Many in Duluth complain that not enough students stay in Duluth. The implication is that there are not enough jobs for them in Duluth and the cause is that Duluth is "business unfriendly".
One would hope that a large percentage of high school students would remain in the town in which they attended school. If many remain, it would provide some stability and continuity to the town. On the other hand, no locality has all the possible opportunities that graduating students might seek. To be in the cutting edge of many ideas, a student has to move elsewhere. How many foreign service officers can Duluth support? How many computer scientists can Duluth support? And on and on.
One cannot expect a large percentage of college students to remain in town. The reason is simple; most of them didn't grow up in Duluth and will move on for personal reasons and for the reasons above.
I saw a good illustration of this in a UMD theatre program. Of the 24 student collaborative artists in the production of "Sugar", only three are from Duluth. Thirteen are from elsewhere in Minnesota, four are from Wisconsin, three are from North Dakota, and one is from Zambia. Of these 24, fourteen are seniors. Can a metropolitan area of 100,000 people support fourteen new actors and designers in any given year? Most of them are going to go elsewhere for graduate school or to become part of a pool of actors and designers in cities across the country.
What many people don't look at is how many students do stay in their home town and quietly build businesses. Some are modest, some are large. Almost every week I read of some little success story of local people in business. These are the people who follow the zoning rules, don't ask for government subsidies, and don't demand tax breaks to even consider their projects.
The mayor of Eden Prairie said some years ago, "We didn't do anything special to attract business; we just made Eden Prairie a nice place to live." Do you think she was on to something?
Showing posts with label opportunities. Show all posts
Showing posts with label opportunities. Show all posts
Friday, October 30, 2009
Monday, June 22, 2009
Forget jobs, create opportunities
I've wanted to write an entry like this for many weeks. Today an article in Yahoo Finance gave me an added impetus. It was on Kodak stopping production of Kodachrome, one of its signature films for over seventy years. See "Sorry, Paul Simon, Kodak's Taking Kodachrome Away".
Quite some time ago I read about somebody complaining about the job situation in Rochester, New York. He said that one used to be able to go to the Kodak factory and get a job right out of high school. I believe he also blamed the lack of jobs on foreign competition.
It was not foreign competition that reduced the jobs for making film; it was technical competition. The rise of digital photography led to less and less use of film cameras and thus fewer and fewer sales of film. Film cameras that cost over two hundred dollars new now sell on eBay for prices that don't justify the shipping costs. I have two working Minolta SRTs with an extra 70-185 zoom lens and an extra 35 mm lens. I hope I shoot the last roll before the sole processor of Kodachrome stops doing so. But it is so much easier to use the little digital camera that I have on my belt that I doubt I'll finish the roll in time.
I fault Obama's stimulus package for focusing on creating jobs for existing skills, thus prolonging the need for those skills. For example, the stimulus package "creates" thousands of construction jobs. We will always need construction workers, but will we need so many? What happens when all these "shovel-ready" projects are completed?
Wouldn't it be better to plan an infra-structure that helps states and communities develop a flexible work force that creates its own opportunities. In other words, we need more entrepreneurs and fewer employees.
It will be a long, slow process to shift our focus. Too many people want the supposed security of benefits rather than the security of adaptability. As long as health insurance is tied to jobs, we will have too many people who want jobs instead of becoming, even on a small scale, an entrepreneur like Steve Jobs.
Quite some time ago I read about somebody complaining about the job situation in Rochester, New York. He said that one used to be able to go to the Kodak factory and get a job right out of high school. I believe he also blamed the lack of jobs on foreign competition.
It was not foreign competition that reduced the jobs for making film; it was technical competition. The rise of digital photography led to less and less use of film cameras and thus fewer and fewer sales of film. Film cameras that cost over two hundred dollars new now sell on eBay for prices that don't justify the shipping costs. I have two working Minolta SRTs with an extra 70-185 zoom lens and an extra 35 mm lens. I hope I shoot the last roll before the sole processor of Kodachrome stops doing so. But it is so much easier to use the little digital camera that I have on my belt that I doubt I'll finish the roll in time.
I fault Obama's stimulus package for focusing on creating jobs for existing skills, thus prolonging the need for those skills. For example, the stimulus package "creates" thousands of construction jobs. We will always need construction workers, but will we need so many? What happens when all these "shovel-ready" projects are completed?
Wouldn't it be better to plan an infra-structure that helps states and communities develop a flexible work force that creates its own opportunities. In other words, we need more entrepreneurs and fewer employees.
It will be a long, slow process to shift our focus. Too many people want the supposed security of benefits rather than the security of adaptability. As long as health insurance is tied to jobs, we will have too many people who want jobs instead of becoming, even on a small scale, an entrepreneur like Steve Jobs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)