Comments on: The Limits of State Policy http://www.michiganfuture.org/09/2009/the-limits-of-state-policy/ Creating a Prosperous Michigan Mon, 08 Mar 2010 23:13:28 +0200 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Lou Glazer http://www.michiganfuture.org/09/2009/the-limits-of-state-policy/comment-page-1/#comment-111 Lou Glazer Mon, 12 Oct 2009 12:45:59 +0000 http://www.michiganfuture.org/?p=368#comment-111 Agreed that it is a chicken and the egg situation. Obviously both job/opportunity and amenities/quality of place matter. So policy makers should work on both. Our argument is that, by and large, policy makers only work on one – jobs/economic development. What should we do that we are not doing already to attract/create more jobs now? Our conclusion is that the levers available to state, regional and local policy makers to create jobs now is limited. What they can do is focus on creating communities where recent college graduates want to live. As the Wall Street Journal just noted Portland, Oregon – even with a high unemployment rate – is one of the top five meccas for young professionals. They continue to flock there because its where they want to live even if its hard to find a job today. Over the long term that will be a major competitive advantage. What Portland has done – that we can do here – is create a vibrant central city anchored by rail transit and great outdoor recreation. This is the kind of agenda that we need to make a priority here as well. Agreed that it is a chicken and the egg situation. Obviously both job/opportunity and amenities/quality of place matter. So policy makers should work on both. Our argument is that, by and large, policy makers only work on one – jobs/economic development. What should we do that we are not doing already to attract/create more jobs now? Our conclusion is that the levers available to state, regional and local policy makers to create jobs now is limited.

What they can do is focus on creating communities where recent college graduates want to live. As the Wall Street Journal just noted Portland, Oregon – even with a high unemployment rate – is one of the top five meccas for young professionals. They continue to flock there because its where they want to live even if its hard to find a job today. Over the long term that will be a major competitive advantage. What Portland has done – that we can do here – is create a vibrant central city anchored by rail transit and great outdoor recreation. This is the kind of agenda that we need to make a priority here as well.

]]> By: Cynthia Hoag http://www.michiganfuture.org/09/2009/the-limits-of-state-policy/comment-page-1/#comment-103 Cynthia Hoag Sun, 04 Oct 2009 22:04:58 +0000 http://www.michiganfuture.org/?p=368#comment-103 I wouldn't worry about attracting talent; I'd worry about keeping the college grads we already have with jobs that pay sufficiently to help them pay off their student loans. When one owes umpteen thousands of dollars of student loans, it doesn't take a long time (or much thought) to say, "Are you kidding?" to the $8/hr jobs that are currently being offered to new college grads. The wages in Michigan are low and, until that changes, Michigan's ability to keep its few remaining college grads will gradually evaporate. I've spent years getting the skills employers want. I am currently stuck in Michigan due to family responsibilities, but this is temporary. When I have a choice of where to live, I will likely move somewhere with higher wages, unless Michigan employers offer me sufficient incentive to stay, which I have yet to see. The employers around here want MIT-level qualifications, but offer Burger King wages. Until that changes, Michigan is headed the way of Mississippi and Alabama in terms of educational attainment. I wouldn’t worry about attracting talent; I’d worry about keeping the college grads we already have with jobs that pay sufficiently to help them pay off their student loans. When one owes umpteen thousands of dollars of student loans, it doesn’t take a long time (or much thought) to say, “Are you kidding?” to the $8/hr jobs that are currently being offered to new college grads. The wages in Michigan are low and, until that changes, Michigan’s ability to keep its few remaining college grads will gradually evaporate. I’ve spent years getting the skills employers want. I am currently stuck in Michigan due to family responsibilities, but this is temporary. When I have a choice of where to live, I will likely move somewhere with higher wages, unless Michigan employers offer me sufficient incentive to stay, which I have yet to see. The employers around here want MIT-level qualifications, but offer Burger King wages. Until that changes, Michigan is headed the way of Mississippi and Alabama in terms of educational attainment.

]]> By: Don Attebury http://www.michiganfuture.org/09/2009/the-limits-of-state-policy/comment-page-1/#comment-88 Don Attebury Mon, 21 Sep 2009 18:39:23 +0000 http://www.michiganfuture.org/?p=368#comment-88 I agree with your general idea that Michigans must attract talented people to attract employers to develop a knowledge based economy. However, we are facing the proverbial question of what comes first "the chicken or the egg?" Yes, we must attract talented young people, but many of them are leaving the state because employment opportunities are so unavailable. I am semi-retired and working part time teaching at a local university. So I am trying to do my small part to increase our intellectual capital. However, I talk all the time with students who are approaching graduation or who are recent graduates, and now are planning to leave the state because they cannot find meaningful employment in Michigan. What comes first? Should we try to attract more talent even though talented people in the area are unemployed? Or should we try to attract employers? I agree that developing and attracting young talent is a key to long term success. But does this work in the short term when young talented people cannot find employment? I agree with your general idea that Michigans must attract talented people to attract employers to develop a knowledge based economy. However, we are facing the proverbial question of what comes first “the chicken or the egg?” Yes, we must attract talented young people, but many of them are leaving the state because employment opportunities are so unavailable. I am semi-retired and working part time teaching at a local university. So I am trying to do my small part to increase our intellectual capital. However, I talk all the time with students who are approaching graduation or who are recent graduates, and now are planning to leave the state because they cannot find meaningful employment in Michigan. What comes first? Should we try to attract more talent even though talented people in the area are unemployed? Or should we try to attract employers? I agree that developing and attracting young talent is a key to long term success. But does this work in the short term when young talented people cannot find employment?

]]>