... but is the only answer for ailing Rust Belt cities high tech and young people? I've heard this same story everywhere I've been before L.A. for the past five years. From personal experience, I know that -- even though I've lived in some places I really liked -- many of the young people would rather be elsewhere, especially recent college grads who grew up in the area.
And isn't that understandable? Don't places like Lansing understand that kids who've grown up there and went to school there may want to see what else is out there? And, really, are these recent college grads that valuable? They're inexperienced, don't have much disposable income, aren't going to buy a home anytime soon, won't be feeding kids into the school system anytime soon. Why this fetish for young people?
Why not go after families? A family is going to buy a home and pay more taxes, a family is going to be composed of at least two people who will contribute to a more experienced work force, a family will (O.K., these days it's may) send their kids to public schools, thereby earning the districts more funding. But I've never heard Roanoke, Cleveland, or Lansing use the word "family."
Someone help me on this.
The Christian Science Monitor drops in on Lansing, but just uses the city as a backdrop.
Remember, the official RF pick for the Democratic nomination for 2008 is Mark Warner. Keep an eye on the guy.
New poll up in this.