So I've been reading some blog posts commenting on the report by the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance discussing the migration of people into and out of Wisconsin. It's interesting - from what I've read, some conservatives seem hell bent on turning this into a fiscal argument. They believe that young people are leaving Wisconsin because of the high tax rate.
I'd beg to differ, and would like to offer a different hypothesis. Having gone to college in Wisconsin sometime after the Reagan administration and having watched the exodus of my friends out of this state, it's something I've known personally for years.
Young, college educated people are leaving Wisconsin because living here is boring and there's nothing to do.
Yup, that simple.
With no offense to the residents of Merrill or Prairie du Chien, there are really only two places that the plurality of graduates from Wisconsin's top schools (UW-Madison, Marquette, Lawrence) would consider living: Milwaukee or Madison. Let's look at both.
Those of my friends in Madison often joke how once you hit your mid-20's, suddenly you can't find anyone your age within miles. The nightlife downtown is completely dominated by obnoxious college students. There are few sophisticated alternatives to hang out without encroachment by boozy fraternity brothers and their sorostitute girlfriends. For better or worse, the university defines the downtown culture of Madison. That's great if you're a student there. It's awful if you're not. Cool bars and nightclubs? No. Major cultural institutions? Nope. Professional sports? Nada. Affordable property? Not downtown.
Milwaukee, while showing signs of improvement, is still more or less in a post-industrial coma. The city has largely gone to hell over the last 50 years as everyone with money that could leave pretty much did, hightailing it for the suburbs, or further out to Waukesha and Ozaukee counties. Milwaukee royally screwed up a huge opportunity with Miller Park by failing to locate the park downtown where it could actually spin off additional commercial investment. Instead, it's pleasantly situated in the middle of an industrial wasteland, a glittering jewel amidst surroundings only slightly more charming than Three Mile Island. And of course, there's that whole problem being in the shadow of the hog butcher for the world.
Most all of my friends from college picked out where they wanted to live and then started looking for jobs. Wisconsin wasn't even an option, and it had nothing to do with job availability. It had to do with quality of life. If you really want to live in the Midwest, why live in Milwaukee when you can live in Chicago? Why live in Madison when you can live in the Twin Cities? Wisconsin's biggest problem is the two enormous draws for young, intelligent, creative talent that lie just beyond its reach.
Those people graduating from Wisconsin colleges this year? They don't care that Wisconsin is a great place to hunt or fish. They know Wisconsin Dells is the Niagara Falls of the Midwest, nothing more than a tourist trap. They know Green Bay has a football team. So does San Diego. San Diego also has a temperate climate, great beaches, and is an hour from Tijuana. If you were single and had no commitments, where would you rather live?
I can also assure you that as college graduates are looking for a new place to call home, they aren't crunching numbers from the Federation of Tax Administrators website trying to figure out where their state tax burden will be the lowest. That might be a major consideration for elderly people on fixed incomes, but no 23-year-old grad from UW-Madison gives a flip about tax rates. Nobody's saying "Screw Seattle, I'm heading to Cheyenne, Wyoming, so I can avoid paying state income tax!"
Wisconsin politicians have it backwards. They spend all their time trying to figure out how to draw jobs to the state, when instead they should be focused on drawing workers to the state. Time and again, studies show that the overwhelming majority of companies don't locate where the tax breaks are - unless you're giving away the farm. Companies locate where their labor is. Believe me, there's a fence around our fair state, and the grass is definitely greener on the other side.
Every legislator - hell, every person concerned with economic development, period - should be made to read The Rise of the Creative Class by Richard Florida. You don't have to agree with all of it. Some of it should be challenged. But Florida's biggest point? It's dead on, and it's in block letters on his website:
Bringing new jobs to Wisconsin doesn't make it less boring. Lowering taxes doesn't make it less boring. Resuscitating its urban centers makes it less boring. Investing in theater, music, and the arts makes it less boring - even if it means spending public money. Sustaining higher education in a way that it can really be a cultural resource makes it less boring. Taxpayers will get their investment back and then some with the kinds of workers they'll draw - and the kinds of companies that will follow.
You want to see where all the young people are going? Click on this link and look at the orange and red areas. Note how Wisconsin is woefully lacking.
Family isn't enough to keep people close to home anymore. I can live in San Francisco - a trendy, desirable location for many upwardly mobile graduates - and fly home to Madison in seven hours for $300. I can live in Boston and get to Milwaukee in two-and-a-half hours for $200. For most young people, that's a small, small price to pay to live somewhere cool.
Wisconsin doesn't suffer from brain drain because of high taxes. It suffers from brain drain because Wisconsin is dreadfully dull, and the people who are smart enough to leave do just that. They leave.
I'd beg to differ, and would like to offer a different hypothesis. Having gone to college in Wisconsin sometime after the Reagan administration and having watched the exodus of my friends out of this state, it's something I've known personally for years.
Young, college educated people are leaving Wisconsin because living here is boring and there's nothing to do.
Yup, that simple.
With no offense to the residents of Merrill or Prairie du Chien, there are really only two places that the plurality of graduates from Wisconsin's top schools (UW-Madison, Marquette, Lawrence) would consider living: Milwaukee or Madison. Let's look at both.
Those of my friends in Madison often joke how once you hit your mid-20's, suddenly you can't find anyone your age within miles. The nightlife downtown is completely dominated by obnoxious college students. There are few sophisticated alternatives to hang out without encroachment by boozy fraternity brothers and their sorostitute girlfriends. For better or worse, the university defines the downtown culture of Madison. That's great if you're a student there. It's awful if you're not. Cool bars and nightclubs? No. Major cultural institutions? Nope. Professional sports? Nada. Affordable property? Not downtown.
Milwaukee, while showing signs of improvement, is still more or less in a post-industrial coma. The city has largely gone to hell over the last 50 years as everyone with money that could leave pretty much did, hightailing it for the suburbs, or further out to Waukesha and Ozaukee counties. Milwaukee royally screwed up a huge opportunity with Miller Park by failing to locate the park downtown where it could actually spin off additional commercial investment. Instead, it's pleasantly situated in the middle of an industrial wasteland, a glittering jewel amidst surroundings only slightly more charming than Three Mile Island. And of course, there's that whole problem being in the shadow of the hog butcher for the world.
Most all of my friends from college picked out where they wanted to live and then started looking for jobs. Wisconsin wasn't even an option, and it had nothing to do with job availability. It had to do with quality of life. If you really want to live in the Midwest, why live in Milwaukee when you can live in Chicago? Why live in Madison when you can live in the Twin Cities? Wisconsin's biggest problem is the two enormous draws for young, intelligent, creative talent that lie just beyond its reach.
Those people graduating from Wisconsin colleges this year? They don't care that Wisconsin is a great place to hunt or fish. They know Wisconsin Dells is the Niagara Falls of the Midwest, nothing more than a tourist trap. They know Green Bay has a football team. So does San Diego. San Diego also has a temperate climate, great beaches, and is an hour from Tijuana. If you were single and had no commitments, where would you rather live?
I can also assure you that as college graduates are looking for a new place to call home, they aren't crunching numbers from the Federation of Tax Administrators website trying to figure out where their state tax burden will be the lowest. That might be a major consideration for elderly people on fixed incomes, but no 23-year-old grad from UW-Madison gives a flip about tax rates. Nobody's saying "Screw Seattle, I'm heading to Cheyenne, Wyoming, so I can avoid paying state income tax!"
Wisconsin politicians have it backwards. They spend all their time trying to figure out how to draw jobs to the state, when instead they should be focused on drawing workers to the state. Time and again, studies show that the overwhelming majority of companies don't locate where the tax breaks are - unless you're giving away the farm. Companies locate where their labor is. Believe me, there's a fence around our fair state, and the grass is definitely greener on the other side.
Every legislator - hell, every person concerned with economic development, period - should be made to read The Rise of the Creative Class by Richard Florida. You don't have to agree with all of it. Some of it should be challenged. But Florida's biggest point? It's dead on, and it's in block letters on his website:
When a place gets boring, even the rich people leave.
You want to see where all the young people are going? Click on this link and look at the orange and red areas. Note how Wisconsin is woefully lacking.
Family isn't enough to keep people close to home anymore. I can live in San Francisco - a trendy, desirable location for many upwardly mobile graduates - and fly home to Madison in seven hours for $300. I can live in Boston and get to Milwaukee in two-and-a-half hours for $200. For most young people, that's a small, small price to pay to live somewhere cool.
Wisconsin doesn't suffer from brain drain because of high taxes. It suffers from brain drain because Wisconsin is dreadfully dull, and the people who are smart enough to leave do just that. They leave.
16 comments:
I find your take on why kids leave Wisconsin interesting but to say Milwaukee is boring is well off base. Yes it is cold and that is probably what hurts us most. But summer in Milwaukee, is hard to beat.
How about Charlotte? Austin? Philadelphia? Washington, D.C.? Denver? Atlanta? Dallas? Those cities have the added benefit of not sucking for the other nine months of the year too.
The three months Milwaukee is arguably tolerable is hardly incentive enough for most people to stick out the other nine.
I'll give you Austin, no doubt Austin is a great city and probably Denver... I can't comment on Charlotte, Philadelphia, or Washington as I've never been but come on Atlanta, from what I've seen the nightlife district is in the suburbs. (Buckhead) and it wasn't all that great anyhow.
And Dallas? really Dallas... Dallas is a dump compared to Milwaukee. Deep Elum is a run down trashy district and Lower Greenville eh is ok I suppose. Uptown is alright but doesn't have anything on downtown Milwaukee. Further in your article you mentioned the Twin Cities which has another poor downtown the 1st Ave area is ok but no better than say Water St, it is basically a bunch of college bars.
Does Milwaukee have work to do, of course but as the Brookings Institution recently pointed out Milwaukee has a "downtown on the edge of takeoff."
New districts such as Milwaukee St and the Third Ward have come to life in my short time in Milwaukee. Jefferson St continues to improve, Walkers point, the Fifth Ward, and even Riverwest are starting to come to life.
The problem I'd say lies with the perception of Milwaukee, not of the city I live in today.
PS I 100% agree on the stadium being in the wrong place
Since you hate it here so much, maybe you should pick up and leave. We won't miss you.
Dave,
Okay, maybe I was pushing it with Dallas. I suppose that one's really just a matter of personal preference. There are neighborhoods in Dallas that I wouldn't drive through during the day, let alone at night.
And yes, Milwaukee has managed to make some improvements in the last 10 or 15 years. It's a lot better than it used to be. That said, it still astounds me that some of these improvements didn't come along sooner, consider the king of new urbanism reigned over the city for nearly a generation.
I hope for Wisconsin's sake that Milwaukee does keep improving. Personally, I think that Milwaukee is Wisconsin's only draw. Madison's too suburban and its identity is tied up almost entirely in the university. It has a tiny airport, no space to develop downtown, and isn't much of a draw for CEO types. Unless you're desperate for biotech workers, I don't know why you'd want to locate in Dane County. Madison's just a white collar version of Green Bay.
Thanks for your thoughtful comments, Dave.
P.S. The anonymous commenter above wins the Playground Politics "Nyah, nyah, I know you are but what am I?" award for weakest comeback. We're not talking about why I choose to live here, anon. We're talking about why so many bright young people with college degrees DON'T choose to live here.
Dallas is a hell hole. And Philly? Please. Austin has it's benefits, it's a lot like Madison, without the sweatshirts...and while DC is ok, you have to take into consideration the overcrowding, the cost of living, and...well...Congress.
Taxes clearly are not the sole reason for the brain drain. But taxation does limit the opportunities available to college grads here, both in terms of available employment and ability to afford the quality of life one desires.
Yet, having lived elsewhere and returning, twice, I'll take Milwaukee. If enough of us stay we can work on the taxes thing, too!
the recess supervisor> I definitely agree with you that the brain drain out of Milwaukee has been a huge problem and needs to be resolved. Further I love the idea of making Milwaukee more exciting as a way to recruit workers and new jobs.
It is unfortunate that some developments get slowed or don't happen but between the VA, Manpower, Park East (2 developments break ground this summer), eventually Pabst City (don't worry it's not quite dead), and possibly MLS ($500 project!) the march continues.
I see in the article you mentioned investing in theater, music, and the arts which I think Milwaukee has done fairly extensively. But as far as sustaining higher education as a way to make the city less boring, might you have some specific ideas as how to better utilize the universities as I really think this is a good point.
er $500 million project
Madison (or Verona) is drawing plenty of young people- decent paying jobs for fresh grads. Most of Wisconsin pays poorly, and it's not because of the taxes.
The state funds it's cultual institutions very poorly. The Wiscosnin Historical Society in some ways is ranked right behind the Smithsonian. They've got a donor willing to fund a major museum downtown, but the state won't come up with a few measly salaries to have someone make and guard the exhibits- those young grads have kids, and the creative class actually uses museums.
Instead, the state has put the Society on life support since 1982- Tommy shot down a bunch of stuff when he was giving away money in the early 1990s that would have really made a difference. McCallum nixed a history center for awhile, Doyle's at least listening.
I agree with much in this article. As a musician, I'd add that the music/club scene, at least in Madison when I was approaching graduation, 91-92, suffered a bit because most shows for National Acts were at clubs and the drinking age restricted minors from going to the shows with wristbands, or some sort of arrangement to discourage their ability to drink underage in the establishment. They would be left out altogether.
By the time graduation came along, I felt that maybe I should look for a city that had a more vibrant club scene (to play gigs as well as go to them). A more realistic attitude towards 18-20 year olds and beer might help, both the club scene, and to discourage the obnoxious drunks binging at some party and hitting the streets later.
As my dad, a lifetime WI resident (save for ten years, '85-'95) suggested, have the beer drinking age be 18 and the rest 21. Realistic certainly for the state of WI, where there's a lot of beer drinkers.
But I also realize the impact MADD had and Reagan's response by threatening to withhold Highway funds, etc. etc and there's probably no turning back. However, the vigorous enforcement of drinking laws in WI could be relaxed some, allowing wristbands for "of age" folks in the clubs, to allow college aged kids to see their favorite bands come to town, encouraging that many more to do so, and maybe bridging the gap some between younger kids and slightly older ones.
Not that this is relevant at all to me now. I moved to the San Francisco Bay Area when I was 23, but now that I am married, 35, and plan on buying a house and having kids soon, the Bay Area and it's median home price of $650,000+ is out of my league for that, and am considering a move back to Madison as a good balance of culture, affordable living, and a place to raise kids.
None of that has to do with taxes, so my case certainly supports the argument. On the other hand, maybe my case also illustrates that there is not an end to the story, that people will come back as they get older. I wonder how, with housing the way it is in the more popular communities like the Bay Area, the delayed effects of the "housing boom" across the country will have on places like WI. I'd imagine people are already heading back.
I've lived in Buffalo, NY; Indiana, Tampa, Florida; Minneapolis and Milwaukee and the best of all of them by far is Milwaukee.
Like most people, you seem to have no appreciation of Milwaukee's cultural charms.
I dare you to name another city our size that has a ballet, classical opera, light opera, symphony, pops, a repertory company, literally dozens of smaller theater groups, AND a world-class art museum (though we could do with better art IN it). Now, combine that with professional sports teams like the Bucks, Brewers, Admirals, and the Wave (which has won multiple championships).
Don't even get me started on Summerfest and the other festivals. (Hell, we even have a good Zoo.)
The problem isn't what Milwaukee has to offer as a place to live. It's that most freshly-graduated 20 somethings are completely clueless about anything except their own inflated sense of self-importance.
Which naturally leads them to gravitate to cities that are as egotistical and self important as they are: New York, Seattle, San Francisco, Washington, Boston, etc, etc.
I really don't think that I would trade a Milwaukee summer for anything. And, for the record, the rest of the year is pretty good too! By the way, I am 24 and find nothing wrong with it.
Just a note to say that I appreciate everyone's thoughtful contributions to the discussion, especially those of you standing up for Milwaukee. Milwaukee needs more of you. Little did I know that when I wrote this it would open up such an interesting line of discussion!
Thanks guys.
- The Supervisor
RS, I have to disagree with some of your comments on Madison:
"Madison's ... identity is tied up almost entirely in the university."
Actually, Madison's whole identity is tied up in how many "Best of" lists it can make. You may not be too fond of Milwaukee, but it is a real city. Madison is nothing more than a collection of pretensious bullshit.
"It has ... no space to develop downtown ..."
It does have space to develop downtown. The real problem is that a handful of carpetbagging, Johnny-Come-Lately obstructionists block every attempt at real urban development downtown. These few fools came to Madison with a Disney-like fantasy of what the city should be, and will do almost anything to make it so. As Marsh Shapiro so eloquently put it, "Give us our city back!"
Jim
I think it's more the creative class jobs that would draw more young people, or have new grads stay. The cultural opportunities are there, but what are you going to do during the day?
I would love to move back to Milwaukee, but my work opportunities have been more interesting and more lucretive in the DC metro area and in Atlanta -- where I never imagined I would live.
The other factor at play for a disproportionate number of creative class people is the political climate.
For example, my partner and I may not be able to marry in Georgia or Wisconsin, but here in the "Shorewood" of Atlanta, we fully expect her to be able to become the legal second parent of my biological child. Not so in Wisconsin.
And that *has* to be a consideration for anyone in a similar situation. Unlike taxes, which have never factored into my decisionmaking about where to live. Even in the DC metro area, where one has the option of living in VA, and it actually is common knowledge that VA's taxes are lower than those of DC or MD.
I left Milwaukee for DC when I left college a few years ago because there were no jobs there. Even with the better economy these days the job market there still sucks.
The cultural and entertainment availability in DC is really not that much better than Milwaukee, and when you consider what the difference in living costs is, you are paying a lot of money for a few extra restaurants and museums.
Taxes are not the most important thing to me directly, but they might cause a corporation to stay away, and thus cost me a job. Also, what really matters to those of us without infinite cashflow is total living costs, and what you get for your money, not just taxes.
Even though the living costs are nasty in NY, SF, DC, etc, there are reasons for businesses to have to be there. DC has the government which defense contractors, lobbyists, and public interest firms have to be around. NY has the stock exchange, and most publishing houses which keep financial services firms and authors there. SF/SJ has a huge locus of software firms which could (and many are) in theory leave the area due to costs, but the industry is still growing, causing the area to grow. Milwaukee has no really hot industries and it has nothing which forces a company to have a presence there other than to cater to the Milwaukee consumer market. The industries it does have could produce their products cheaper elsewhere, and thus many are choosing not to expand there.
Oh, and look at any map of the DC area, the VA suburbs have clearly seen more growth than the MD side. There are more jobs on the VA side too. I don't think taxes are the only reason for this, but they probably had some affect.
Post a Comment