Here’s a bit of month old news I don’t remember getting much local press:
The Seattle, WA metropolitan area has the strongest local economy in the nation according to POLICOM Corporation’s annual economic strength rankings. Edwards, CO is top among the “Micropolitan” areas, which are smaller urban centers.
“The top rated areas have had rapid, consistent growth in both size and quality for an extended period of time,” stated William H. Fruth, President of POLICOM. POLICOM, located in Palm City, FL, specializes in analyzing local and state economies.
“The rankings do not reflect the latest ‘hotspot’ or boom town, but the areas which have the best economic foundation,” Fruth continued. “While most communities have slowed or declined during this recession, the strongest areas have been able to weather the storm.”
We hear an awful lot from our local media and Republican critics about how fucked up we are around here… about how our taxes are too high and our government budgets too big and our regulations too oppressive and all that. And yet, year after year, in reports and studies and surveys, Washington state in general, and the Puget Sound region in particular consistently ranks near the top in economic strength, quality of life, business climate, government efficiency and everything else that leads to prosperity.
It’s not like we don’t have problems to solve, but honestly, what a bunch of whiners we can be.
Given that the “local media” aren’t exactly a growth industry maybe they should leave economic punditry to someone else.
Goldy–
Take a look at the “methodology” of Policom.
They focus primarily on Earnings per Capita and variations like Households etc. But it all seems to start with Worker Earnings.
It doesn’t appear they pull out Government Workers.
The problem we are faced with is that current Government Wages in Washington State are unsustainable.
If you include unsustainable Government Wages that are a result of Budget shell-games, government borrowing, handouts from the Feds because of increased national debt etc….
doesn’t seem like a credible barometer.
Poor Klynical – You are so damn ignorant it is comical to see you try to jump through hoops to justify your warped little world view.
If government workers were the number one reason for job growth then Seattle would not be AT the top – Washington DC would be.
We have no state government here and the UW has LOST jobs.
Face it klynical, liberal Seattle creates and keeps more good jobs than all the red state cities. We must be doing something right here. Maybe it is the technology, education and the quality of the environment that are important.
Not “entrepeneur” and state taxes that you idiots complain about.
So much for the Klynical hypothesis – once again the moron is shot to hell with actual statistics.
Take home lesson:
Support education, a clean environment and the development of technology for a healthy economy.
@2 Mr. Cynical 06/02/2010 at 11:52 am,
Perhaps a method which would seem like a credible barometer for you would be to simply eliminate Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA from the study and rate them dead last because of the unsustainable Government Wages that are a result of Budget shell-games, government borrowing, handouts from the Feds because of increased national debt etc….
And why is methodology in quotes?
FYI –
The study measures 23 different economic factors over a twenty-year period to create the rankings. The formulas determine how an economy has behaved over an extended period of time. Data stretching from 1989 to 2008 was used for this study.
So, over what time period would one need to measure to show that the policies are sustainable?
It really doesn’t help things that the Democratic politicians rarely set things straight, but instead play to the GOP memes.
See: Governor Chris and her last budget.
Conservatives want clean air, clean water, great roads, sports franchises, parks, recreation, good education, safe to eat food, fish in the river, buildings that don’t fall down during earthquakes, awesome police, fire, and emergency response, no snow on the roads…
Yet they despise the governments, policies, and employees that make these things possible.
@4:MBS
You and I realize that Klynical is full of crap, but the idiot keep ranting about stuff that does not even apply.
You see, real statistics blow away Klynicals little mind because they don’t conform to his preconceived ideas about the universe.
Yes, it was almost a 20 year study. But that is “unsustainable” according to Klynical.
Typical rantings and “analysis” by a total fool.
@6: they may “claim to want clean air, water and safe food – but they support policies that prevent that and they side with businesses that pollute versus government enforcements that keep our environment healthy.
According to conservatives we should just stop regulating mines, oil companies, builders and the like and l;et them police themselves….ooops, that is what happened under Bush and see the results.
sarge spews:
Conservatives want clean air, clean water, great roads, sports franchises, parks, recreation, good education, safe to eat food, fish in the river, buildings that don’t fall down during earthquakes, awesome police, fire, and emergency response, no snow on the roads…
Yet they despise the governments, policies, and employees that make these things possible.
i thought he said no whining?
it’s probably all the gun ranges that have allowed pugetopolis to hold up through the great recession.
No offense, Goldy:
I hope VERY FEW people read this post or the study it’s based on.
It’s pretty obvious that the rest of the country could go to hell and we’d still be relatively OK. The less any of us advertise that the better, IMO.
We’re very fortunate to live here; being viewed as an economic lifeboat would be very unfortunate.
No wonder fools like the bigot lobotomy (Dre) hate Seattle so much.
It’s just resentment – pure and simple.
We have it better because of the choices we’ve made and they generally don’t but of course they don’t mind us subsidizing them for schools, roads, public safety, etc…
They can even have it better if they dropped the zombie attitude towards raising taxes. Oregon just did it and it’ll take an initiative brought by a wealthy man (Bill Gates Sr) to make something like that happen here.
Can’t happen soon enough.
Another clear example that a liberal run town run solely by Democrats is taxed to death and drives out all private business with over regulation! Oh wait, reality is the exact opposite of what Republicans always say, I forgot. And our STATE is constantly marked as one of the 5 best to do business in (by the hippy liberal Forbes magazine), and it’s run by liberal Democrats too. Huh. How about that.
Here’s a description of the methodology, and what is being measured:
http://www.policom.com/metro.htm
The main driver is money coming into an area over the past 20 years. Construction and retail business is weighted most heavily.
You do the same analysis in 5 years and we’ll have dropped way down the list. That’s because the growth in local income due to Boeing, MicroSoft and Amazon in the heavily-weighted 1995-2005 period was so great. The consistent gains in construction spending and retail business during that period are what put this region at the top.
Now we’re in an overbuilt phase, with condos selling at depressed auction prices. That means construction jobs are in the shitter. Same with retail – nobody’s got money to buy stuff.
The way this ranking is set up puts us at the top now based on what happened over the past 20 years. We’re beginning a stagnating pattern that will hammer us in terms of the things this particular survey weights heavily.
Just sayin’ . . .
i’m here for the weather.
ain’t it grand?
and the mall.
thanks kemper, you’re a doll.
The surest way to drop in the measurements is to adopt any of Tim Eyman’s initiatives.
YLB
What is Dre calling himself nowadays?
When I first moved out here in 1979, I was rather amazed at the amount of money available here. Middle class homes had new boats and RV’s parked out front! The sources were pretty clear: the military bases in the region, federal spending on defense in local industries, a strong manufacturing sector, union wages paid by Boeing and through the Longshoreman’s union, international trade through the ports of Seattle and Tacoma. Microsoft was in it’s infancy.
Then came the Reagan years. Manufacturing shrunk. Shipbuilding and heavy machinery ceased ceased, steel fabricators shut down by the scores. Then logging stopped due to environmental issues, then fishing curtailed due to the decline of fisheries stocks.
But Boeing recovered, and gradually other industries gave the area some needed diversification. Microsoft, Amazon.com, the bio-tech companies, etc. contributed to a surge of money into the region the 1990’s. One of the principle draws was our quality of life here, the relative absence of slums, and our strong higher education system providing skilled graduates.
It would be easy to change that formula for the worse, simply by continuing our slide of funding of schools, parks, etc., until such point that those industries decide to locate elsewhere.
So riddle me this KLOWNS–
The last smoke-and-mirrors Budget Gregoire & the Democrats conjured up leaves the next Budget with a whopping $5.8 BILLION DEFICIT.
How are you KLOWNS going to plug that monster?
Did Politicom consider sustainability of Budgets when doing it’s rankings?
@2 Klown, you are completely and totally full of shit. State employees are among the most underpaid workers around. Of course, you wouldn’t know that because you’ve never had to live on a state salary. You couldn’t get hired for a state job, and you couldn’t do the work if you were, nor would you be willing to live on state pay. How about taking your tiresome government-worker-hating goat crap and shoving it back up your ass so the rest of us don’t have to put up with the smell?
A couple of point here.
@14 uff da, while it is unlikely that Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA will keep its top of the pile ranking, it is not necessarily true that the success of the past breeds failure in the future. The really interesting thing here is that in yet another survey, this part of the country comes out once again significantly above average.
This has not gone and is not going unnoticed by policy wonks. The Obama administration has a disproportionately high number of WA people for reasons beyond their political stripes. Leaders of this region have a history of proven success.
None of this means that there are not a number of significant issues needing to be addressed.
IMHO what has kept this region growing better than the rest of the country has been the willingness and effectiveness of the populace to tow a pragmatic line. For those on the Republican side of the fence it appears more liberal because of their intransigence to look at facts and data (see Mr. Clown @2) and make decisions based upon knowable facts. The rigid polemics of the Republican party in WA is why they are so frequently rejected by the pragmatic WA voters.
Think about this. Slade Gorton, one of if not the most successful WA Republican politicians in a half century would never be able to get a Republican nomination for state wide office today. Skeletor is too liberal.
Lastly, something that Washington (especially western WA) has that few other places have is our environment. Everybody that loves the outdoors loves to live here. The Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA economic region draws disproportionately large number of non US born immigrants. Most are highly educated. Most quickly realize what a paradise this place is and become staunch environmentalists – aiming to preserve this place for what it is.
Western WA is great because of its people and our ability to pull together and get amazing things done. The Republican party of the 21st century requires that you ignore this and emulate Texas. When is the last time you heard of a Washingtonian moving to Texas? :-)
@21: When is the last time you heard of a Washingtonian moving to Texas? :-)
I know lots that have – for various reasons.
@19 Mr. Cynical on 06/02/2010 at 2:39 pm,
Did Politicom consider sustainability of Budgets when doing it’s rankings?
Ok smart guy. You don’t like Politicom’s “methodology” and want it to include state budgets in evaluating the long term tendency for an area to consistently grow in both size and quality of metropolitan areas.
How would you do that? How would you rate and weight state budgets on a per capita basis?
OBTW, have you any idea how WA compares to the other 49 states regarding state budget stability? Is WA in the top or bottom 25?
@14
Microsoft, Amazon, and other local tech companies are still growing like crazy and will continue to pump money into the local economy.
While Boeing isn’t likely to grow headcount much in the next few years those 737s, 747s, 777s, and 787s will still pump a fair bit of money into the local economy.
@24 – MSFT laid off 5K from the Redmond work force last year. It is using tons of contract workers on the Indian subcontinent. Those trends will continue. Amazon’s workforce is relatively small. Those are the successes. The real workforce numbers are in small companies – and those are the ones doing poorly. You can tell that by the very low sales tax receipts. And @14 has a good point about the overbuilt condo AND office space around here. Construction will be in the doldrums for years while that gopher moves through the python.
One last point – the housing bubble has not dissipated here, and credit will be tough for most people to get. That means housing prices will continue to slide, further eroding the “paper-wealth” that many people here used (via lines of credit) to buy stuff and make sales tax receipts look good. That wealth is gone, and it will further depress the region.
17 – Not sure but his OCD will out him eventually.
The bottom line about our bottom line is that uff da @14 totally took this thread apart. All the rest, from goldy at the top to YLB at the (heh) bottom is bogus. Particularly including MikeBS’s feeble attempt at refutation.
The Boy Scout molester refuted nothing, but at least he didn’t lapse into vulgar incoherence, as he usually does, by calling uff da a douchebag.
@27 Brigham on 06/02/2010 at 4:39 pm,
Thank-you for your informed non vulgar comment.
It certainly shows you to be a reasoned non vulgar thinker.
Got that right. For a change.
@27
I have to agree that uff da dropped the bomb on the thread, and not one person has been able to to retort.
When Boeing (and the rest of the aerospace industry) fell through its ass in the early 70’s, what kept the Northwest from drying up and blowing away was an explosion of medical instrument technology: Physio-Control, Spacelabs, Quinton, several diagnostic ultrasound companies. These were mostly spinoffs from the University of Washington, at the time the largest institution in the country in receiving Federal funding for medical research, not to mention the home of a top-notch College of Engineering, and pretty damn good chemistry and physics departments. The general interest in computery that came from all this inspired a couple of kids at Lakeside (Bill and Paul–you might have heard of ’em) who later bailed out of Harvard and started a company to make all that fun stuff accessible to “ordinary people”.
If instead of what happened, the budget axe had fallen really hard on the UW because of declining tax revenue, we’d have wound up in pretty deep shit.
I have no argument to pick with uff da @14, but for those of you who think uff da dropped the bomb on the thread maybe you should read what was written.
uff da said
Now here is what Politicom says:
1. The 1995-2005 period was not heavily weighted.
2. The period of 1999-2008 included the dot com crash and the 9-11 recession, both of which significantly impacted MS and Boeing.
The study is sound for what it studied and in no way was set to put this area at the very top of the nation.
uff da @14,
Um… this a ranking of regional economic strength, and as such it is inherently relative. So while yes, our local economy is much weaker than it was in 2005, so are local economies in metropolitan areas throughout the nation, and in fact when judged by metrics like unemployment, decline in real estate prices, government budget shortfalls etc., this recession has not hit Seattle nearly as harshly as it has in many other major cities.
So with other cities facing similar economic weaknesses, I would suggest that your thesis is wrong, and that Seattle would continue to maintain a relatively high ranking by Policom’s methodology as the economic recovery continues.
I’ll give Uff Da @ 14 credit for participating in a rational discussion, which has been sorely lacking in this forum from the right side of late.
But I would point out that the same warnings that growth was “unsustainable” in the region could, and were, made in every rescession since I’ve moved here. As each industry declined (shipbuilding, steel, fisheries, timber), others have arisen to take their place. That’s not to say that I don’t mourn the loss of American manufacturing. But it just shows that if you preserve a breathtakingly beautiful environment; keep the area affordable and family-friendly; and provide good public libraries, schools, universities, parks, and recreational areas; then businesses will find reasons to locate (or stay) here.
In contrast, I just got through reading my old hometown newspaper again (a city the size of Tacoma). Citizens were complaining about gangs controlling the city. Gang and drug-related shootings have become everyday headlines. A police officer published his resignation letter in the paper, pointing out that after ten years he is still making only 37K a year, which is the same as new hires. In the meantime, the Tea Bag protesters have been loudly arguing (for several weeks) that $65,000 the city paid for a new awning at some softball fields was an extravagant waste of taxpayer money. In the meantime, a nearby suburban community pool may be closed this summer because the community there can’t get agreement on some $38,000 in essential repairs.
The fierce fighting over what seems (from here) to be small amounts of money is rather amazing. I’m sure glad I don’t have to deal with the politics – or budgets – there anymore. But I fear this is our future if we keep going the Tim Eyman route of perpetually cutting taxes to the point where our public services are starved and decayed. Maybe then, too, we won’t be able to afford as a community $38,000 to keep our parks open, or $65,000 to make improvements to our softball fields.
Then tell me why Washington has such a high suicide rate?
rhp6033@18
WOW! Where the hell were you in 1979? This area was just starting to recover in 1979 from Carter! Logging was DEAD from the spotted owl, Boeing was crippled FROM Carter policies, you remember Carter don’t you? That was Obama #1.
@34
I think you made an unintended point in your post.
If a police officer(with ANY experience) is only making $37,000 a year, then I can understand why people would be upset over spending $65,000 for a softball field awning(which does seem a bit outlandish if you think about it).
I think what makes many people(myself included) upset over govt spending is that there is no rhyme or reason to what money is spent where. Case in point above – you gotta have your priorities set up to where they make some sort of sense.
Police, fire, 911, etc should be budget priorities, but the problem is that THEY AREN’T.
Example: Seattle and King County seem to have money for bike paths and public art, but no money for King County Sheriff’s Dept or City of Seattle Police Dept?
Now that’s just stupid. I am all for spending a little money on public art and such, but you do it when the times are good and when all other important needs are met.
Its all about priorities people, and our leaders seem to be clueless(by accident or design, you tell me)
Carter had the misfortune to be in office when the bill came due for a certain little marching party in southeast Asia. In the late 70’s the lumber industry, and construction in general, were hurting because people were having trouble taking out mortgages at 16% APR, and the banking laws didn’t quite allow the degree of “creative financing” we…ahem! “enjoyed” in the last decade.
After Reagan took over, initially things became even worse. By 1982, for the first time in my life I became aware of not just grizzled individuals but whole families standing out by the roadside begging.
After all the blather of fiscal restraint, Ronnie and his pals pulled us out of the tailspin by pushing the Russians into a final orgy of strategic-weapons spending. Seems it’s always OK for Uncle Sam to write “hot checks”, to quote a certain guy from Texas, so long as it’s for killing people or building bigger and better means to do so. We ended up breaking the back of the Red Menace’s economy and gave our own another hit from the bong. The irony, which is entirely lost on those over on the right, is that their poster boy for frugal government actually spent his way out of what would have otherwise been the recession we’re experiencing now…or even worse.
Funny how one’s memory can become confused when one’s political beliefs are challenged.
@36 Chuck spewed on 06/02/2010 at 7:08 pm:
In 1979 “Logging was DEAD from the spotted owl“, but the Spotted Owl wasn’t proposed as threatened until 1989.
And regarding Boeing, Carter’s deregulation of the airlines in 1978 certainly helped Boeing airplane sales in the long run.
But hey, if bashing Carter over shit he never did is the best you got… go for it!
@14, I have no idea why you would include Boeing in that group. After 9/11, the company and inductry went into the fucking toilet.
Thousands of people were laid off, the stock took a nose dive, capped off with a strike (it was in all the papers.)
maybe you meant some other company that didn’t suffer staggering losses, and hemoraged people and money.
When my brother was laid off I didn’t see that as a sign of “growth” in his income when I was paying him to do odd jobs.
Dumbass.
Tee hee…. the trolls are nearly speechless, for once.
@34 I think American manufacturing may be making a comeback. I guess some Chinese are going on strike in the Honda plant, and area asking for a raise from $70 per month to $130. They know others make up to $130 per month, and they want a piece….
People live here for the rain…er..I mean the economy stupid… If our economy looked like Detroit, imagine the suicide rate!
We’re #1, We’re #1, We’re #1. Take that gloom and doom sayers that think Republicans should run our state into the ditch like the do every other place when they infect a state’s government. There is more to making a city thrive than cutting taxes on rich people while putting the hammer on the rest.
Guess what stupid? Seattles suicide rate is above even Detroit!
@43: Gee Chuck – as if suicide rate even matters in this argument.
Have you heard of dark rainy weather as a cause of suicide?
That is not an economic phenomenon. And if you want to move to Detroit…good luck. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out of here.
@14 “the heavily-weighted 1995-2005 period”
You attempt to score a point by making shit up. Fail.
@30 “I have to agree that uff da dropped the bomb on the thread, and not one person has been able to to retort.”
Yeah, he dropped a bomb, alright. Puddy drops similar bombs from his ass. We call those stinkbombs, “Puddyfacts”.
What does this say about Goldy? In the three years since KIRO dumped him, living in the city with the strongest economy in the nation, he still can’t find a job?
“The Seattle, WA metropolitan area has the strongest local economy in the nation.”
Have you LOOKED at the national economy lately, Goldy? Being the strongest isn’t saying much. But just wait awhile. Obama and Gregoire will make it worse.
Hey it’s a great thing Seattle has the strongest economy – but why are you libs trying to wreck it?
Here’s how I read that survey. This region HAD the strongest economy in the 1998 – 2008 period. “Strongest economy” essentially refers to growth in money flowing into a region, and the three key things measured are: 1) payroll growth, 2) retail sales, and 3) construction spending.
Our region fared well for a number of reasons. Public and private payrolls grew consistently. That alone drove year-over-year growth in retail sales. Other factors driving the big retail sales figures here during the past 20 years include above-average housing value growth, which made taking equity out of homes seem easy. That source of revenue was spent buying stuff. Also, the easy availability of personal credit from credit card issuers also fueled retail sales growth here. That was a bigger factor here because of the relatively high private and public payroll growth.
In the first half of the period the tech sector added wealth to the economy by increased value of the stock holdings of residents, and the addition of many new jobs each year. In the second half of the period, the easy credit and pro-developer policies enabled massive construction spending. Those are the drivers of this particular survey.
Going forward we can not expect this region to outperform other regions. The tech boom brought an unprecedented shot of new wealth into this region, and nothing comparable is on the horizon. Credit availability for new construction is tight, and there is a glut of overpriced housing and office properties. Those factors mean new construction spending will be low. Moreover, retail sales are way off, which shows the major driver for economic recovery isn’t underway. Unemployment is relatively high for here, and the large private employers are not likely to grow their local workforces much (labor is cheaper elsewhere).
What have the Dems done to encourage small business activity and robust private sector job creation? Those are the things that would pull us out of economic purgatory. Would the R’s do anything that would help the local economy more if they were to take a few local, state, or federal offices? I doubt that would make any difference.
Thoughts?
Goldy writes: “when judged by metrics like unemployment, decline in real estate prices, government budget shortfalls etc., this recession has not hit Seattle nearly as harshly as it has in many other major cities.”
That’s not really the point though, is it? What matters is whether or not we are able to pull out of this recession quickly and strongly enough.
For that we need strong consumer spending, and job growth (private sector). Does anyone think the political leadership in place here can help on those scores? I have my doubts . . . look at Dow and the county council raising sewer rates, pushing for increases in sales tax and property tax, look at Sound Transit raising sales taxes big time in a recession, etc.
@49
I think that is a pretty fair and accurate assessment.
Econ stats point to higher consumer spending but it appears to be by people fortunate enough to have a lot of money. Those who profited the most by the right wing policies of the last 30 plus years are spending a lot right now. The threat of them getting haircuts from the government for bailouts and whatnot has greatly dissipated so it’s time again to live it up. Lucky people.
Jobs are perking up but at not nearly the rate needed to meet even the not all that rosy employment projections by the CBO and the Fed and guess what? A large portion of the job “growth” appears to be for temporary Census takers.
More stimulus is long overdue but won’t be attempted until after November.
Seattle rated #2 in Kiplinger’s 10 Best Cities for the Next Decade. Austin is #1 on the list.
Those who profited the most by the right wing policies of the last 30 plus years are spending a lot right now.
WRONG. Sales tax receipts are down.
Next . . . .
“Going forward we can not expect this region to outperform other regions.”
Oh yes we can. The conversation on this thread wandered back to 1979. I was told then of the doom and the gloom. What we have going for us today only few could even possibly dream of then. And yet it certainly was the dream of a few. That’s the thing about Seattle, something I recall Murray Morgan noting in the close of the first edition of Skid Road – we have dreamers here and, as amazing as those dreams may be, some of those dreams really will come true. We still have such dreamers. That’s one of the ways I perceive the spirit of Seattle and the region. I may not be around when today’s dreams come true, but I love Seattle and I see the region’s future as being brighter than ever before. Tech, bio, aerospace, trade. This isn’t the end. I believe it’s only the beginning.
To mangle Margeret O’Brien’s line from the end of Meet Me in St. Louis, I’m so lucky to have been born in the best city in the whole wide world.
Hat tip to you, Junior. I loved the way you played the game. Safeco Field. That’s the house you built. As for who paid for it, eh, that’s for another discussion. Today it’s, “thanks for the memories”.
Exactly what you’d expect if only a few people are spending..
If they WEREN’T spending the state would be in federal receivership if there were such a thing.
Again on the NATIONAL scale (which is what I was talking about, sorry if that wasn’t clear) consumer spending is UP but again when you look at who’s spending it’s mostly rich people.
NEXT!
The spending has to start somewhere, and it only makes sense that it would start with people who still have some money.
The more they spend, the more it will help spur the economy on.
@57 FunFacts, here is a fun fact for you. The wealthier one is the less one is likely to spend the next disposable dollar.
If one wants the spending to start somewhere the least probable place to see an increase in spending is from the wealthy.
And if it is the less wealthy (a.k.a. poor) who are the most likely to spend and spur the economy, the question is how poor people can spend if they don’t have money.
There’s a simple answer, but don’t be disappointed if your goggles blind you to it.
57 – agreed and they’d better spend A LOT more if employment is going to meet Fed and CBO projections.
They aren’t all that great – something like an 8.3 percent unemployment rate by the end of 2011.
Something like 358,000 jobs a month would have to be produced between now and then.
What’s needed has NEVER been done for the last 60 years.
@50
The choice is either raising taxes or government layoffs combined with a massive reduction in services. That makes unemployment worse because there are now more people looking for jobs, depresses tax revenue even further, and reduces economic activity.
As for Sound Transit they didn’t “raise taxes” the voters of the Sound Transit taxing district did.
Sarah @50,
No, that really is the point. This is a ranking of metropolitan regions against each other, none of whose economies operate in a vacuum. Our economy is down, as is the economy throughout the nation. But in that context, ours measures up fairly well, and there’s nothing concrete to suggest that our economy won’t continue to measure up well as the nation climbs out of a global recession.
From a policy and governance perspective, can we do better? Sure. But don’t ignore the fact that we already do better than most everybody else, and have been for quite some time. We must be doing something right.
@58
Current spending habits and past history would seem to prove you wrong.
The wealthy spend money on not just retail stuff, but on business ventures that provide jobs(like construction projects). This is where the economy starts.
Poor people buying flat screens with a credit card at Best Buy or Costco do not spur the economy or provide jobs(accept in China).
@59
That pace will never happen.
It will be 2015 before we get anywhere near back to the level of 2006-2007, and that is only if the specter of super inflation does not rear its head(which we are setting ourselves up for).
@63
Actually deflation is a much greater threat and much harder to get under control once it starts.
I say we need a massive program to repair, rehabilitate, and replace aging infrastructure. Not only will it create jobs now but it would be a down payment on the future.
I’d also create an Apollo program like green energy initiative with investments in energy efficiency, renewable energy, and R&D.
Chris @60 – The boardmembers of ST put a huge tax increase on the ballot, then they passed the resolution to start it up immediately. THEY are responsible, Chris, and those were stupid moves on their part. You can’t blame the voters for the exceedingly costly ballot measure the boardmembers wanted, nor can you blame them for the damage it will cause going forward.
From Goldy: “there’s nothing concrete to suggest that our economy won’t continue to measure up well as the nation climbs out of a global recession.”
Please. Here are some concrete reasons why this region will lag its peers by a significant margin: the large local private employers will be adding employment elsewhere, as costs here are too great; there will not be robust small business growth because the 9.5% sales tax and B&O taxes are too steep (ie, they make businesses less profitable so the businesses can’t hire more employees, and the sales tax wipes out much of the lower economic demographic’s spending ability); and there is a disproportionately large excess of housing and office space that this market will not digest for years (that will keep a lid on future construction activity).
How exactly do you believe an inflationary spiral like we saw in the seventies would repeat itself today? I hear this all the time from right wingers and a coherent “how” is never forthcoming.
It’s inchoate..
65 – Thank you for justifying a tax on the wealthy coupled with a tax cut for the middle class.
Vote yes on I-1077.
From Goldy: “From a policy and governance perspective, can we do better? Sure. But don’t ignore the fact that we already do better than most everybody else, and have been for quite some time. We must be doing something right.”
You mean “governance” like encouraging the inevitable damage to the local economy the stupid lending policies of Freddie Mac and WAMU caused? Those led to the overbuilding here. That’s why those “construction” numbers in that survey you tout were so high here – DCLU under Nickels let developers run wild, fueled by easy credit. Now we’ve got craptastic Belltown, and tons of empty class A office space in Seattle to show for it. A similar situation led to the wildly overbuilt downtown Bellevue. Yeah, your friends in government did great by people!
@67 It would be a better initiative if the sales tax were reduced, instead of property taxes. Sales tax revenue should be replaced by income tax revenue.
69 – I agree actually! Well let’s encourage our legislators to go a few steps farther than Mr. Gates, shall we?
@69: I agree also. Reduce the sales tax not the property tax.
From the “even a stopped clock” file, I give you “Warshington” @69:
Aside from that accidental truth, you consistently ignore the fact that the ills you reference, e.g. declining tax revenues, vacant office space, high unemployment, are occurring everywhere. The data quoted by Goldy, along with the Kiplinger’s report referenced by “uptown” @53, demonstrate that on a comparative basis Seattle has had and continues to have one of the most robust economic environments in the nation.
Yes, we’re having troubles right now. So too is every other community in the nation and much of the world. But we’re handling it better than the great majority of the others.
We need a millionaire’s tax combined with a 20% asset tax on multi-millionaires applied every 5 years.
Yes in many cases that is true. However, cutting their taxes and eliminating regulations did not have the intended effect did it?
And who throws their money at casino finance vehicles like hedge funds – joe sixpack? What the freaking good has that ever done?
And more of the same expecting different results is the definition of insanity.
Cynical @ 19
You raise an interesting point. What programs would you cut from our state’s budget to make it balance?
I mean, in addition to your proposal to cut the administration of elections and our courts.
The economy around here is SO GOOD my income is DOWN almost $1000.00 a month.
I was hoping to keep more change in my pocket.
@64
I agree, we need a huge infrastructure boost.
The problem is that we have no money to pay for it. I suppose that is where the debate starts.
@65
you posted:
Please. Here are some concrete reasons why this region will lag its peers by a significant margin: the large local private employers will be adding employment elsewhere, as costs here are too great; there will not be robust small business growth because the 9.5% sales tax and B&O taxes are too steep (ie, they make businesses less profitable so the businesses can’t hire more employees, and the sales tax wipes out much of the lower economic demographic’s spending ability); and there is a disproportionately large excess of housing and office space that this market will not digest for years (that will keep a lid on future construction activity).
You are exactly right.
This region was late getting into the recession, and it will be very late getting out of it.
@66
Because the govt continues to spend money on a massive scale(money it does not have). You are smart enough to take it to its logical conclusion from there.
@67
A tax on the wealthy is not going to generate the amount of cash needed. That is pretty much a fact.
There is also the notion that piling a tax on certain people(and not everyone, even at a graduated rate) is not “the American way”(for lack of a better term). On that subject, there is much debate, which I will leave to you guys.
@77
Well I’m talking on a national level here in which case we can take advantage of having a sovereign fiat currency that just so happens to also be the world’s prefered reserve currency.
As I said earlier the real danger is deflation so the reasons one would normally be worried about a massive increase in the money supply don’t apply so much. Inflation means you are successfully avoiding deflation.
BTW another idea for stimulus would be some sort of direct small business loan program. Just to be fair the program should be roughly the same size as the Wall Street bailouts were.
sarah @ 50
On that point:
Our macroeconomic policies have favored the supply side of the economy for the last 30+ years. We have excess capacity, excess goods, and not enough buyers.
For our nation’s economy to recover, we need policies that promote consumption. Meaning putting money into the hands of consumers, creating more jobs (public and private), incentives for entrepreneurs, etc. Meaning a progressive (downward) redistribution of wealth.
I’m not an economist, just repeating what I’ve been reading, as I try to better understand this stuff.
Note that this is a macroeconomic policy issue. Meaning federal and some state. There’s very little Seattle (metro area) could do on its own to promote consumption.
Me, personally, I’m in the Sustainable Ballard school of thought: Do more with less. Our quality of life will improve, even though the traditional measurements of “standard of living” will decrease.
@74
I am not going to agree or disagree with you. My point was that in order for people to have jobs(and therefore money to spend on retail items), wealthy people and business needs to spend/invest money on capital projects.
How you/we get to that point in time is the part nobody seems to agree upon.
That is just a fact of life.
@81
And how much longer do you think the dollar will be the world’s preferred reserve currency? Assuming that it always will be is a dangerous stance.
At the rate of debt spending and money printing, the dollar will continue to be worth less and less.
You seem to be saying that we can do and pay for anything we want – its as easy as printing more money. That method is a sure-fire way of economic collapse.
I’m inclined to wonder whether the decline in sales tax receipts might be partly due to the folks at the lower echelons of the middle class spending a greater percentage of their paychecks at the supermarket. Food prices have skyrocketed in the last decade, and if it’s a choice of having decent food on the table and putting off the purchase of that new car, digital camera, nice overcoat or trip to Disneyland, most people are probably shifting their priorities.
@85
Or perhaps people have reached their credit limit, and have discovered to their horror that all those cool purchases they made over the last few years actually have to be paid for.
I am curious to find out as to when the federal government will learn the same lesson.
@84
You seem to keep missing that bit I keep mentioning about deflation being the big danger right now.
Any government with a sovereign fiat currency can do this, though the US has a particular advantage due to the size of our economy and reserve currency status.
To some extent you want government capital spending to be counter-cyclical. It counteracts the lack of spending in the private sector, it can offset the contraction of credit, and it sews the seeds for the next economic expansion.
Certainly fixing the infrastructure maintenance and repair backlog, promoting something of an industrial policy (green jobs), and providing a huge pile of money for small business expansion provides one heck of an economic stimulus and will pay huge dividends during the next 30 years or so.
A pile of debt and inflation is a much easier problem to deal with than a stubborn deflationary cycle. In an ideal world you don’t want either but the former is far preferable to the latter.
Of course if the Bush tax cuts had never been passed then people wouldn’t be handwringing over the debt either.
@65
Eh? So when the voters pass a tax increase it is the fault of those who put it on the ballot? WTF?
The voters could easily have told the Sound Transit Board that their tax increase was ill timed by voting against it. They didn’t, instead it passed by larger margins than the 1996 Sound Move ballot measure. I’ve never heard of a voter passed tax increase being delayed in this state.
I mean I get it, you likely think Sound Transit is a huge waste of money, that government should only ever cut taxes not raise them, and government employees are a bunch of overpaid lazy bums.
On what? What causes inflation?
Government has so far spent 1 trillion dollars on two recent foreign military adventures not to mention maintaining over 700 military outposts around the world.
Has that caused inflation?
Well I’ll tell you what, how about the government raises taxes on their capital gains income so that instead of throwing it on casino finance and getting a big tax bill they throw it instead on enterprises with a longer term payoff that might (shocking I know) have the potential to create jobs. And in the end create value and wealth for them as well.
Reward proper investment on things ordinary people need and have use for, long term outlook vs. short term speculation on exotic speculative vehicles, a misallocation of capital that acts as a parasite on the economy.
@89
By the numbers: Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, interest on the debt, and defense are the majority of the Federal budget.
In and of itself a large debt doesn’t cause inflation, but monetizing the debt can.
Yeah because supply-side and screwing the middle class is the Raygunism “American way”. No thanks. Give me FDR back! Give us back the days when America told the rich to take hike!
@89
What the money is spent on is irrelevant. The fact that it was printed and spent is the important fact.
I think you are confusing two different things.
@91
The fact that one of the top expenditures on your list is interest payment on debt should tell people that there is a huge problem.
Will people finally understand we have a huge problem when interest payments on the debt is the largest budgetary item?
The people at the wheel are driving us over the cliff.
@92
I do not want to tell anyone to “take a hike”. Aren’t we all citizens of the same nation?
I guess I am just not the jealous type.
EDIT: Actually, I do want to tell some people to “take a hike”, and that would be all the politicians, on both sides, who got us here.
And please, spare me the “its their(the other party) fault”. Both parties got us here, because at their core, they are both corrupt.
Ahh I see now…
@94
Yes interest on the debt is one of the larger line-items but it is still less than 5% of the entire budget.
Heh… Our “FunFacts” friend has much to teach us about “honoring” debts.
@97
“less than 5% of the total budget”…for now.
When do we get concerned? When its 10%? 20%? 50%?
@99 FunFacts on 06/03/2010 at 5:23 pm
If you are truly concerned and interested in how to reduce the deficit, read this TNR piece of Jonathan Chait.
@100
Interesting article and there is probably a lot of sound logic in it.
Fuck the rich. Confiscate everything they own.
The rich, even those with good intentions, are actually the problem. The reason for this is that despite their wealth, most rich people really don’t do anything. Oh, they may be managers of people who are doing actual work, but mostly they take their money and either spend it on their own hedonistic pleasures or sequester it someplace where it may well work against the promotion of the common good, like in offshore oil fields or speculative futures trading in commodities which drives up retail prices. Rich people, for the most part, don’t make chips fly or pick the tomatoes you had in your salad last night, or invent a new drug to treat cancer, or write some exciting, truly innovative piece of software–some of ’em might have have done really creative stuff at one time, but most likely once they have that 5,000 square foot shack on Hunt’s Point they’re merely exercising their ability to put their name on the fruits of someone else’s labors.
Government, on the other hand, takes the tax money it collects (heck, and then some!) and spends it on something that puts people to work, builds infrastructure, educates the next generation of creative minds, or lands guys on the moon and brings them back home.
So, letting the already rich off the hook and letting them keep more money out of circulation is actually the most counter-productive and growth-inhibiting thing we can do. In other words, in case you havent figured it out, Grover Norquist either doesn’t know his ass from a hole in the ground, or is a lying sack of shit.
@102
Let’s start with your stuff first. OK?
@103
May I ask what your definition of “rich” is?