The Atlantic: How the Crash Will Reshape America

NYC will absolutely survive... and it will be more interesting and diverse and a lot of good stuff.

But, we can't escape the fact that its going to have substantially less $$$. It might still be more than anywhere else, but going from the dominant city of the last decade to even just ahead by a bit is going to require some substantial change for most of us.... not to mention the changes the entire country will go through.

btw, the atlantic piece was covered in another thread..

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/talk/discussion/8569-renters-vs-buyers-renting-better-for-america

Ah, so it was. My, as the kids used to say in the 1990s, bad!

btw, the Atlantic has four covers for different regions "New York wins", "Chicago Wins" (too bad rufus has reading comprehension issues), "San Francisco Wins" and "Toronto Wins"...Think the real estate business is tough these days? Or Wall Street? Try selling magazines?

Those must be their biggest urban markets, although I'm surprised Boston isn't in the mix (despite being a tiny city).

For those of you who haven't read the article, it's interesting not just in a buy/rent way, but in a wealth/decline US and global geography way. Basically, it makes the argument that growth these days depends on brainpower, which clusters and catalyzes and actually enjoys accelerated wealth creation based on all those smarts being in the same area. "Velocity" and "density" are discussed. Among other things.

alanhart, I seem to recall America being touted as a "knowledge based economy", moving away from manufacturing, back in the 90's. The Information Super Highway, banking, etc... Does the Atlantic think we going to base our economy on CGI movies and IPhone apps?

Boston wasn't included because, as every Yankee fan knows from the time they are old enough to breathe, "Boston Sucks"

I don't think the author dismisses the more fundamental problem of a nation that has very little manufacturing (or even agriculture) left. He acknowledges the growth of non-Western economies and its impact on us. He discusses the enormously long lag (in centuries past) between global manufacturing/trading power and the locus of global finance; in doing so he relies too much IMO on "historical performance" and dismisses modern communications [but he refers to an earlier article by himself on that ... I didn't read it].

I worry about how much value the entire world places on things like patents.

But a main thrust of the article is that to extent that the US will [have to] rely on that "knowledge based economy", the areas that will do best are the established megalopoli and the core cities within each: New York, SF, LA, etc.