City Journal provides a run-down of the wacky theories of Richard Florida, an economist who argues in a recently published book that in order to grow economically, cities must attract “creative workers “the kind who start and staff innovative, fast-growing companies”
To lure this workforce, Florida argues, cities must dispense with stuffy old theories of economic development—like the notion that low taxes are what draw in companies and workers—and instead must spend heavily on cultural amenities and pursue progressive social legislation.
The article provides data showing that the “most creative” cities, according to Florida’s criteria, grow no faster, and in many cases slower than cities adopting Florida’s model of development.
The Money list illustrates an underlying problem with Florida’s whole approach. Not only does he believe that marginal attractions like an idiosyncratic arts scene can build economic power, but he thinks that government officials and policymakers like himself can figure out how to produce those things artificially. He doesn’t seem to recognize that the cultural attributes of the cities he most admires are not a product of government planning but have been a spontaneous development, financed by private-sector wealth. While Florida’s writings denigrate efforts of cities to power their economies by building sports stadiums and convention centers, the professor thinks that he, by contrast, has found the philosopher’s stone that will turn public spending on amenities into economic-development gold.
[article]
