joel kotkin presentation
TRANSCRIPT
HOW TEXAS GOT ON TOP-‐-‐HOW IT
CAN STAY THERE
Presenta8on by Joel Kotkin to Texas EDC, Aus8n, Texas
September 25th 2012
Reasons for Texas Ascendency
• Role of Resources • Business Climate and Job Growth
• Favorable Demographics
80
85
90
95
100
105
110Jan-‐07
Apr-‐07
Jul-‐0
7
Oct-‐07
Jan-‐08
Apr-‐08
Jul-‐0
8
Oct-‐08
Jan-‐09
Apr-‐09
Jul-‐0
9
Oct-‐09
Jan-‐10
Apr-‐10
Jul-‐1
0
Oct-‐10
Jan-‐11
Apr-‐11
Jul-‐1
1
Oct-‐11
Jan-‐12
Apr-‐12
Jul-‐1
2
Index: Jan. 2007 = 100 Non-‐Farm Jobs
United States California Texas New York Florida
Employment Growth December 2001-‐December 2011
Color threshold is Zero
Grand Delusions won’t save California
*Green Jobs *High-‐Speed Rail
*Social Media “boom”
In Texas, they realize that in a post-‐industrial age, stuff s8ll ma\ers…
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
160,000
180,000
UnitedStates
Canada Australia Germany UnitedKingdom
China India SouthKorea
Arable Land (thousand hectares)
Room to Grow Total Arable Land
America’s Opportunity
Food and Agriculture Organiza8on of the United Na8ons
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
1.7
4.7
5.2
Real GDP Industrial Production: Manufacturing 2011 2011 Feb. 2011 to Feb. 2012
Growth Rates: Real GDP vs. Manuafacturing
593 547
182 161
116 104
87 83 80 77 77
70 68 63 60 59 57
50 42 41 39 39 38 36 34 33 29 24 23 23 21
United States Russia
European Union Canada
Iran Norway Algeria China
Netherlands Saudi Arabia
Qatar Indonesia
Uzbekistan Egypt
Mexico United Kingdom
Malaysia United Arab Emirates
Australia Argen8na
Trinidad and Tobago India
Pakistan Kazakhstan
Turkmenistan Nigeria
Thailand Oman
Venezuela Azerbaijan
Ukraine
Natural Gas Produc>on, Billions of Cu M
CIA World Factbook, most recent year: 2008 & 2009
0% 50% 100% 150% 200% 250% 300% 350% 400% 450%
North Dakota Georgia
Pennsylvania Arkansas
South Carolina Wisconsin Minnesota
South Dakota Hawaii Idaho
Nevada Colorado
Iowa Delaware
Utah New Hampshire
Washington Florida Arizona Virginia
Montana New Jersey
Oregon Maine
Oil and Gas Extrac>on Employment Growth 2001-‐2011
Source: EMSI Complete Employment, 2011.4
14.7%
2.1%
5.3%
Texas California US Aggregate
Growth in Middle Skill Jobs, 2002-‐2010
Source: EMSI Complete Employment, 3rd Quarter 2010 Analysis by Praxis Strategy Group
14.0%
1.7%
5.4%
Texas California US Aggregate
Growth in STEM Jobs, 2002-‐2010
Source: EMSI Complete Employment, 3rd Quarter 2010 Analysis by Praxis Strategy Group
Source: EMSI Complete Employment, 2011.4
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0%
District of Columbia Michigan Vermont
North Dakota Washington
Utah South Carolina
Alaska Texas
Nebraska Maryland
New Hampshire Wyoming Arkansas
Ohio Massachuse\s West Virginia
Georgia Oregon Virginia
South Dakota Kentucky California
Na8on
STEM Job Growth, 2009-‐2011
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
NYC Chicago
PiOsburgh Cleveland
LA Detroit SF Bay
Philadelphia St. Louis
DFW Boston
Houston Atlanta
CharloOe
1960 Fortune 500 Headquarters
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
NYC Chicago
LA SF Bay
PiOsburgh Detroit
Houston Cleveland
Philadelphia Boston
St. Louis DFW
Atlanta CharloOe
1980 Fortune 500 Headquarters
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
NYC Chicago SF Bay
Houston LA
DFW Detroit Atlanta
Philadelphia Boston
St. Louis PiOsburgh CharloOe Cleveland
2006 Fortune 500 Headquarters
Housing Affordability
Demographia Housing Affordability Survey
Affordability: Below 3.0
7.2 6.1
5.9 5.0 5.0
4.4 3.5
3.3 2.9 2.9
2.7 2.5 2.5 2.4
2.2 2.0 2.0
San Francisco
Los Angeles
SeaOle
Raleigh
Houston
Dallas-‐Fort Worth
Kalamazoo
Fort Wayne
South Bend
Median Mul>ple: Median housing price divided by median family income
-‐2.0 -‐1.5 -‐1.0 -‐0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
NY
CA
IL
MI
OH
PA
GA
NC
TX
FL
Millions: Net Domes>c Migra>on
Domestic Migration by State: 2000-2009 10 LARGEST STATES
Data from Census Bueau
Sources of Net Migra>on to Texas, 2004-‐2008
O’Neil Center for Global Markets and Finance SMU Cox School of Business
0.96%
0.75%
0.64%
0.60%
0.50%
0.38%
0.35%
0.35%
0.23%
0.13%
0.13%
0.03%
0.02%
-‐0.04%
-‐0.05%
-‐0.22%
-‐0.36%
-‐0.39%
-‐0.52%
-‐0.56%
-‐0.57%
Tampa Denver Miami Dallas Sea\le
Washington Houston Riverside Atlanta
San Francisco Phoenix
San Diego Minneapolis
Boston Bal8more
Philadelphia St. Louis
Los Angeles New York Detroit Chicago
Net Domes>c Migra>on Rate, 2010-‐2011
U.S. Census Popula8on Es8mates Program
Houston MSA Net Migra>on Flows 2000-‐2010
Net Oualows to Blue Net Inflows from Orange
IRS Tax Return Data. Net flow of tax return exemp8ons
Tarrant County Net Migra>on Flows 2000-‐2010
Net Oualows to Blue Net Inflows from Orange
IRS Tax Return Data. Net flow of tax return exemp8ons
-‐10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Boston San Francisco
Chicago AVERAGE
Oklahoma City Sacramento Washington
Columbus Salt Lake City
Tampa-St. Petersburg Denver
Indianapolis Nashville
Riverside-San Bernardino San Antonio
Houston Orlando
Dallas-Fort Worth Atlanta
Phoenix Charlotte
Austin Las Vegas
Raleigh
Change in 5-17 Population: 2000-2010 TOP 20 MAJOR METROPOLITAN AREA EXAMPLES
Source: Census Data
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
Under 3.0 3.0-4.0 4.0-5.0 5.0-6.0 6.0-8.0 Over 8
Chan
ge in College Gradu
ates: 2007-‐2009
Median House Price/Median Household Income: 2007
Absolute Change: College Graduates HOUSING AFFORDABILITY: MAJOR METRO AREAS: 2007-9
52 Metropolitan Areas over Million Population 2007
Major Demographic Challenges Ahead
• Making Immigrants the New Mainstream
• Improve Educa8onal Performance • Maintain the sense of op8mism
2.1
2.5
3.3
4.1
4.6
4.8
5.2
5.8
6.0
6.5
6.5
7.4
7.5
8.0
10.1
Philadelphia Detroit
Riverside SeaOle Boston Atlanta Chicago Phoenix
Washington Houston Dallas
New York San Francisco Los Angeles
Miami
Immigra>on Rates Top 15 Regions Annual Average, 2001-‐2008
Areas are MSA U.S. Census Popula8on Es8mates
The Millennial Genera>on is the Most Diverse in American History
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71 76 81 86 91
Percent of U.S. Population That Is African American, Hispanic, Asian Pacific Islander, American Indian, and Other; By Age – December 2004
Current Population Survey, U.S. Census Bureau, Dec. 2004
§ Echo Boomers!§ Generation X!
§ Baby Boomers!§ Pre-Baby Boomers!
Ethnic Purchasing Power Continues To Soar
Source: Selig Center for Economic Growth, Terry College of Business, University of Georgia (2008)
Spending Power by Ethnic Groups (in Billions) 1990, 2000, 2008, with 2013 projections
$318.1
$211.9
$116.5
$590.2
$489.5
$268.9
$913.1
$951.0
$509.1
$1,239.5
$1,386.2
$752.3
Black
Hispanic
Asian
1990 2000 2008 2013
Big Changes in Composi>on of New Entrepreneurs
Share of All New Entrepreneurs (1996, 2010)
It all depends on her…
Educa8on is the biggest challenge for Texas…making progress but more is
needed
39.4% 38.2%
35.2% 34.2% 34.1%
33.0% 32.5% 32.2%
31.1% 30.1% 29.8% 29.7%
28.8% 28.5% 28.4% 28.3% 28.2%
27.6% 27.1% 26.9% 26.8% 26.6% 26.3% 26.2% 26.0% 25.6% 25.4% 25.1% 24.8%
24.1% 21.6%
21.0% 20.0%
15.8% 15.6%
15.0% 14.3%
Aus8n Denver Provo
Tallahassee Atlanta Omaha
Kansas City Charlo\e
Dallas Ogden
Columbia Nashville Knoxville Spokane Houston
Boise City United States Oklahoma City
Wichita Greenville
New Orleans Baton Rouge Birmingham
Tampa Reno
Greensboro San Antonio
Memphis Tulsa
Kennewick Las Vegas
Mobile Corpus Chris8
McAllen Yakima
Beaumont Brownsville
Bachelor's Degree and Above Educa>onal AOainment Level, 2010
78.4% 73.7%
70.7% 62.4%
52.8% 52.3% 51.7%
48.1% 42.4%
40.1% 40.0% 39.8% 39.6% 39.5%
38.4% 36.9% 36.1% 35.7% 35.2% 34.6% 33.8% 33.5% 33.3%
31.5% 31.0%
29.5% 27.4%
26.3% 24.7%
23.3% 23.1% 22.7%
21.2% 17.4%
13.8% 10.1%
5.9%
Las Vegas Provo
McAllen Ogden
Boise City Aus8n
Charlo\e San Antonio
Nashville Omaha
Kennewick Baton Rouge
Tampa Houston
Reno Dallas
Atlanta Columbia Denver
Greenville Knoxville
Oklahoma City Brownsville
Spokane Kansas City
United States Memphis
Birmingham Corpus Chris8
Tulsa Wichita
Greensboro Mobile
Tallahassee Yakima
New Orleans Beaumont
Growth in Popula>on with a Bachelor's Degree or Higher, 2000-‐2010
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
South Dakota
Minnesota
North Dakota
Iowa
Nebraska
Kansas
Colorado
Wyoming
Na8on
Oklahoma
New Mexico
Montana
Texas
Chance for College by Age 19
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
New Mexico Oklahoma Nebraska
Na8on Iowa
Wyoming Texas
Kansas South Dakota
Colorado North Dakota
Montana Minnesota
Share of 8th Grade Students at or Above Proficient in Mathema>cs, 2011
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
New Mexico Oklahoma
Texas Na8on Iowa
North Dakota Kansas
Nebraska South Dakota
Wyoming Minnesota Colorado Montana
Share of 8th GradeStudents at or Above Proficient in Reading, 2011
Can Texas Keep its Momentum?
Cri8cal Factors: • Maintain Pro-‐Business Aotudes
• Integra8on of Immigrants • Improve educa8on and skills
JOELKOTKIN.COM
A vivid snapshot of America in 2050 focusing on the evolu8on of the more in8mate units of American society—families, towns, neighborhoods, industries. It is upon the success or failure of these communi8es that the American future rests.
Ques>ons and Comment