| 
		U.S. economists wrestle with how to help 'left behind' areas
		 Send a link to a friend 
		
		 [October 07, 2019]  By 
		Howard Schneider 
 BOSTON (Reuters) - Boston Federal Reserve 
		officials have a pretty good idea what helped the ailing industrial town 
		of Lawrence, Massachusetts, start to make a turnaround, including a 
		state takeover of the public school system and a focused effort to lift 
		job options for working parents.
 
 Would the same strategies apply in Smith County, Kansas, where the 
		population has been declining since 1900 and now includes twice the 
		proportion of senior citizens as the United States as a whole?
 
 That's the dilemma economists have begun wrestling with as they debate 
		whether "place based" economic strategies, often seen as a path to pork 
		barrel spending under the good intent of creating local jobs, may now be 
		the only way to reverse the separation of the country into areas that 
		are doing well and those that are treading water or slipping behind.
 
 The short answer: It won't be easy, and after decades of decline in some 
		places it may require a fairly tough set of decisions about which ones 
		have a credible chance to rebound.
 
		
		 
		
 "You can't do this for every community," Boston Fed president Eric 
		Rosengren said after a two-day conference the bank sponsored here on the 
		geographic divisions that have split the United States into largely 
		coastal boomtowns that are increasing their share of national jobs and 
		wealth, and evidence of stagnation in many other places.
 
 "Not every community has social cohesion. Not every community has a good 
		leader," Rosengren said as he outlined the qualities the Boston Fed used 
		in a competition to select towns for economic development grants, one of 
		which helped Lawrence move 200 working parents into new or better jobs, 
		and set up a system for more to follow.
 
 "We were looking for communities that had the highest probability of 
		success," he said.
 
 It is not a new idea that geography shapes a country's economy. Natural 
		features such as rivers and the Great Lakes helped the U.S. industrial 
		heartland thrive in its heyday. But until recently "place" was not seen 
		as a constraint on individual success: if jobs and opportunity were 
		inadequate in one town, it was assumed people would move, providing a 
		built-in source of adjustment across the American economy.
 
 A growing body of research, however, shows that is no longer the case. 
		People are moving less, incomes across regions are no longer growing 
		closer, and the opportunities in the "superstar" places may be growing 
		out of reach for the less educated. Places that lag in job growth are 
		less likely to catch up; kids born in poor neighborhoods are more likely 
		to be poor as adults.
 
 While chronic joblessness is a well-recognized problem in ailing cities 
		such as Baltimore and Cleveland, and in some of the country's remote 
		rural corners, the election of Donald Trump in 2016 focused attention on 
		the fact that it existed across a broad swath of small town America -- 
		and was hardening attitudes among parts of the white working class. The 
		unemployment rate among job seekers may be low, but larger numbers of 
		working age men in particular have simply stopped looking for work at 
		all.
 
 "There is a plausible view that in the long run all local low skilled 
		employment will be in services," said Edward Glaeser, a Harvard 
		University economics professor. New technologies such as ridesharing 
		platforms "will be able to generate jobs for less skilled people in 
		Boston. What are they going to do in eastern Tennessee? That seems the 
		central question...for American employment policy in the 21st century."
 
		
            [to top of second column] | 
            
			 
            
			The Federal Reserve Bank of Boston's President and CEO Eric S. 
			Rosengren speaks in New York, April 17, 2013. REUTERS/Keith 
			Bedford/File Photo 
            
			 
'THERE IS A PROBLEM'
 Over two days of discussion there was no clear answer.
 
 Trump's election drew attention to the problems of working age men displaced 
from blue collar jobs. But should they be encouraged to move, retrain as 
computer coders, or make what may require a cultural leap and join the boom in 
jobs caring for the elderly?
 
What about a separate suite of longer standing issues, such as the state of 
urban school systems still lagging under the legacy of segregation? Beyond 
Medicaid, food stamps and other programs that funnel tax dollars to individuals, 
should national policy be used more aggressively to subsidize education, 
services or jobs in low income areas?
 "There is strong consensus there is a problem...We don't know quite what to do 
about it," said David Autor, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology labor 
economist whose research on the "China shock" helped frame debate about the 
disproportionate impact China's rise had on U.S. manufacturing hubs.
 
 Some large national efforts have been proposed or are already underway.
 
 Trump's trade battles with China are, ostensibly, about reversing some of the 
decline, but with no evidence yet that the potential benefits will outweigh the 
risks. The 2017 tax bill included capital gains tax exemptions for investments 
in ailing census tracts. That program is still in its early stages.
 
 One proposal for the federal government to fund research and development hubs in 
dozens of mid-size cities might help places with an existing core of college 
graduates. It may not help those with a less educated workforce, typically the 
worst off.
 
 "We are not dealing with one problem" but several connected ones, said Betsey 
Stevenson, a University of Michigan economics professor and a former member of 
President Barack Obama's Council of Economic Advisers.
 
 
For Rosengren, that may mean acknowledging the geographic divide as a 
generational problem, half a century in the making and with roots in the shift 
toward services and knowledge-based industries that has accelerated since the 
1980s.
 "You don't just want to throw money evenly across the country and see what 
sticks," Rosengren said, arguing that any effort should be "mostly ground up and 
more of a competition" so local communities can be in charge of their own best 
ideas.
 
 "We have had 50 years of many of these communities not doing well. It is not 
like you turn it on a dime."
 
 (Reporting by Howard Schneider; Editing by Daniel Wallis)
 
				 
			[© 2019 Thomson Reuters. All rights 
				reserved.] Copyright 2019 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, 
			broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.  
			Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |