the mass exodus of young college grads from Ohio, and he might even slightly accelerate it.

Interesting indeed, and you make some good points.  Frankly I think we need to do more to bust up the current power structure.  Hopefully the new county regime will have an effect.  But the election results weren't positive.  Urbanists like Ronayne and Levin lost to the old guard, and even the young people who made it in were thoroughly groomed and vetted.  It's not midwesternness that's holding us back.  It's leadership.  We need to mount an opposition to Kasich and his kind, but before we can do that we need to build a youth movement around here.  Start with precinct committee seats.  Show up to ward meetings and take them over.  Ready... go!   

Jobs, jobs, jobs...people follow opportunity. Everything else will follow. The state's "coolness factor" will rise with a better ecomomy.

I agree that Ohio has so much potential, which I why I'm still here after college. And just as surfohio said, most of the things are found on the east coast, can be found in Ohio, just on a smaller scale. I would LOVE to see Ohio improve, especially Cleveland. It's just ashame how slow change occurs here in Ohio.

Jobs, jobs, jobs...people follow opportunity. Everything else will follow. The state's "coolness factor" will rise with a better ecomomy.

 

There are states with 'less' jobs than Ohio, yet they are considered more appealing than Ohio. Oregon and Florida are two states that immediately come to mind. Conversely, there are states with supposedly better economies than Ohio, which are considered significantly less appealing than Ohio, such as North Dakota and Iowa.

 

Also, determining which states economies are better than others is a pliable subject since not all states share the same economic foundations.

I think people tend to choose based more on "cool" cities than "cool" states. For instance, a lot of people dont think New York State is cool, they think NYC is cool, same with Chicago. I think California and Florida only get any recognition because of their weather, which is something we cant compete with. We just need to get people to believe we've got some pretty badass cool cities lol.

^I agree. I just threw in "state" since I was replying to his post. Yeah, CA and FL are probably the only two states that are consistently identified as "cool."

 

But to tie it back in to Kasich before it gets too far off topic, I think he could care less about making the state appealing to younger people and retaining the younger educate people. That would mean he would have to be PROGRESSIVE. He strikes me as a religious nut; always saying "God given this, God given that." :roll:

 

Frankly, I don't think he really cares much about the general welfare of the people or the state. I just get that vibe from him and he seems to have alterior motives. I have nothing concrete to back this up, it's just my opinion.

^HHS78, I agree with your point...I know of lot of people who have left Ohio with no job prospects just to be in a cooler city. I know my answer was a little simplistic, but I still think a better overall job market will improve Ohio's image. In theory, with more jobs there will be more people from out of state moving to Ohio who will be forced to explore Ohio. Hopefully, these people will tell others about their experiences. 

 

Edit: I was looking at some really old posts.