The south taking over?

[Jerry LeRow]

 

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/the-economic-engine-america-isthe-south-11225 --> This article is about the south, especially Texas, and its increasing economic importance for the US. 

 

I personally have been taking closer looks on Texas for some while, and was more and more impressed by the numbers the Dallas Fed delivered (although as inhabitant of the EU you're already impressed by a GDP growth just above 1%  ). I don't know much about the other southern states though, except for Florida which is said to have an outstanding education system and also very business friendly.

 

Same counts for California, where former Governor Schwarzenegger pushed for a more business friendly climate:

 

California Lieutenant Governor Newsom has some interesting points when he writes about how to increase said business climate --> http://www.ltg.ca.gov/docs/LGN_Econ_Agenda.pdf . Though I don't notice that much being realized...

 

I don't wanna present numbers here, I mean come on, present me the right numbers in the right way and you could make the impression California was the best state for business

 

But let me present 1 ranking by the Chief Executive magazine: http://chiefexecutive.net/best-worst-states-for-business-2014#ranking

Texas: #1

California: #50 

 

So I wanna hear your opinion: Is the Golden State's economic power vanishing? Is the south, especially Texas, a slowly awakening sleeping giant? Or will economic power go westwards again?

 

EDIT: just read through my news and saw Perry is now in Japan, promoting "stronger economic ties between Japan and Texas". Last time I heard such a thing was Christie down in Mexico, and I can also remember Schwarzenegger in Asia and Perry in Davos. Some might think republican govs are more on the internatioal state...

Edited September 8, 2014 by Jerry LeRow

[ELPINCHAZO]

Texas isn't generally considered part of the 'South' in the US. It is kind of its own thing. Also,a lot of Florida isn't considered part of 'The South' in defiance of all logical geography because some parts are just full of northern transplants. While I don't wholly agree with this map it might give you a better idea of what Americans refer to as the 'South' (deep south on the map)

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2013/11/08/which-of-the-11-american-nations-do-you-live-in/

 

 

 

this map is also useful in reference to population density.

Edited September 8, 2014 by ELPINCHAZO

[Jerry LeRow]

Texas isn't generally considered part of the 'South' in the US. It is kind of its own thing. Also,a lot of Florida isn't considered part of 'The South' in defiance of all logical geography because some parts are just full of northern transplants. While I don't wholly agree with this map it might give you a better idea of what Americans refer to as the 'South' (deep south on the map)

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2013/11/08/which-of-the-11-american-nations-do-you-live-in/

Ah, thanks. Quite a difference to the Census Bureau definition I used. So would you in general say that americans see this ( https://www.census.gov/geo/maps-data/maps/pdfs/reference/us_regdiv.pdf ) definitions as "outdated"?

 

And back to the topic... would you share the sentiment that south (now by CB and thereby the NI article definition) is taking the lead?

[ELPINCHAZO]

Ah, thanks. Quite a difference to the Census Bureau definition I used. So would you in general say that americans see this ( https://www.census.gov/geo/maps-data/maps/pdfs/reference/us_regdiv.pdf ) definitions as "outdated"?

 

And back to the topic... would you share the sentiment that south (now by CB and thereby the NI article definition) is taking the lead?

 

 

well there are the geographical and the cultural delineations. I believe that generally the Americans will use the cultural definitions by default but it occasionally does cause confusion and often requires a bit of context.

 

Anyway,I don't generally pay close attention to which states are showing economic growth. I believe that  somethings have shifted do to fracking but again that is a finite resource and with all the controversy there is a chance that could always turn around fast. 

 

I generally see the south as not likely having the legs to sustain or ultimately retain any large amounts of growth.  They don't have the same infrastructure for technology that the northeast and east coast have. My understanding is that tech advancements drive business and create new industries, you just don't see something like silicon valley or Boston in the south. So the south is likely going to rely in raw resources and I think that is tricky in today's world economy.

 

anyway,not my area of expertise.

[Grillick]

I generally see the south as not likely having the legs to sustain or ultimately retain any large amounts of growth.  They don't have the same infrastructure for technology that the northeast and east coast have. My understanding is that tech advancements drive business and create new industries, you just don't see something like silicon valley or Boston in the south. So the south is likely going to rely in raw resources and I think that is tricky in today's world economy.

You may want to reconsider that particular view.

 

Texas, as awful as it is, is definitely an up-and-comer in the technology circuit, and it isn't afraid to throw a few elbows here and there. And it isn't just technology.

[Solomon]

I don't see why this topic is in the debate section. Is the south part of the USA considering seceding from the Union?

[ELPINCHAZO]

You may want to reconsider that particular view.

 

Texas, as awful as it is, is definitely an up-and-comer in the technology circuit, and it isn't afraid to throw a few elbows here and there. And it isn't just technology.

 it may be an up 

 

I don't see why this topic is in the debate section. Is the south part of the USA considering seceding from the Union?

 

if only.

[ELPINCHAZO]

You may want to reconsider that particular view.

 

Texas, as awful as it is, is definitely an up-and-comer in the technology circuit, and it isn't afraid to throw a few elbows here and there. And it isn't just technology.

Well one article,yes I will reconsider my entire world view.

 

sorry,not there yet man.

 

also its funny that the article about Austin was written by this person:

 

"Julie Huls has served as the President and CEO of the Austin Technology Council since 2009 where she collaborates regularly with state and national leaders on economic and workforce policy development. "

Edited September 8, 2014 by ELPINCHAZO

[Jerry LeRow]

Solomon, I want to listen to both sides. I'm pro-Texas, but I hope to find some pro-West guys in here.

[Solomon]

Both sides? Is this a pissing match between California and Texas? 

[WISD0MTREE]

Both sides? Is this a pissing match between California and Texas? 

Ehh, it is like a Cold War in a way. We have the two superpowers (Cali and TX) with some neutral areas (swing states) and others fixed on one side or the other. California is mostly http://www.democrats.org/ and Texas is http://www.gop.com/ (unless we don't secure the damn border). 

 

Only time will tell. Psst... Texas supporters, meet me at the Pantex facility. Cali might have a small pollution problem when we are through. Seriously, I wonder if Texas could secede if somehow the state got control of the plant. 

[ELPINCHAZO]

Ehh, it is like a Cold War in a way. We have the two superpowers (Cali and TX) with some neutral areas (swing states) and others fixed on one side or the other. California is mostly http://www.democrats.org/ and Texas is http://www.gop.com/ (unless we don't secure the damn border). 

 

Only time will tell. Psst... Texas supporters, meet me at the Pantex facility. Cali might have a small pollution problem when we are through. Seriously, I wonder if Texas could secede if somehow the state got control of the plant. I'm 

I'm really hoping for the New England secessionist movement to pick up some steam(any...at all). My state gets so very little back from what it pays out to the federal level.

[Jodo]

I'm really hoping for the New England secessionist movement to pick up some steam(any...at all). My state gets so very little back from what it pays out to the federal level.

I'll back you up with that, but only if you guys help us push NYC into the ocean.

[Toxxikation]

Being a resident of Texas, I'm severely worried that the economic boom that we're seeing will be held back by the backwards social policies that the state seems to adapt with little to no support from their constituents. I wonder if there's some correlation between backwards social policies and greater economic growth. Seems California is the most liberal, least economic, and Texas is the most conservative, most economic. If only we could find some middle ground...

[Aisha Greyjoy]

To the extent Southern states(aka Republican states) have taken away all worker rights and greatly empowered corporations to pollute, steal from their workers, and pay no taxes, yes the South is a very friendly place for Capital.  Its a really crappy place for Labor, however. Southern States have terribad education systems, terribad healthcare, terribad infrastructure.  

 

California's economy is still a LOT larger then that of Texas.

Texas and Florida both have about 25% of their residents getting Bachelor Degrees.  Califorina is 30% and New York is 32%.  Average income is much higher when you're not in the south.

 

 

Is the south, especially Texas, a slowly awakening sleeping giant?

 No, the south is like Mexico or China.  Cheap, exploitable labor.  That's all.  

[Ayayay]

Yankeedom: Founded by Puritans, residents in Northeastern states and the industrial Midwest tend to be more comfortable with government regulation. They value education and the common good more than other regions.

Ha, I wish.

Edited September 9, 2014 by underlordgc

[WISD0MTREE]

 

To the extent Southern states(aka Republican states) have taken away all worker rights and greatly empowered corporations to pollute, steal from their workers, and pay no taxes, yes the South is a very friendly place for Capital.  Its a really crappy place for Labor, however. Southern States have terribad education systems, terribad healthcare, terribad infrastructure.  

 

California's economy is still a LOT larger then that of Texas.

Texas and Florida both have about 25% of their residents getting Bachelor Degrees.  Califorina is 30% and New York is 32%.  Average income is much higher when you're not in the south.

 

 

 

 No, the south is like Mexico or China.  Cheap, exploitable labor.  That's all.  

 

>taken away worker rights

Proof please. 

>pay no taxes

No, they pay the same as a small family business. 

>pollute 

Please prove. Fracking is allowed in non southern states. 

>steal from workers

Steal how? Supply and demand. We have an unsecure border, so if guy x won't mow the lawn for $15, then guy y will. 

 

Cali does have 12 billion more people than us, so they should have a larger economy. 

 

Mexico? Dude, they are on the brink of collapse. Attrition war with the cartels. 

China? Housing bubble (even though they seem to be controlling it well)

[Jerry LeRow]

 

To the extent Southern states(aka Republican states) have taken away all worker rights and greatly empowered corporations to pollute, steal from their workers, and pay no taxes, yes the South is a very friendly place for Capital.  Its a really crappy place for Labor, however. Southern States have terribad education systems, terribad healthcare, terribad infrastructure.  

 

California's economy is still a LOT larger then that of Texas.

Texas and Florida both have about 25% of their residents getting Bachelor Degrees.  Califorina is 30% and New York is 32%.  Average income is much higher when you're not in the south.

 

 

 

 No, the south is like Mexico or China.  Cheap, exploitable labor.  That's all.  

 

Then I wonder why south has the most immigrants... especially from corners like California  

Yes, they don't have the strong unions that California has, but let me assure you, modern unions often (not always) abuse their power. True, so do businesses, but they at least let the economy boom.

 

According to this ( http://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/articles/2014/04/21/how-states-compare-in-the-2014-best-high-schools-rankings ), Texas ranks #9 in schools...    yes, no idea if it's right, but for me as foreigner this looks good.

 

And no, in China you can't elect everyone you want, only 1 party, you can barely protest against them and so on. Plus they're overaging ( http://longevity3.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Chinas-Demographic-Shifts_Hayutin-r-10-2008.pdf ), ageing faster than USA, their workforce already declines and, as wisdomtree mentions, they've a housign bubble, which will sooner or later burst, also the debt is out of control (there is a report by a suisse bank on that, will try to find it and provide the link).

[Donald Sterling]

 

To the extent Southern states(aka Republican states) have taken away all worker rights and greatly empowered corporations to pollute, steal from their workers, and pay no taxes, yes the South is a very friendly place for Capital.  Its a really crappy place for Labor, however. Southern States have terribad education systems, terribad healthcare, terribad infrastructure.  

 

California's economy is still a LOT larger then that of Texas.

Texas and Florida both have about 25% of their residents getting Bachelor Degrees.  Califorina is 30% and New York is 32%.  Average income is much higher when you're not in the south.

 

 

 

 No, the south is like Mexico or China.  Cheap, exploitable labor.  That's all.  

 

Who turned CNN on.

 

But seriously, sure there are parts of Texas that are bad , I mean the state is massive, any developed part of Texas on the other hand has great education.

Also by terribad infrastructure you mean the only state that has its own electrical system meaning it is the only state in the country that has the ability to secede and do okay.  And on the topic of seceding, no state will secede because Texas needs the rest of the country as much as the rest of country needs Texas.  In other words don't expect any breaking off from the country any tine soon   

[SoS]

The infrastructure of Texas consists of a few cities surrounded by vast wastelands.

 

California has it's problems, but if California and Texas had a war - Texas would be razed, fast.

 

Texas could stand as a nation on it's own. It would be mediocre. It would be no great loss to the US. We can easily rerout pipelines. Let 'em go if they like, I say.

[elsuper]

Not a huge fan of Paul Krugman, but he makes the interesting case here that Texas' recent growth is more due to lower land values than a better business climate:

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/the-texas-unmiracle.html?_r=0

[Jerry LeRow]

Not a huge fan of Paul Krugman, but he makes the interesting case here that Texas' recent growth is more due to lower land values than a better business climate:

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/the-texas-unmiracle.html?_r=0

That piece is 3 years old... 

 

http://www.slideshare.net/civicanalytics/miracle-or-myth-the-real-story-of-job-creation-economic-development-in-texas 

 

http://www.dallasnews.com/business/columnists/mitchell-schnurman/20140106-the-texas-trifecta-growth-in-jobs-population-and-pay.ece

Edited September 12, 2014 by Jerry LeRow

[WISD0MTREE]

The infrastructure of Texas consists of a few cities surrounded by vast wastelands.

 

California has it's problems, but if California and Texas had a war - Texas would be razed, fast.

 

Texas could stand as a nation on it's own. It would be mediocre. It would be no great loss to the US. We can easily rerout pipelines. Let 'em go if they like, I say.

California is, too. 

 

Ok, so one on one Texas vs California. Let's remove the Pantex facility for balancing issues. 

Now, California has 12 million more people than Texas. They also have some of the most restrictive gun laws in the USA. Texas on the other hand, has some of the least restrictive gun laws in the USA, and probably the First World. (First World is capitalized when being used as a noun) California would have an army with a shitload of people who have never shot a gun. Texas would have less people who have used a gun before. Also, we would have a militia defending against the defenders. If you say the size advantage wins, then think again. We will have an easier time keeping up with our tanks and planes. http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/08/03/the-most-oil-rich-states/2613497/

 

Again, we have about a third of the USA's proven oil reserves. Sure, you can reroute the pipelines, but they won't be nearly as full. We also have one of the only official nuclear device dismantlement plant in the USA. 

And I'd be happy to leave the USA in Texas. 

>inb4 someone brings up no texas succession 

[Karl Marx]

Yes, they don't have the strong unions that California has, but let me assure you, modern unions often (not always) abuse their power.

 

Ever heard of the AEA (Alabama Education Association)?

[Emmad]

Haha, no..I don't think so.