Theory. Let’s call it “Lone Urban Success Paradox” or LUSP:
“Cities with an extremely successful industry are more likely to be politically mismanaged.”
Why?
[1/
“Cities with an extremely successful industry are more likely to be politically mismanaged.”
Why?
[1/
1. The best workers in the local workforce will gravitate towards this aspirational industry. Politics are uninteresting in comparison: much less career potential
2. The local government is flush with money by milking the world-class industry. It becomes profligate and wasteful.
3. Locals who work in the world-class industry don’t pay too much attention because their success and happiness is much more determined by career than local mgmt
4. The city attracts people from all over the world to work in that industry, despite poor urban services. No incentive to get better.
5. Because the industry has lots of transplants, who tend to not vote / not be able to vote, their voice will not be heard, and the city will not make efforts for them.
San Francisco is a great example of this. My guess is LA is too, and Detroit has already suffered from the consequences after the automobile industry disappeared. What other cities are like this? Oil cities? What else?
My guess is that it’s a bit like the resource curse for countries, but for cities.
Does this theory make sense?
Does this theory make sense?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
