Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My gosh....it is so refreshing to read factual, unbiased big-picture commentary here that doesn't seethe with anger and resentment against all things Johnson County and the State of Kansas in general.
And thank you for that link - good information there.
Nice to see you ignored this little "fact"
Quote:
Originally Posted by GraniteStater
I have analyzed all of the data from the BLS, the link you provided, and the census data. The vast majority of all job growth in KC has occurred in JOCO.
Which was in reply to this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Earth
This site indicates that KC was losing ground in the 70s and 80s, but began to recover in the 90s and 2000s. KC metro had negative growth in 1974 and 1975. I seem to recall there was a big political convention around that time at Kemper Arena. Also that's the same time when Kansas City had FOUR professional sports teams in all four major leagues (Chiefs, Royals, Scouts, and Kings). What happened that KC couldn't capitalize on that era and grow after that? 1976 was a huge year for KC. But after 1976, there were 7 straight years of sub-1% growth. This is METRO AREA growth. Let me repeat, this is metro area growth. You can't claim that the problem was Kansas siphoning off growth when the entire metro was struggling to grow.
Where does joco get many of their "new" jobs?
If most of the economic growth in metro KC was in JoCo and most of metro KC's growth is local moves and local organic growth then how is all this growth in JoCo not adversely effecting KCMO?
I have analyzed all of the data from the BLS, the link you provided, and the census data. The vast majority of all job growth in KC has occurred in JOCO. If you subtract out JOCO alone than the metro itself did not have very good job growth rates. Indy, by comparison, has had a much more dispersed job growth in many areas of its metro at very high rates. KC economic growth is very compartmentalized into particular sectors and segments that are stronger than some of its peers like IT, telecom, etc. I just don't quite understand how you can come to the conclusion that KC metro as a whole had stellar economic growth during the 2000s when Jackson county lost 11% of all employment during that same time period.
1970s? Probably the worst economic conditions that the US experienced since the depression followed by the recent great recession. Very few metros had great growth rates in the 1970s outside of the Sunbelt.
Why on earth would you subtract out JOCO? Why don't we subtract out Kansas City, MO and say Kansas City has no major sports teams?
Did you review the population growth numbers shown for the period? Therein lies the answer.
Why on earth would you subtract out JOCO? Why don't we subtract out Kansas City, MO and say Kansas City has no major sports teams?
Did you review the population growth numbers shown for the period? Therein lies the answer.
To point out that JoCo has grown primarly at the expense of kcmo which is probably a net loss for the metro as a whole when trying to compete with other cities.
For example. How does AMC leaving its long time downtown location for a shiny new (heavily subsided) building on Nall make metro KC a better place economically? It looks great to the people out there that drive down nall, but to the people looking at the region from a distance, they don't see the shiny new building on nall. They see the vacant downtown building with the dead sidewalks out front and the lack of energy and pulse downtown. Multiply that out with dozens of companies over decades of time and maybe you can see the damage inflicted on KC as a whole even while things look fine and dandy in joco.
Johnson County carried KC economically in the 80's and 90's, but at what cost?
My gosh....it is so refreshing to read factual, unbiased big-picture commentary here that doesn't seethe with anger and resentment against all things Johnson County and the State of Kansas in general.
Well until two particular ones show up and look for a way to turn things into a JoCo/JaxCo war, neither of whom live in KC anymore.
This says MO side of metro carries more Gross Metro Product weight. MO side GMP is nearly $55B, KS side of metro is $46B. MO side may have decreased at faster rate than JoCo from 2008-2009 though, can't find the stats. I'm thinking in 2008 when mass jumps occurred in most metros, JoCo lead the job losses for the whole KC metro - can't find source though. It's pretty crazy they went after MO jobs rather than elsewhere in the US to improve the metro as a whole, instead of no net gain.
Greater Kansas City Chamber of Commerce - Economic Data (http://www.kcchamber.com/RESOURCES-SERVICES/Economic-Data/ECONOMIC-SNAPSHOT-of-KANSAS-CITY-MSA.aspx - broken link)
Well until two particular ones show up and look for a way to turn things into a JoCo/JaxCo war, neither of whom live in KC anymore.
This says MO side of metro carries more Gross Metro Product weight. MO side GMP is nearly $55B, KS side of metro is $46B. MO side may have decreased at faster rate than JoCo from 2008-2009 though, can't find the stats. I'm thinking in 2008 when mass jumps occurred in most metros, JoCo lead the job losses for the whole KC metro - can't find source though. It's pretty crazy they went after MO jobs rather than elsewhere in the US to improve the metro as a whole, instead of no net gain.
Greater Kansas City Chamber of Commerce - Economic Data (http://www.kcchamber.com/RESOURCES-SERVICES/Economic-Data/ECONOMIC-SNAPSHOT-of-KANSAS-CITY-MSA.aspx - broken link)
Extrapolate the data out 10-20 years and KS side will likely be dead even with the MO side for GMP given the historic job growth trends of JOCO and the clustering of the population with four year degrees that already live there. JaxCo lost -11.1% of all employment between 2000 and 2009 according to the Census Bureau. They did regain some of those jobs lost in the last two years, but it was a lost decade economically for the county itself and the core of metro KC just like many of its metropolitan competitors. Johnson County QuickFacts from the US Census Bureau
JOCO gained 8.1% new employment between 2000 and 2009. Jackson County QuickFacts from the US Census Bureau
Between 2000-2009 the job percentage gain/loss differential between Jackson County and Johnson County was 19.2%. That is just an enormous difference.
Total employment 2009 Jackson County: 334,290
Total employment 2009 Johnson County: 305,554
Well until two particular ones show up and look for a way to turn things into a JoCo/JaxCo war, neither of whom live in KC anymore.
This says MO side of metro carries more Gross Metro Product weight. MO side GMP is nearly $55B, KS side of metro is $46B. MO side may have decreased at faster rate than JoCo from 2008-2009 though, can't find the stats. I'm thinking in 2008 when mass jumps occurred in most metros, JoCo lead the job losses for the whole KC metro - can't find source though. It's pretty crazy they went after MO jobs rather than elsewhere in the US to improve the metro as a whole, instead of no net gain.
Greater Kansas City Chamber of Commerce - Economic Data (http://www.kcchamber.com/RESOURCES-SERVICES/Economic-Data/ECONOMIC-SNAPSHOT-of-KANSAS-CITY-MSA.aspx - broken link)
I'm puzzled by this post as I would hope we would agree that this thread is not about the utterly tiresome and pointless MO/KS war that rages in the imaginations of certain regulars. And yet your second paragraph ends with a line straight from their battle cry.
I'm not sure whether you're aware that I'm ex-KC area (1976-1990) as well, so there are at least 3 regulars in the thread who don't live in KC anymore. So I'm not completely sure which " two particular ones" your referring to.
For the record, and just in case there's any doubt, I jumped in for the sole purpose of supporting Blue Earth's excellent and much needed challenge to the latest blast of MO vs. KS pollution that this forum has suffered way too long.
This is a good thread....and it is a shame that it, too, had to be tainted with the same old Hatfields and McCoys KCMO/JOCO nonsense over an imaginary boundary line.
JaxCo lost -11.1% of all employment between 2000 and 2009 according to the Census Bureau.
Yeah, got it. You point that out every chance you get. Is an issue with many Midwest core counties. Hennepin and Ramsey counties in MSP had 5% loss each too so you could say the outer burbs carried the weight in MSP. But yeah, JoCo > JaxCo in net jobs gains - no surprise at all, especially given the poaching. But in terms of GMP, JoCo doesn't carry the weight for the metro was my point.
I'm puzzled by this post as I would hope we would agree that this thread is not about the utterly tiresome and pointless MO/KS war that rages in the imaginations of certain regulars. And yet your second paragraph ends with a line straight from their battle cry.
Sorry, that wasn't targeted at you. When trying to have a conversation about the metro as a whole, two others tend to turn it into a KS/MO war - neither live in KC.
I stand by my theory that a city of only 2 million having so much of its corporate community in the suburbs has been the primary thing keeping KC from taking off. The state line is what it is, but had Sprint, Black and Veatch, Garmin and many others located in the city rather than in far flung suburbs or the dozens of firms that left KCMO had stayed in the city, KC would have seen a lot more spin off economic development and interest from outside the metro.
Yes, this is your main issue and I just fundamentally disagree with you. I always have. I don't think it matters where the corporate HQ is in the metro area, so long as it's in the metro area. I don't think it matters if more jobs are in JoCo than downtown KCMO. The KC metro area is easy enough to get around in that people can commute to wherever the jobs are. Leawood is just over the state line from KCMO. People can live in downtown KCMO and commute to Corporate Woods for a job.
I want downtown and the Plaza and other urban parts of the city to be healthy. It's not a zero sum game. You can have both. You can have suburbs and city.
Compare Minneapolis and KC. There are only a few major companies based in the urban core of Minneapolis. Target and U.S. Bank are the biggest ones. Both have headquarters on Nicollet Mall, which is kind of like Country Club Plaza if Country Club Plaza was downtown. Most of the major companies in Minneapolis are in suburban areas.
General Mills moved to suburban Golden Valley in the 1950s. Best Buy is along I-494 in Richfield. 3M is in a suburban area east of St. Paul. I could go down the list. Supervalu, UnitedHealth Group, Medtronic. A lot of the major companies in Minneapolis are in suburban areas just like Johnson County.
So what? This is what cities look like. Not everything is concentrated in the urban core.
I have long believed that you have a particular bias against the state of Kansas, and that is what drives your invective. I don't believe that you are against things being dispersed, on principle. I think that you are against Kansas. That's where you always steer the conversation. I rarely, if ever, steer the conversation toward hating Missouri. I have made almost no comments ever on this forum disparaging Missouri.
I have analyzed all of the data from the BLS, the link you provided, and the census data. The vast majority of all job growth in KC has occurred in JOCO. If you subtract out JOCO alone than the metro itself did not have very good job growth rates. Indy, by comparison, has had a much more dispersed job growth in many areas of its metro at very high rates. KC economic growth is very compartmentalized into particular sectors and segments that are stronger than some of its peers like IT, telecom, etc. I just don't quite understand how you can come to the conclusion that KC metro as a whole had stellar economic growth during the 2000s when Jackson county lost 11% of all employment during that same time period.
Marion County, Indiana had -10.8% employment growth from 2000-2009, the same as Jackson County. Marion County is the core of the Indianapolis metro area in a way that Jackson County isn't for KC. Marion has the entire city of Indianapolis, plus some suburbs.
Very few metros had great growth rates in the 1970s outside of the Sunbelt.
Ah, but you're always saying that KC is the Sunbelt. So it is when you want it to be, but it isn't when you don't want it to be.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
