ANOTHER REASON YOU MAY NOT WANT TO WRECK THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

JOEL KOTKIN, WALL STREET JOURNAL - For much of the past decade, business
recruiters, cities and urban developers have focused on the "young and
restless," the "creative class," and the so-called "yuspie"--the young
urban single professional. Cities, they've said, should capture this
so-called "dream demographic" if they wish to inhabit the top tiers of
the economic food chain and enjoy the fastest and most sustained growth.

This focus--epitomized by Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm's risible
"Cool Cities" initiative--is less successful than advertised.
Cincinnati, Baltimore, Cleveland, Newark, Detroit and Memphis have
danced to the tune of the hip and the cool, yet largely remain
wallflowers in terms of economic and demographic growth. Instead, an
analysis of migration data by my colleagues at the Praxis Strategy Group
shows that the strongest job growth has consistently taken place in
those regions--such as Houston, Dallas, Charlotte and
Raleigh-Durham--with the largest net in-migration of young, educated
families ranging from their mid-20s to mid-40s.

Urban centers that have been traditional favorites for young singles,
such as Chicago, Boston, New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco, have
experienced below-average job and population growth since 2000. San
Francisco and Chicago lost population during that period; even
immigrant-rich New York City and Los Angeles County have shown barely
negligible population growth in the last two years, largely due to a
major out-migration of middle class families.

Married people with children tend to be both successful and motivated,
precisely the people who make economies go. They are twice as likely to
be in the top 20% of income earners, according to the Census, and their
incomes have been rising considerably faster than the national average.

There is a basic truth about the geography of young, educated people.
They may first migrate to cities like New York, Los Angeles, Boston or
San Francisco. But they tend to flee when they enter their child-rearing
years. Family-friendly metropolitan regions have seen the biggest net
gains of professionals, largely because they not only attract workers,
but they also retain them through their 30s and 40s. . .

Contrary to popular belief, moreover, the family is far from the brink
of extinction. Most Americans, notes the Pew Research Center, still
regard marriage as the ideal state. . .

The evidence thus suggests that the obsession with luring singles to
cities is misplaced. Instead, suggests Paul Levy, president of
Philadelphia's Center City district association, the emphasis should be
on retaining young people as they grow up, marry, start families and
continue to raise them.

Mr. Levy notes that the remarkable transformation of once sedate Center
City--the area's population has grown to over 90,000--has indeed been
due primarily to young singles, childless couples and a few "empty
nesters." The proliferation of clubs, restaurants and bars has created
an almost Manhattan ambiance. But he suggests that the district is
reaching the limits of its success. . .

Boosters such as Mr. Levy look increasing towards reviving the
traditional family neighborhoods which surround Center City. His
organization has worked closely with local public and private schools,
church and civic organizations to build up the support structures that
might convince today's youthful inner city urbanites to remain as they
start families. "Our agenda," Mr. Levy says, "has to change. We have to
look at the parks, the playgrounds and the schools."

http://opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010911

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||