Jon Keller cannot be accused of pulling punches in his blog commentary this morning. He notes that population loss in Massachusetts has slowed, but that we aren’t growing as fast as Idaho, Arizona and Texas. [So much for the weather argument, comments below notwithstanding: it’s 18 degress in Boise right now]. Then he launches right in:
What’s going on? It’s not rocket science. The experts say good weather and affordability are the main draws for people, and those are problems for us. The weather, we can’t do much about, but despite all the big talk on Beacon Hill about making the place affordable for working-class people, it hasn’t happened. That might require real change and sacrifice. NIMBY types who like their mansions huge and their views unimpeded might have to put up with smaller lot sizes and – GASP – windmills to cut energy costs. Public employees might have to join the real world, where workers pay more than 10% of their health insurance. The Mass. Turnpike authority might have to lay off some tolltakers. Oh, the horror!
This is the real challenge for governor-elect Deval Patrick. Will he drop the baby talk and start demanding the changes we need from a completely change-averse political culture to once again compete with other states? Or will it be a few months of futile activity, followed by years of pursuing the next job.
You tell ’em, JK! If you get tired of reporting, I dare say you have a bright future in blogging.
“You tell ’em, JK! If you get tired of reporting, I dare say you have a bright future in blogging.”
<
p>
Bob, did you tell him about the pay cut?
<
p>
Seriously, he’s right, it needed to be said. Cost of living is the issue. In fact, I’ve got a draft post that I never published that said much the same thing. Maybe I’ll clean it up and put it up, finally.
Make the cost of living go down, and housing prices will go up. Why? Because they can.
<
p>
People want to live in Massachusetts. Not all people. Not even a lot of people (considering the 300 million in tUSA). But — enough people, and enough people with money do want to live in MA.
<
p>
So, if you bring down the cost of “living”, it would seem that higher housing prices are not far behind.
<
p>
Damn invisible hand.
It’s not quite “cost of living”. It’s “cost of living where people demand to live”, where “demand” is based partly on service levels, partly on jobs, and partly on other factors such as personal preference and proximity to things like family or social activities.
<
p>
There are plenty of affordable places to live in Massachusetts that are being rejected. I’m sure the city of North Adams is pretty affordable — but there are few jobs in that area. Decaying urban areas such as the city of Springfield are very affordable — but you’d have to accept less of nearly every service and accept a reduced quality of life in trade.
<
p>
We can try and solve this population deflation by going the old route of trying to force more housing into areas that fiercely reject it, trying to jam more jobs into Boston and then wonder why we need projects like the Big Dig to alleviate traffic, and ignoring the big picture.
<
p>
Or we could go a different route and share the wealth around the state. Sell North Adams for economic development. Improve the services in decaying urban areas so that the density and economies of scale that already exist can be reused.