Quote:
Originally Posted by edluva
The economic influence argument is a response to ignorant statemnts regarding, and limited to, LA's economy.
|
I was thinking about something you wrote earlier: that the only way members of the port industry could exercise power would be by going on strike. Obviously power is linked to discretion. The port of LA is a vital and integral part how America's economy operates. But workers in the port industry lack discretion. In the sense that they just do their jobs, unload containers, load trucks... whatever it is people do in port facilities.
But how much real discretion do others have? Think about finance... now there seems to be an industry with discretion and power. Very large amounts of money that get allocated all the time. Billion dollar allocations that often make or break companies, or entire industries. Groups of allocations, which taken together, even break countries (financial crises in Mexico, SE Asia, Argentina, etc). But then again, the port industry "allocates" trillions of dollars worth of goods, without which the global economy would grind to a total halt. What's the perceived difference? Discretion. Short of a strike, what discretion do the ports have? Increased efficiency at ports reduces prices and increases trade. But that's so boring. Not like a banker buying out a company and its thousands of employees with one phone call, a la Wall Street the movie. Much more attractive on a visceral level.
But when you think about it, how much discretion do even bankers have? Financial allocations are based on bankers' calculations of returns. It's the calculations that have "power", not the whims of the bankers. They don't allocate money to one company because they "like" the CEO or the town where the company is based. If they did, they wouldn't last too long in the industry. They allocate capital based on calculations (and they are most often complicated mathematical calculations) about rate of return, risk, variance, etc. Just like I guess port workers calculate how best to move materials.
Lots of things are necessary for the operation of a modern economy. Try running an economy or company without trucking, modern supply chain management (the great unsung productivity enhancer of the past 20 years), computer networks, or even plumbing. I wouldn't say that any of them as industries or services are less important than finance. All are necessary for the operation of the modern economy. Why do so many people give special weight to financiers? Because financiers are thought to have more discretion (aka power)? I guess, if you think "Wall Street" the movie is how the banking industry really works. But more than that, I think it's because financiers very famously make lots of money. They live large, going to expensive restaurants, flying first class, wearing $2,000 suits, etc. Hollywood makes movies about them. Port executives, supply chain managers and even tech workers are nowhere near as glamorous.
Anyway, I don't think the putdowns about LA's economy here have much to do with power or importance, per se. They have to do with prestige and money. Outside of Hollywood (a very special and flakey industry), there aren't very many professional career opportunities in LA, at least compared with NY, London, or even Boston, Washington and SF. There are plenty of rich people in metro LA (I looked at some numbers, and metro LA would be 2nd nationally in the number of millionaires), but they are often self-made, with small companies, in real estate, or Hollywood. Not many in prestige fields like finance, FT 500 management, technology, etc.
If you went to the Ivy League or equivalent schools, LA is not a very good place to start or continue a conventional upper-middle-class career path. That's what bothers some people, I think. The local wealthy are viewed by some as unintellectual, vulgar or low-class. Not like those suave, worldly, intelligent bankers in NY, who do "important" things.