In the NYT, Parag Khanna writes,
The Northeastern megalopolis, stretching from Boston to Washington, contains more than 50 million people and represents 20 percent of America’s gross domestic product. Greater Los Angeles accounts for more than 10 percent of G.D.P. These city-states matter far more than most American states — and connectivity to these urban clusters determines Americans’ long-term economic viability far more than which state they reside in.
Pointer from Tyler Cowen.
Khanna’s bottom line:
the next president has to move beyond platitudes and implement a serious policy of leveraging new infrastructure investment from home and abroad and backing the shift toward a new urban political economy built around transportation engineering, alternative energy, digital technology and other advanced sectors.
In other words, we’ve had too much organic growth in cities. From now on, it needs to be planned. Needless to say, I do not (note correction) share in this assessment.
So, one fifth of country has about one fifth of the measured GDP? I’m sympathetic to the synergy theories, but…
You “DO share in this assessment”. Typo, sarcasm, or is that what you really think?
He shared it.
What could go wrong?
Indeed, if that is what he really thinks, he does need to say it.
Hell in California Solar Panels are freckin’ up everywhere and young people are learning to take the train system. In reality it does not seem like the President does not need to focus on this metropolis areas because these changes are happening naturally.
That said most heavily populated cities in East Asia have lots of central planning.
Solar panels are cheap because…China.
I mean…not to harsh your mellow…but just sayin’.
Whatever the government is doing just means they are misallocated away from the sun towards people who want to greenwash.
The “government” is not doing anything. Human are using the mechanisms of government ; people are contesting for the uses of the mechanisms of government.; dogs chasing the truck and ankle-biting the driver if they catch it.
The reason why California is getting so many solar panels is because the power company doubles the price of electricity in the middle of a summer day when everybody wants power. Power company claims that high day usage forces them to need to invest a lot more, which is true but exaggerated. Anyway, give it 10 years and California solar energy will be the updated version Bastiat.
Also a lot people don’t use China solar panels beccause the desert is too hot.
Solar costs are actually dropping. Has nothing to do with China.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/energy/2015/10/151002-solar-energy-sees-eye-popping-price-drops/
Okay. But point of info, nothing has nothing to do with China.
I think this goes back to your point of government policies stimulating demand while reducing supply.
Such networks would just as easily help poor and rural areas, like Appalachia. Upgraded transportation corridors between New York, Washington and Atlanta could finally lift Appalachia’s isolated and stagnant towns stretching from New York to Alabama by facilitating investment in farms and vineyards, food processing and eco-tourism.
Just to unpack that paragraph: the economy of Appalachia could receive a real shot in the arm with some new investments in such 18th century industries as farming and food-processing, and those investments can or would be stimulated by the construction of a high speed rail network.
Well, I’m sold.
Missed this the first go-round:
Correction: April 15, 2016
An earlier version of this article said that Congress provided support for the construction of the Erie Canal. Rather, the canal was funded by New York State.
And annually, there could be a contest between young people, the outcome of which determines the allocation of the food supplies to various regions.
How many of these cities are run by Republicans? The Times is recommending giving more power to the party that hasn’t done such a good job in managing organic growth. You would think anything organic would be praised by Democrat voters.
Arnold says:
“In other words, we’ve had too much organic growth in cities. From now on, it needs to be planned. Needless to say, I do share in this assessment.”
When the “Book of Arnold ” is writ, will it cover this reasoning?
There seems to be evidence that those cities which are now growing “organically” are offering the best balance of quality of life.
The urban areas discussed (N E U.S., e.g.) all suffer from constraints related to “planning,” which generally is aimed at maintaining economic advantages. GDP is not the measure of life or living. Those areas suffer from decay and civic indifference brought on by controls, licensing, regulations, zoning, etc., etc. All around them are areas of attempted escape. NJ, halfway down, is a microcosm of multi-planning.
What may be in order, but hard to come by, are appropriate or effective revisions in what have been the bases for, and means used in, “planning” (urban renewals, redevelopments, etc.) over the past 60-70 years.
High-speed rail? Really? It’s 2016, not 1916. Passenger rail has never been independently viable. High-speed rail is a low usage, all those commuters ebb and flow on a schedule that take less than 1/6th or 1/5th of the available day. It is also vulnerable to disruption with limited capability to work around.
Railroads have an advantage in collective transfer of heavy goods at relatively slow timeframes over long distances. That is, they accumulate over time, then move heavy goods at slow speeds to regional distribution centers. If it is an unscheduled moderate to low weight shipment that positively, absolutely needs to be there by the end of the week, you use a truck carrier, by tomorrow, you may need to use a plane.
Funny thing about “regional” infrastructure. Those who build pipelines and other long distance private infrastructure sure seem to be able to negotiate with all the various territorial authorities to get things done.
Except it seems when the federal border crossing gives the federal government control over a key border crossing approval. Hmmm? Then non-regional players are able to sabotage the regional project, like the Californians, on the other side of the continental divide were able to shutdown the Keystone XL pipeline in the Midwest.
So let’s give DC more control over regional infrastructure development. Yeah, that’s the ticket.
Khanna’s article is all buzzwords and non sequiturs. Or, as Milton Friedman loved to ask: “How do you know?” Find me one clear and well argued statement here. I see nothing.
What *do* we know? A lot of growth (most growth?) is occurring *not* in the places Khanna emphasizes. We also know what green energy and new infrastructure are especially prone to boondoggles. And finally, the cost of living keeps rising on those areas he is so fond of, so the trend is moving away, not toward.
I’m taking a charitable view of this guy by ignoring him. And his regions, sub-regions, super-regions, mega-regions, urban archipelagos — the whole farrago. And especially his dozens of laconic provinces.
With organic regional development you run the risk that the wrong type of places, such as Red cities or states, may prosper. Or perhaps it would be the wrong industries, such as fossil fuels. Texas is a prime example of such unfortunate success.
Much safer to have the Feds run things.
I’ve been hearing this “regions not states” argument for a long time. It basically means “more power to the NGOs/EU/OAS. less power to the nation states” which in practice means “less democracy, more governance by elites.”