Living in the City, Working in the Burbs
July 17th, 2006
In the New York Post, Steven Malanga makes a case against a recent report by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York that argues that the city’s economy is stronger than its sluggish job growth suggests and finds that New Yorkers’ incomes are rising faster than the national average.
Malanga argues that this is because New Yorkers are now going to the suburbs to find work.
“To get a glimpse of what New York has been missing, consider this,” Malanga writes, “the engine of New York’s economy, Wall Street, added nearly as many jobs in New Jersey (143,000) as it did in New York (154,000) from 1970 through 2000. And things are only likely to get worse.”
By Mark Berkey-Gerard on July 17, 2006, 6:50 amIn category: Gotham City, Public Finance | 2 Comments »


July 17th, 2006 at 9:35 am
New York City has its problems, but a failure to match the employment growth of areas that aren’t fully built out isn’t one of them.
From 1950 to 2000 the nation’s employment doubled, while NYC’s ended up about the same. What would it have taken for NYC’s employment to double, with the associated increase in population?
Well the city pulled that trick in the prior half century, thanks to the construction of the entire subways system and many of the roads and the development of more than half its land.
I suppose we could double-deck all the subways and roads, but were are we going to get more land? Tear the city down and built it twice as high? Is that going to be cost competitive with low-rise space built on greenfield sites in Texas? No, it will — and does — cost vasly more, thus limiting growth here. We are destined to get either richer or poorer, but not much bigger.
For our real problem, look at low labor force participation — the share of our adults dependent on government largess.
July 17th, 2006 at 1:08 pm
Malanga and the Feds missed the crux of the argument — the self employed, not the growing number of out-commuters.
Are more people self-employed rather than employees because they are pursuing a more fulfilling and hip way of life?
Or are they employees in all but name, but without health insurance and other benefits, because the tax law requires all employees be covered if employer-provided health insurance is to not count as taxable income?
Even within the out commuters, the issue isn’t Wall Street, the issue is the suburbs zoning out their own working class.