Connect with us

Spread & Containment

The COVID-Crisis Could Bring A New Era Of Decline For American Core Cities

The COVID-Crisis Could Bring A New Era Of Decline For American Core Cities



The COVID-Crisis Could Bring A New Era Of Decline For American Core Cities Tyler Durden Fri, 06/26/2020 - 20:25

Authored by Ryan McMaken via The Mises Institute,

Manufacturing company 7-Sigma made headlines when it decided to leave Minneapolis as a result of the company's plant being burned by rioters. "They don’t care about my business,” 7-Sigma owner Kris Wyrobek old the Star-Tribune. After more than 30 years in the city, the company isn't staying, nor are any of the company's fifty jobs.

But the costs of being victimized in protests is just one of many reasons homeowners and businesses may be realizing life and business in central cities has lost its luster. The ongoing threat of more business lockdowns, more riots, higher taxes, and failing schools may induce many Americans to flee, once again, to the suburbs as their parents or grandparents did.

This goes well beyond the fear of the disease many journalists have assumed is behind the observed beginnings of an exodus from cities. Yes, many in the upper classes have fled the cities for their mountain homes and yachts for "health reasons." But these people are relatively few in number and their thinking quixotic. They can afford to drop everything and leave cities overnight.

But the larger impacts are likely to be felt as middle class homeowners and business owners conclude they'd simply rather avoid the edicts and neglect of mayors and city councils in central cities who thinking nothing of issuing job-destroying "stay-at-home" orders while allowing rioters and vandals free rein.

The real cost to cities is likely to emerge over time. It will come in the form of families and shop owners who decide it's best to move their businesses ten miles down the road to a neighboring city that will actually do something about rioters. It will come in the form of families which decide their next home will be just a little bit farther from the urban dictator-mayors who have the heaviest hands in enforcing lockdowns and business closures. It will come in the form of potential new business owners and homeowners will be decide to never purchase property to start a business in central cities in the first place.

The Decline of Cities at Mid-Century

We may be seeing something reminiscent what happened in America's large central cities during the 1970s and 1980s. Many Americans concluded these cities had become unlivable and crime infested. Many concluded these were places that were quite inhospitable to doing business. So they left. (Forced busing for "integration" purposes was a factor as well.)

In some cases, there were dramatic events that illustrated the trend. The late sixties in New York saw several strikes by city workers. Transit and sanitation in the city became a disaster. The 1977 blackout in New York City ended in widespread riots that induced many businesses to pack up and never return. Many households followed.

But for the most part, cities saw an exodus that took many years and slowly hollowed out the finances and tax revenues of big cities. Areas of Detroit fell into ruin. By the mid seventies, New York City was lurching from one fiscal crisis to another.

"Nearly half of large cities lost cities shrank by at least 10 percent" during the 1970s, according to the Kansas City Fed :

St. Louis, Cleveland, Buffalo, and Detroit each shrank by more than 20 percent. Vast stretches of urban land were left virtually deserted.

More than half of large cities lost population from 1950 to 1980.

There were other factors at work as well, of course. The central cities were often hit the hardest as the old Rust Belt went into decline after the region was destroyed by labor unions and city and state laws that made business in the region inefficient and uncompetitive. Business owners and workers who possessed any real ambition or entrepreneurial spirit had good reason to leave the region altogether.

City centers, built on an old manufacturing-based working class never recovered.

The situation today is a bit different. During the 1990s, core cities began to recover from their mid-century decline and many officials and intellectuals in these areas began cultivating the so-called " creative class" (also known as the " bohemian bourgeoisie ") with the idea that young artists, engineers, architects, and tech workers might be convinced to move into city centers and and revitalize local urban economies. It appears to have worked in many cases.

But in 2020 America the hey day of the new techno-city may be over.

Civil Unrest

The case of the Sigma-7 closure in Minneapolis is just the most famous case of central cities' hostility to businesses within their borders. We're not hearing about the many small less-notable businesses that won't re-open in the wake of riots. In other cities, such as Chicago, city officials are now begging retailers to not leave the city.

Meanwhile, a number of small businesses now within the "CHOP" zone in Seattle is suing the city for abandoning businesses to the whims of the leftist mob.

As reported by the local NBC affiliate, local businesses have been threatened and harassed by the bosses of the "Capitol Hill Occupation Protest" (CHOP) zone in the city. The city government, the plaintiffs have concluded, essentially have abandoned these businesses to the new "government":

The City’s decision has subjected businesses, employees, and residents of that neighborhood to extensive property damage, public safety dangers, and an inability to use and access their properties.

Minneapolis and Seattle aren't the only cities the prospect of continued civil unrest. with forty million new unemployment filings in recent months, the US faces a worrisome period of highly elevated unemployment. Many of the worst-affected workers will be lower-income populations living in core cities. This won't help the prospect of a speedy return to placid city environments.

Regime Uncertainty

As government experts and media pundits emphasize growth in reported COVID-19 cases, the prospect of renewed lockdowns now looms, as well. This is a threat at the state level and in many suburban local governments. But experience strongly suggests that those political jurisdictions controled by political leftists are likely to embrace the longest and harshest lockdowns. In many states, such as Texas and Colorado and California and Pennsylvania, local governments in big cities embraced lockdowns more enthusiastically than the surrounding regions and at the state capitols.  "Regime uncertainty"—uncertainty about what business-killing regulations a government might embrace next—appears to be greater in central cities.

Business owners are likely to remember this. In the medium- and long-term, business owners and potential business owners will gravitate to those areas where the threat of harsh lockdowns is smaller.

The Rise of the "Work-at-Home" Trend

If the work-at-home trend persists, core cities will have lost one of their main draws: namely, the prospect of a shorter commute for those who can afford a home close-in to the employment centers. Even if daily commutes are just reduced—say, to a three-days-per-week schedule—the commute-time cost of a home in the suburbs falls dramatically. Without the need to sit in traffic five days per week, more expensive city homes and the congrestion and crime of city centers becomes far less attractive.

Declining Tax Revenue and Urban Blight

On top of it all will come big cuts to city budgets as COVID lockdowns decimated tax revenues. All cities and states will be impacted, but if the most productive taxpayers move out of the core cities, it is these areas that will feel the brunt of revenue shortfalls. In other words, a shift of productivity toward the suburbs and small cities will hollow out big city budgets and school district budgets as well. This will only encourage businesses and families to stay away in even larger numbers. Families will seek to avoid school districts and decline, and employers won't want to become part of a shrinking tax base where tax increases are frequently eyed by politicians as a way out.

The Beginnings of a Trend?

All of this will take time to play out. Yes, we've started to see those with means leave big cities already. The New York Times has reported on numerous former residents of New York City who have left for the surrounding regions. The Times asks "is New York City worth it anymore?" and points out  "the pandemic send young New Yorkers packing."

Meanwhile, some real estate agents report a "mad rush" of wealthy buyers to get out of the city center and into the wealthy suburbs of San Francisco. These are just the early movers. The exiles of more modest means will come later. Not surprisingly, the median rent in San Francisco for a one-bedroom apartment dropped 9.2 percent in May, compared year-over-year.

But these remains a small percentage of the overall population. Most homeowners, families, and business owners need time to move their businesses, sell their properties, and be convinced it's time to move on.

None of this should be interpreted, however, as a trend away from metropolitan areas overall. There appears to be little risk that large numbers of Americans will be quitting metro areas for rural villages and towns. Some will. But most will notice that metro areas still have most of the jobs, most of the cultural institutions, and most of the health care services. What can't be said is that core cities have a monopoly on these resources. In recent decades, suburbs and small cities have increasingly become places that host a wide variety of sports teams, museums, convention centers, hospitals, and more. Metro areas are still a good place to be. But old core cities? Not so much.

Read More

Continue Reading

Spread & Containment

Preventing the next pandemic: Learning the lessons

In the first of a three part series, Ben Hargreaves looks at what the odds are of another
The post Preventing the next pandemic: Learning the lessons appeared…



In the first of a three part series, Ben Hargreaves looks at what the odds are of another pandemic arising in our lifetimes and what can be done to lower the risk of this happening again.

The current pandemic is still very much underway. The question is, as one study was recently entitled, whether the current phase brings the world closer to the end of the pandemic or just to the end of the first phase? What is clear is that due to vaccines and therapeutics, the critical early phase of the pandemic is over. As the article suggests, what could lie ahead is a process of learning how to live with a persistent circulation of the virus and, with this, consistent spikes of cases, likely occurring periodically and more often in the winter months.

With the current pandemic refusing to dissipate, the discussions around future pandemics become more difficult to countenance. As identified very early into the current pandemic by the WHO, there is the risk of fatigue arising over long-term global health crisis response, which becomes an issue when acknowledging that the current times we’re living through could happen again. Research has suggested that in any given year there is a 2.5 to 3.3% chance of a pandemic on the scale of COVID-19 occurring. Not only this, the expectation is that such events are becoming more likely, with estimations that the probability of outbreaks such as the current pandemic will likely grow three-fold in the next few decades.

Pharma invested

The acceptance that there will potentially be another pandemic within many people’s lifetimes underlines the importance of using the emergence of COVID-19 to better protect ourselves against the next threat. Although it’s come at a high cost, the world is now in a strong position to prepare itself, with the lessons from the current pandemic still fresh in mind.

One clear benefit is that the pharmaceutical industry has proven that it is able to develop and safely deliver vaccines in a much shorter timeframe than usual. A typical vaccine development timeline takes between five and 10 years; the vaccines approved for COVID-19 emerged much more quickly.

Though the next pandemic could prove to be a more complicated target to vaccinate against, the success of the vaccines and the financial gains that were achieved would see companies eager to engage in development. Already, the industry is seeing greater research and funding being diverted back into vaccine development, with mRNA vaccines holding particular interest. This should see a pipeline of vaccine candidates better stocked than on the emergence of COVID-19, if this can be sustained into the future.

Global governance

However, the work required to prevent the next pandemic is far broader than vaccines and therapeutics, which are essentially the last defence. In the future, the entire global health system will need to change to become more resilient, which requires many individual changes but can be broken down it smaller, logical actions that have outsized outcomes. One such action is simply coordination at the highest levels.

There were warning signs prior to COVID-19 that a pandemic could be possible, with the outbreaks of Zika and Ebola viruses, both of which have occurred intermittently for years but had attained wider notoriety after bigger outbreaks in the last decade. Despite this, coordinated efforts on the response to the current pandemic lacked cohesion – many countries adopted different methods of combatting the spread of the virus and containment. Once vaccines were on the market, countries competed against one another for access, thereby denying them to the countries without the economic firepower to match.

A recent report for the G20 group of nations, on preventing the next pandemic, concluded: “It requires establishing a global governance and financing mechanism, fitted to the scale and complexity of the challenge, besides bolstering the existing individual institutions, including the

WHO as the lead organisation. A primary one is training and hiring adequate levels of health workers.”

The report broke down four major gaps that need to be addressed, on a global and national level, to be able to respond more quickly, equitably and effectively when further pandemics occur:

  • Globally networked surveillance and research: To prevent and detect emerging infectious diseases
  • Resilient national systems: To strengthen a critical foundation for global pandemic preparedness and response
  • Supply of medical countermeasures and tools: To radically shorten the response time to a pandemic and deliver equitable global access
  • Global governance: To ensure the system is tightly coordinated, properly funded and with clear accountability for outcomes

Spending money to save money

The hiring of additional healthcare workers, the build-out of surveillance systems, support provided for R&D into infectious diseases, and the creation of a stockpile of medical countermeasures all require funds. This is a major question of the report for world leaders: Whether there is the appetite for further funding into pandemic preparation? The global economy has taken and continues to feel the financial blow of COVID-19.

However, the report calls for more public funding to be put into health in the coming years, with the authors stating that approximately 1% of GDP must be committed by low- and middle-income countries. In terms of funding for international efforts for preventing the next pandemic, the figure is estimated at $15 billion per year, sustained for the coming years. Compared to the sums spent on vaccines and therapeutics during the current pandemic, the investment is far lower and will help boost what the report calls, “a dangerously underfunded system.”

Beyond all action is a tactic for mitigating pandemics that is known as primary prevention. Fundamentally, this means going before all of the previously discussed methods to tackle the virus at the root cause.

Research has called for greater emphasis to be put on elements that prevent virus spillover, where a virus jumps species. The authors identify three areas where a difference can be made: reduced deforestation, better management of the wildlife trade and hunting, and better surveillance of zoonotic pathogens before any human is infected. The authors suggest that even a 1% reduction in risk of viral zoonotic disease emergence would make any efforts in this direction cost-effective. They end their study, stating, “Monothetic ‘magic bullets,’ including diagnostic tests, treatments, and vaccines, failed to control COVID-19 as it spread around the globe and exacted the largest health and economic toll of any pathogen in recent history. This makes plain that we cannot solely rely upon post-spillover strategies to prevent a similar fate in the future.”

The post Preventing the next pandemic: Learning the lessons appeared first on .

Read More

Continue Reading

Spread & Containment

FTSE 100 gains as commodity-linked stocks bounce back

The commodity-heavy FTSE 100 gained 0.4%, while mid-cap FTSE 250 index inched up 0.3% UK’s FTSE 100 gained on Monday, as an easing of COVID-19 restrictions…



The commodity-heavy FTSE 100 gained 0.4%, while mid-cap FTSE 250 index inched up 0.3%

UK’s FTSE 100 gained on Monday, as an easing of COVID-19 restrictions in China brought relief to commodity prices, lifting shares of major oil and mining companies.

As of 0704 GMT, the commodity-heavy FTSE 100 gained 0.4%, while mid-cap FTSE 250 index inched up 0.3%.

The risk sentiment improved after a Wall Street rally late last week and a rebound in copper and iron ore prices on Monday, boosted by an easing COVID-19 restrictions in Shanghai and relaxed testing mandates in several Chinese cities.

The burst of global enthusiasm for equities has put a spring in the step of the FTSE 100 at the start of the week, Hargreaves Lansdown analyst Susannah Streeter said.

Mining stocks led gains on the FTSE 100 index, with Anglo American, Rio Tinto and Glencore rising more than 3%, after Group of Seven leaders pledged to raise $600 billion private and public funds in five years to finance needed infrastructure in developing countries.

It is hoped this scheme, seen as a counter to China’s Belt and Road Initiative, will set off a spurt of spending and demand for commodities around the world, Streeter added.

Among individual stocks, CareTech surged 20.8% after the UK-based provider of care and residential services agreed to be acquired by a consortium led by Sheikh Hoidings in an 870.3 million pounds ($1.07 billion) deal.

Carnival Corp jumped 5.6%, extending its Friday gains after the leisure travel company forecast a positive core profit for the current quarter despite surging costs.

London-listed shares of Rio Tinto added 2% after a U.S appeals court ruled that the federal government may give the UK copper miner a right to lands in Arizona.

BAE Systems inched up 0.4% after the defence company received a $12 billion contract from the U.S Department of Defence.

The post FTSE 100 gains as commodity-linked stocks bounce back first appeared on Trading and Investment News.

Read More

Continue Reading


Structural racism drives higher COVID-19 death rates in Louisiana, study finds

COLLEGE PARK, MARYLAND–Disproportionately high COVID-19 mortality rates among Black populations in Louisiana parishes are the result of longstanding…



COLLEGE PARK, MARYLAND–Disproportionately high COVID-19 mortality rates among Black populations in Louisiana parishes are the result of longstanding health vulnerabilities associated with institutional and societal discrimination, according to research conducted by an interdisciplinary team under the mentorship of University of Maryland (UMD) Clark Distinguished Chair Deb Niemeier and UMD Associate Professor of Kinesiology Jennifer D. Roberts in the School of Public Health. 

Credit: Guangxiao Hu, Nora Hamovit, Kristen Croft, Jennifer D. Roberts, and Deb Niemeier, University of Maryland.

COLLEGE PARK, MARYLAND–Disproportionately high COVID-19 mortality rates among Black populations in Louisiana parishes are the result of longstanding health vulnerabilities associated with institutional and societal discrimination, according to research conducted by an interdisciplinary team under the mentorship of University of Maryland (UMD) Clark Distinguished Chair Deb Niemeier and UMD Associate Professor of Kinesiology Jennifer D. Roberts in the School of Public Health. 

The team included doctoral students from three different programs at UMD, working together as part of an interdisciplinary fellowship program known as UMD Global STEWARDS, directed by Professor Amy R. Sapkota of the School of Public Health.

“Our results suggest that structural racism and inequities led to severe disparities in initial COVID-19 effects among highly populated Black Louisiana communities, and that as the virus moved into less densely populated Black communities, similar trends emerged,” the researchers concluded in a study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences on Monday, June 27. 

Over the course of generations, discrimination in employment, education, housing, and access to medical care has led to higher risks of chronic illnesss (including asthma, diabetes, and obesity) among Black communities, as well as a higher likelihood of suffering a stroke, the authors noted. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have linked these factors to the likelihood of becoming severely ill from COVID-19.

Both nationally and in Louisiana, Black communities encounter inadequate housing and lower rates of home ownership, reduced access to health care, and lower rates of employment. As exemplified by Cancer Alley, Black families are more likely to live in so-called “fence-line” neighborhoods, located near industrial facilities that expose them to pollutants, and typically encounter reduced air and water quality compared to white Americans. Black families are also more likely to be uninsured and face higher rates of unemployment. These and multiple other factors, all reflecting decades of institutional and societal bias, add up to a combination of stressors that undermine health and, in the case of COVID-19, have made Black communities particularly vulnerable.

To obtain their findings, the team members identified the spatial distribution of social and environmental stressors across Louisiana parishes, and used hotspot analyses to develop aggregate stressors. They then tracked the correlations among stressors, cumulative health risks, COVID-19 mortality rates, and the size of Black populations across Louisiana. The results suggest that COVID-19 mortality rates initially spiked in Black communities with high population densities and moderate levels of aggregate stress. Over time, the rates also increased in less densely populated Black communities with higher levels of aggregate stress.

“We find that Black communities in Louisiana parishes with both higher and lower population densities experience higher levels of stressors leading to greater COVID-19 mortality rates,” the researchers wrote. “Our work using the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly as observed in Louisiana, makes clear that communities with high levels of social, economic, and environmental racism are significantly more vulnerable to a public health crisis.”

The study lead authors include UMD graduate students Kristen Croft (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering). Nora Hamovit (Department of Biology), and Guangxiao Hu (Department of Geographical Sciences), who worked together on the study as part of the UMD Global STEWARDS (STEM Training at the Nexus of Energy, WAter Reuse and FooD Systems) training fellowship program, which is funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF).

Allen P. Davis, Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering, is a co-PI for the UMD STEWARDS program, which aims to bring together graduate students from a wide variety of backgrounds to work on collaborative projects. “Each student brings their own area of expertise to the table, resulting in synergy,” Davis said. “That kind of synergy is something you might not get in other disciplinary studies.”

The value of such an approach was evident in the collaboration among the three students.  “As a human geographer, my main focus was on the spatial disparities of structural racism and inequities and their effects on COVID-19 mortalities,” Hu said. “Using hotspot analysis, we identified two groups of parishes with high or low population densities located at different regions of Louisiana. Our research provides policy makers with very useful insights about the disproportionate burden of Black communities and the nonstationary distribution of this disproportion across Louisiana.”

Hamovit performed the initial data analysis that yielded stressor index calculations, which Hu then utilized for hotspot analysis. “Because my PhD research involves large and complex data sets I brought a strength of data organization and analysis to our team,” Hamovit said. Croft played a key role in defining the research topic and utilized her background in stormwater research to pinpoint specific variables that could have a bearing on health. 

Faculty mentors included Niemeier and Roberts. Niemeier, who joined the UMD civil and environmental engineering faculty in 2019 as the inaugural Clark Distinguished Chair, is an internationally-recognized expert on the equity impacts of infrastructure and engineering decisions. She is a member of the National Academy of Engineering and, in 2021, was elected to the American Philosophical Society. Her work, which details how marginalized communities are affected by vehicle emissions, development patterns, climate change, and approaches to disaster preparation and recovery, has helped spur policy and regulatory reforms.

Roberts is founder and director of the  Public Health Outcomes and Effects of the Built Environment Laboratory at UMD. She is also co-founder and co-director of NatureRx@UMD. Her scholarship focuses on the impact of built, social and natural environments, including the institutional and structural inequities of these environments, on physical activity and public health outcomes of marginalized communities. Roberts was recently named to the National Academy of Science’s Response and Resilient Recovery Strategic Science Initiative Strategy Group on COVID-19 and Ecosystem Service in the Built Environment.


Read More

Continue Reading