Bacon's Rebellion

Democracy Thrives in Sunlight

America’s Quiet Demographic Alignment

—

by

James A. Bacon
in ,

In his landmark book, “The Rise of the Creative Class,” Richard Florida divided the United States between thriving cities with large numbers of creative-class workers — artists, educators, entrepreneurs, professionals, scientists and engineers — and the down-in-the-mouth cities with fewer creatives that were doomed to stagnation if not outright decay. The creatives, Florida argued, were drawn to hip places like Boston, San Francisco and university towns noted for their cultural diversity and tolerance. The greatest danger to American prosperity, he argued in a follow-up treatise, “The Flight of the Creative Class,” was the rise of cultural narrow-mindedness and intolerance in America and emergence of competing creative centers abroad.

I think Florida makes some valid points but the real world is more complicated, as demonstrated in a Wall Street Journal op-ed piece written by Michael Barone, a senior writer at U.S. News & World Report. Barone does not address Florida’s creative-class theory explicitly, but his findings tend to undermine it. He categorizes American metropolitan areas into four groups:

  1. The Coastal Megalopolises. These include New York, L.A., San Francisco/San Jose, San Diego, Chicago, Miami, Boston and Washington. (Note: Most of these meet Florida’s criteria as centers of cultural diversity and tolerance.) To all outward appearances, they are prospering. But take a close look, says Barone. While immigrants are moving into these metros in large numbers, native Americans are leaving. New York had a domestic outflow of eight percent in the six years following 2000 and an immigrant inflow of six percent. “Americans are moving out of, not into, coastal California and South Florida, and in very large numbers they’re moving out of our largest metro areas.” Overall, populations are stagnant.
  2. Interior Boomtowns. These metros, none of which touch the Atlantic or Pacific coast, see surging populations. They couple significant immigrant inflow with even greater domestic inflow, plus a natural increase (births exceeding deaths) much higher than the coastal megalopolises. Dallas is now larger than San Francisco, Atlanta larger than Boston. Sacramento, Austin, Raleigh, Nashville and Richmond enjoy growing populations and economies.
  3. The Rust Belt. The Rust Belt cities, whose woes became apparent in the 1980s, are still suffering. Detroit, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Milwaukee, Buffalo and Rochester are losing population. A modest immigrant inflow fails to offset the exodus of native-born Americans. Natural increase is very low. Writes Barone: “Their economies are ailing, more of a drag on, than an engine for, the nation.”
  4. Static Cities. A number of cities are treading water demographically, with domestic outflow/immigrant inflow roughly matching. They’re holding their own economically, but none are surging ahead, and some are in danger of falling back. These include Philadelphia, Baltimore, Seattle, Denver, St. Louis, Cincinnati, Kansas city and, closer to home, Norfolk.

Barone’s interest is to probe the political implications of all this movement. It portends well for Republicans nationally, he argues, as the population shifts from blue states to red states. I’m more interested in the dynamics of wealth creation than partisan politics, but the voting patterns of these metro areas serves as a rough substitute for the (Richard) Floridian value of tolerance of/worship of cultural diversity, a dominant Democratic Party theme.

Coastal Megalopolises: Kerry, 61 %
Interior Boomtowns: Bush 56%
Rust Belt: Kerry 54%
Static Cities: Kerry 52%

What Barone does not tell us is whether the migrating native-born Americans are members of the creative class. I would hypothesize that a disproportionate number of them are. They are certainly better educated than the immigrants who are replacing them. Regardless, a large segment of the population is picking up and leaving. What is driving them?

I would hypothesize that the metro areas experiencing the greatest outflow of native-born Americans have the highest costs: higher taxes, higher housing prices, longer (hence more expensive) commutes, higher general living costs, and so on. People may value hipness, coolness, diversity and tolerance, but they place a greater value on lower taxes, less expensive housing and shorter commutes — more disposable income and a greater material quality of life.

Undoubtedly, we could probe deeper. Young, unmarried people probably place a greater premium on “hipness.” Married couples with children arguably place a greater value on lower taxes, affordable housing and lower general living costs. If one percent of the population picks up and moves on the basis of such criteria each year, it’s barely noticeable year to year. But decade to decade, it represents a massive realignment.

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

23 responses to “America’s Quiet Demographic Alignment”

  1. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Jim Bacon,
    Richmond city actually LOST population from 2000 to 2006 while Henrico and Chesterfield obviously gained. Norfolk lost, but Suffolk gained. Somewhat similar
    Better watch that cheer-leqading, boy!

  2. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    Anonymous, Barone was comparing the populations of metropolitan statistical areas. While the City of Richmond’s population has declined, the population of the MSA of which it is a part has increased. Although I personally would not characterize the Richmond MSA as a “boom town,” it undeniably has a growing population and a growing economy. Demographically, it has more in common with Charlotte, Raleigh and Atlanta than it does with Milwaukee, Buffalo, St. Louis, Boston or Frisco.

  3. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    I’m afraid that you miss the point of much of Florida’s book: It is choices and a sense of authenticity that help drive successful cities, not some concept of “hipness.” Isn’t it interesting that acceptance and tolerance somehow morphs into something trendy in your eyes. Yeah, geez, I sure hope this 21st century stuff goes away and we can get back to the real Virginia.

    But is making bike lanes a priority merely “hip”? Is making sure all your citizens have a voice merely “hip”? I’d say these could be issues that appeal to Bush voters every bit as Kerry voters.

    As far as economic results, the local success of Richmond and Petersburg’s Friday artwalks say much about the power of the creative class to transform cities, where artificial spending projects have miserably failed for generations. Which is cheaper and uses less tax dollars?

    And Florida covers the whole single vs. married issue rather well in his book. You have mischaracterized it here. He has data from extensive studies to show that married people do value a wide range of choices in their community (you call this “hipness”) even if they aren’t touched by them every single day. Meanwhile, you have anecdotal evidence that they don’t and a list of which areas of the country voted for Bush rather than Kerry (?) to prove your point.

    Read the book again.

  4. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    Anonymous 12:07, I’m afraid that you missed the point of my post. I’ll concede that I probably oversimplified Florida’s position for the sake of brevity. Believe it or not, I’m a big Richard Florida fan (or, I should say, the “early” Richard Florida). I reviewed his book in the very first edition of Bacon’s Rebellion five years ago, and I wrote numerous columns exploring his ideas in a Virginia context. I’m critical, however, of his second book, “The Flight of the Creative Class,” which I suggest that *you* read, and you’ll see that, while I may oversimplify his ideas a bit, I’m not far off.

    In the second book, cultural diversity and tolerance assume far greater importance than the first one, in which, as you suggested, he also discusses the importance of “authenticity,” grassroots, street-level cultural life and a number of other factors that had received insufficient attention in the economic development literature.

    But Florida went over the deep end in the second book, in which he attacked cultural conservatives and the post-9/11 mentality as threats to tolerance that would discourage talented immigrants from coming to the United States and even scare off some of the best and brightest native-borns. Meanwhile, he argued, cities in Canada, Australia, Europe and even East Asia were emerging as competitors in the quest for global talent. It was a very pessimistic book, and it was very clear who the bad guys are.

    Barone’s data suggests to me that there are other important factors at work. The best and brightest of America’s native born aren’t fleeing to Toronto, Sydney, Frankfort and Singapore. They’re migrating in huge numbers to the red states.

  5. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    And let’s hope they make those red states blue!

  6. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    So if Richard Florida went off the “deep end” in his second book, did this entire nation go off the “deep end” in last year’s election by rejecting “cultural conservatives and the post-9-11 mentality”?

    What exactly do you define as “the deep end” when only 28% of this country currently supports George Bush and his policies? I’d say a vast majority of Americans are starting to realize who the “bad guys” are, as well.

    And are you really suggesting that George Bush and the current administration have HELPED America’s image worldwide?

    What you label “pessimism” looks like a prescient early indicator that change from the status quo was necessary. Not to make broad comparisons but was Tom Paine “pessimistic” or was he advocating a better way and stating his case strongly?

    And when Democrats are being elected in red state mainstays like Kansas and Montana — as they were in the last election, reflecting a real shift in political thinking— aren’t you defining these red states and their priorities kind of narrowly in order to discredit Florida’s theories? You could just as easily conclude that those places finally realized that those theories and practices hold water.

    Sorry, but we haven’t seen good common sense government come out of the Republican Party for quite some time. Don’t shoot the messenger for being “pessimistic” when you are really mad at him for being right.

  7. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    Anonymous 1:28, By “post-9/11 mentality” I was referring not to the war in Iraq but the measures designed to avoid a repetition of the terrorist attack, especially the increased scrutiny of foreigners seeking admittance to the country and the attendant bureaucratic delay.

    My comments have absolutely nothing to do with current elections and partisan politics, as you want to make them. The issue is whether a wave of conservative “intolerance” is sweeping the country and chasing people away. A lot of people swore they’d move to Canada if Bush won the second election, but I haven’t noticed that many have actually done so. Immigrants, both legal and illegal, educated and uneducated, are still seeking to get into the country. Yeah, I think Florida was unduly pessimistic, and I think he missed major internal migrations within the United States — the very migrations that Barone highlights.

  8. Ray Hyde Avatar
    Ray Hyde

    “I would hypothesize that the metro areas experiencing the greatest outflow of native-born Americans have the highest costs: higher taxes, higher housing prices, longer (hence more expensive) commutes, higher general living costs, and so on. “

    I agree. That is really all you need to say about it. I know a number of people who have left good, and interesting jobs downtown because it was just too hard and too expensive to get there, let alone buy lunch.

    But why do you think this only applies to “native” Americans. Why wouldn;t recent immigrants also succumb to the lure of lower costs?
    Is it because they can get a sense of identity and support while they can acclimatize and learn the language? Or is it the government support services, which in turn raise the effective costs for those that do not need them?

  9. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Where did this concept of “native-born” Americans come from? Does this mean truly “native” born Americans or WASP Episcopalians who assume they are on top of the pecking order? Need anyone else apply?

  10. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    Anonymous 9:09, What an obnoxious question. “Native-born Americans”
    refers to American citizens who were born in the United States, regardless of whether their ancestral origins were English, German, American-Indian, African-American, Irish, Italian, Jewish, Polish, Ukrainian, West Indian, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, Mexican or what-have-you.

    How well do you know Episcopalians? Do the members of what is arguably the most liberal church in America really believe they’re “on the top of the pecking order?”

  11. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    Ray, Why do “native-born” Americans leave the coastal cities and not the immigrants? Give the immigrants, or their children, enough time and they’ll leave too. But immigrants have different considerations. Immigrants the world over tend to settle in communities where there are others like them, communities where the same language and customs are observed. If those communities exist in the coastal cities, that’s where immigrants will come and stay — at least until they, or their children, no longer need the support that their ethnic community provides.

  12. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    Jim:

    “Why do “native-born” Americans leave the coastal cities and not the immigrants?”

    First, you use the word “cities” when you mean “metro” area.

    Second, most of the Borone column and much of a discussion would be meaninless if it recognized that most of the “movement” is due to change in definition of MSAs.

    Over the past 30 years the Census Bureau has, under politial pressure from legislators who do not want to be identified with the core municipal jurisdictions, failed to define MSAs and CMSAs in ways that reflect what was happening.

    That is why we created a new geographic Conceptual Framework anchored by the New Urban Region and the Urban Support Region.

    The short answer to the question of migration is the economic food chain. Those toward the top move because they can, those toward the bottom move because they cannot find shelter and/or want more shelter for the dollar. (The Affordable and Accessible Housing Crisis.)

    Both groups are fooled by the Private Mobility Myth and the false hope that there is a way to build more roads and solve the Access and Mobility Crisis.

    The good news is that the market demonstrates that a more functional and sustainable settlement pattern at the New Urban Region scale is by far the most favored.

    It is a mattern of closing the Wealth Gap and fairly allocating the full cost of locational decisions.

    Have a good day.

    EMR

  13. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Jim Bacon,
    Anonymous has every right to ask the question about “native born.” I find those words pejorative in the sense that there has long been a nasty tradition in the U.S. of xenophobia and discrimination against people who arrived in the U.S. a little later than they did. You might want to review your history of the “Know Nothings” who harrassed Catholic immigrants in the 19th century, the Ku Klux Klan’s campaigns against recent emigres and the anti-foreign, anti-Bolshevik hysteria just after WW I. Many major universities had “quotas” restricting Jews. And, U.S. citizens who happened to be of Japanese descent were herded into concentration camps during WW II in one of the worst instances of human rights violations in this country’s history.
    Your use — and that by others — of the term “native born” is loaded and offensive. This is the truly obnoxious part.

  14. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    Anonymous 8:41. OK, I see your point, sort of. I certainly didn’t intend to convey the meaning that you read into it. I was simply looking for a term that was more eloquent than “non immigrants.” Maybe I should have used the term “U.S. citizens.”

  15. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    i think barone misses the point. some people don’t like this idea — but not all people are equal. the brightest with highest earnings and educational levels are sticking around in the cities that barone says are losing their populations. they are building companies, advancing technology, and altering culture. so while he claims there is a realignment, the power is staying in the places that barone says are losing out

  16. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    Anonymous 12:10, You make a good point. Barone does not analyze the average incomes of the people who are migrating. A demographic and political realignment is not the same as a realignment of wealth creation potential. By contrast, as I recall, Richard Florida is more interested in income.

    Las Vegas, for instance, is growing faster than any other metro area in the country. But the quality of jobs is not high — the number of “creative class” individuals is relatively low — and incomes, as I recall, are nothing to brag about.

  17. Darrell -- Chesapeake Avatar
    Darrell — Chesapeake

    Las Vegas per capita income is higher than Tidewater. Then again, so are most of our competitors.

  18. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    Writing thru revision is one of our themes so let us restate, in part, our 6:31 AM post:

    Most of the Barone column and much of the discussion in this string would be far more meaningful if it was recognized that much of the “movement” is due to failure to intelligently change the definitions of MSAs and CMSAs.

    Bad data sets yields bad assumptions.

    The real movement is the radial centrifugal movement within expanding urban agglomerations, not movement to different types of agglomerations.

    Jim Bacon notes “Dallas is now larger than San Francisco.”

    According to the data released 5 April 2007, Dallas-Ft Worth etc., is at 6.0 Million.

    The Dallas Ft Worth New Urban Region is somewhat larger.

    The five co-terminous and inter-connected MSAs that make up most of the San Franciso Bay New Urban Region is 9.1 Million. Over 50% larger than Dallas-Ft. Worth.

    Over the past 30 years the Census Bureau has, under pressure from legislators who have constituents that do not want to be identified with the core municipal jurisdictions (Winchester, Frederick, Hagerstown, Culpeper and Fredericksburg with the Federal District, Flint, Ann Arbor, Jackson, Monroe with Detroit, Etc.) failed to define MSAs and CMSAs in ways that reflect what has happened.

    That is why we created a new geographic Conceptual Framework anchored by the New Urban Region and the Urban Support Region.

    The short answer to the question of migration is “the economic food chain.”

    Those toward the top move because they can.

    Those toward the bottom move because they cannot find shelter and/or want more shelter for the dollar. (The Affordable and Accessible Housing Crisis.)

    Both groups are deluted and misled by the Private Mobility Myth and the false hope that building more roads (or rails) will solve the Access and Mobility Crisis.

    The good news is that the market demonstrates beyond a shadow of a doubt that more functional and sustainable patterns of land use at the New Urban Region scale are by far the most favored human settlement patterns.

    It is a matter of closing the Wealth Gap and fairly allocating the full cost of location decisions. Oh yes, and curtailing Mass Over-Consumption.

    Hope you had a good day.

    EMR

  19. Darrell -- Chesapeake Avatar
    Darrell — Chesapeake

    The more I read this stuff the more I’m beginning to think that living in a hillbilly shack with oil lamps, coal heat, and an out house doesn’t seem so bad.

    Well, maybe not the outhouse.

    But things have gotten to the point that urban living just isn’t worth it. I bust my butt trying to make something out of my life, to support my family, and all I hear is how the government should take my money to improve my life.

    Eventually one gets to the point that you wonder why you go through all this, when at the end of the day you have less than when you woke up that morning. And I think that view is beginning to be a big reason for all this migration. People are looking for the least hassle. So they move to the southern states, and even places like Costa Rica.

  20. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “What Barone does not tell us is whether the migrating native-born Americans are members of the creative class. I would hypothesize that a disproportionate number of them are. They are certainly better educated than the immigrants who are replacing them. Regardless, a large segment of the population is picking up and leaving. What is driving them?”

    I read this article and was surprised that quality of schools was not mentioned. Jim Bacon is, I think, absolutely right about high taxes, commutes, etc; but I suspect that a lot of the US citizens moving out are middle-class mostly educated families with children, seeking better schools AND more affordable living.

    Someone a while back on BR mentioned that ESL and special ed were big driving forces in the rising costs of Fairfax County’s schools. These are certainly expensive services that help a limited number of students. I’m sure that’s true in these “The Coastal Megalopolises” as well.

    Rich educated families with children can send them to private school so they stay. Many middle-class parents don’t have that option, especially if they will have 2 or 3 children in school at one time. Why pay high taxes that support expensive services that don’t add to the average child’s education, especially if that child is yours and you see the quality of the schools going down even as costs go up? ESL and special ed are mandated. Great science and technology labs and courses like art and music aren’t. So you move farther out.

    I lived in NoVA for over 37 years and I firmly believe that the school issue built Fairfax County in every sense of the word. Young parents, many of them well educated, who were ambitious for their children flocked there.

    Deena Flinchum

  21. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    “The more I read this stuff the more I’m beginning to think that living in a hillbilly (“hillbilly” is defined as?)shack with oil lamps (“where does the “oil” come from, whales?), coal heat (who ships in the coal or is habitation limited to walking distance from an open coal seam?), and an outhouse (actually WPA designed some quite comfortable outhouses and composting is far easier on the environment than septic tanks that morph to sesspools or big pipe systems with inadaquate treatment) doesn’t seem so bad.”

    Making reasonable assumptions about carrying capacity and the realities of living off the grid the US of A would support perhaps 1/3 of the current population. If you had three children which two would you turn in to create a sustainable society?

    Comtemporary technology can support the current population for a decade or so but only if there is movement towards Fundamental Change in settlement patterns and Fundamental Change in governace citizens.

    With these patterns and governance, citizens could find ways to democraticly end the Mobility and Access Crisis, the Accessible and Affordable Shelter Crisis and come up with solutions to Mass Over-Consumption.

    A sustainable future will require a reduced population and far less “growth and development” but not as drastic as the Neo Pol Pot solution that seems “not so bad” to those unwilling to fully consider the real alternatives.

    EMR

  22. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Regarding the comment about “turning red states blue …”, this just drives me nuts.

    This issue may sound trivial, but it’s not exactly. WHY do Republicans accept that we’re the “Red” side? We should be “Blue”, like the conservatives in Australia, England, France, and Canada, among others.

    The Democrats are the socialistic “Red” side. Remember “Better dead than red”, “Pinko”, “Red China”, etc.? Remember, “true blue conservative”? Republicans allowing the media to paint Dems as blue muddles the issue horribly. Around the world, red is the side of statism, blue the color of freedom. We should keep it that way.

    Americans cite blue as their favorite color by a 2 to 1 margin. The American military always uses blue for the good guys and red for the bad guys. Around the world, red is the color of statism; blue is the color of freedom. We should keep it that way. Stop the madness.

  23. bud levin Avatar
    bud levin

    do people choose to live in a smsa or in a locality?

    the statements on washington, balmer, and philly, if applied to the cities themselves, would be wrong. in each case, the city is at present down approximately 30% from peak size and is unlikely to recover any time soon.

    perhaps the loss of intellect and of capital might be more salient than the loss of creativity?

Leave a Reply

Read More