CSY Repost #18: When "Restoring the Rust Belt" Becomes "Restoring the Urban Middle Class"
Restoring one necessarily restores the other.
A view of downtown Cincinnati, taken over the James Roebling Bridge, looking north across the Ohio River from Covington, KY. Source: gettyimages.com
(Note: It’s been a crazy couple weeks for me. Work at my main gig really ramped up; it always does this time of year as we prep for our new fiscal year. Illness spread through my department, hitting me as well. Simply no time to focus on creating new content.
But I’m getting back in the groove now, with a repost originally published in 2022. Ironically, it was a 2022 followup to the last CSY Repost (#17, published 2 weeks ago). So in many respects it makes sense to post here again. Please take a look. -Pete)
Originally published: April 15, 2022
Here’s a followup to the post from earlier this week about my experience at a “Restoring the Urban Middle Class” conference in Houston a couple weeks ago.
First, a quick recap of the earlier piece. The “Restoring the Urban Middle Class” conference left a lot to be desired, in my opinion. The conference had a few California natives there, mostly railing against the problems of the Golden State’s high-cost economy and lifestyle. A smaller number of California expats who recently moved to Texas chimed in, touting the Texas urban growth model. A handful of East Coast people were also there. They generally agreed with the Californians on the negatives of coastal urbanism. And then there was me, from the nation’s heartland, feeling mostly irrelevant in the discussions.
I think it’s instructive to examine the routes taken by certain metros to raise their economic profiles, and determine if those routes are actually feasible to others. Those who said that Rust Belt metros should emulate what other successful Rust Belt metros are already doing, or worse yet, what other coastal and Sun Belt metros are already doing, aren’t fully understanding the differences.
People tout Indianapolis, Columbus, Des Moines and Minneapolis as models for other Rust Belt cities to emulate. They’re not. In my view they’re employing the same model that metros like Nashville, Austin, Raleigh, even Atlanta, have used as well – capitalize on being either the commercial center, state capital and home of a major university within a given state, or some combination of the three. In fact, I’d argue that Indianapolis, Columbus and Minneapolis benefitted from this model before their Southern brethren; the Southern cities have managed to make it pay off far more for them because they’ve been far stronger migration destinations.
What all of these cities have in common, however, is that they do not carry the same manufacturing legacy that cities like those on the Great Lakes did. A look at Bureau of Labor Statistics data demonstrates this. In 1979 the U.S. hit its peak manufacturing employment, when 19.6 million workers, or 22 percent of the non-farming workforce, were employed in the manufacturing sector. By 2019 just 12.8 million workers, or nine percent, were employed in the manufacturing sector. At their economic peak in the 1960s and 1970s, it was not uncommon for Great Lakes cities like Buffalo, Cleveland, Detroit, Chicago and Milwaukee to have upwards of a third of their workforce employed in manufacturing jobs. Historically, cities like Indianapolis, Columbus and Minneapolis were perhaps more dependent on manufacturing jobs than comparable cities nationwide, but less so than the Great Lakes cities. When manufacturing jobs were lost, they were able to rely on assets – state capital locations, large public universities – that eased the transition into the next economic era.
But back to the sense of irrelevance. If you’ve read this site long enough you know I’m not down on the Rust Belt’s ability to make a comeback. But I live here. Whether or not the Rust Belt makes a comeback depends more on people currently living outside of the region than inside. And I left Houston disheartened by what I viewed as the rest of the nation’s failure to see that it indeed could happen. I think short-term thinking is at fault; the cheap land/warm weather/low taxes formula can only go so far and last so long. We’re now approaching a time when demand in Austin, for example, is pushing housing costs to the same levels seen on the coasts. And while I don’t view climate change as the ultimate catalyst that could spur revitalization around the Great Lakes, it’s not unreasonable to think that coastal flooding, damaging hurricanes and storms, and lengthy droughts could cause a not-zero number of people to consider the region.
I always look at the South’s ability to come back in the latter half of the 20th century as inspiration for the Rust Belt. Between 1900 and 1950, cities like Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland and St. Louis were the nation’s fast-growing economic powerhouses. At that same time Southern metros were wondering what they needed to do to compete. They found their groove after World War II.
We know how Southern metros did it. In an era when private sector unions secured the middle class lifestyle for manufacturing workers, Southern metros promoted themselves as non-union and lower-cost alternatives for corporations. Southern metros, particularly in Florida, learned to market sunshine and an eternal vacation lifestyle to attract new residents. It worked for Southern metros, and became the foundation for the growth that followed.
It’s fair to ask, then, what triggers might push growth toward today’s Rust Belt, at the expense of the Sun Belt. What I do know is this: the political and business leadership of Detroit in 1952 could not imagine what Houston would become over the next 50 years, and Detroit paid the price. Atlanta in 2022 cannot imagine what Cleveland could become in the next 50 years, and could pay the price as well.
Even if there is no such trigger, I believe there is a blueprint for Rust Belt cities to follow for future success. Doing one or more of the following could change the trajectory of the Rust Belt:
1. Lean in on immigration. The Rust Belt was once a leader in attracting immigrants. The rise of Hispanic and Asian immigration in the 60s/70s did not impact the Rust Belt like other regions, and the region suffered as a result.
2. Promote affordable urbanism. Rust Belt cities have solid urbanism at a fraction of the cost of coastal cities. This can mean existing urban fabric, or the creation of new urban fabric within areas previously vacated and abandoned.
3. Authenticity. Rust Belt cities aren’t creating a new urban vibe, they already have one. They have a history, building stock and aura that gives them a sense of authenticity that more recently developed places lack. That will always appeal to a segment of the population.
4. Boutique manufacturing. Mass production manufacturing will always flow toward low labor costs. However the Rust Belt can move beyond this. There is quite a bit of manufacturing skill in the region that could benefit from moving away from mass production and toward excellent craftsmanship.
5. Water security. Metros in the Gulf Coast will increasingly deal with the impacts of sea rise and damaging storms, imperiling fresh water supplies. Drought and heat will diminish fresh water in the Southwest. While the Midwest will have its share of climate impacts, the availability of water will not be one of them. If the Midwest invests in blue infrastructure, it could be a winning proposition.
6. The local angle. There are local twists that each metro can promote to its advantage. Chicago has Ivy League-quality universities and the region’s scarcely scratched the surface of their potential regional impact. Chicago has also for decades been a premier destination for Big Ten university grads. Detroit or Cleveland have the ability to promote popular music in a way similar to New Orleans now, focusing on R&B and rock n’ roll.
I realize this might be getting old to some readers, but I still want to offer a cautionary warning to coastal and Sun Belt residents. Nothing lasts forever.