Quote:
Originally Posted by Razor
Interesting thread..
I was a little taken back by LA, but when you think about it manufacturing isn't all about planes, trains and automobiles.I imagine LA has a huge fashion manufacturing industry.
Ditto for music gear.
Now,would those constantly revolving Hollywood movie sets be considered manufacturing?
|
Planes? Los Angeles has been a large aerospace center for a long time; a postwar boom in defense contracting was responsible. San Jose had some of that, as well.
http://articles.latimes.com/1989-02-...fornia-defense
This article breakdowns manufacturing products in Southern California. #1 for Los Angeles County is Petroleum and Coal Products (Beverly Hills High School has an oil well on its campus). Aerospace is only 8%, Apparel only 5%. By dollar value, by employment may be different. Southern California, has lost manufacturing jobs at about the national average since 1988. So by % relative to the national average, Los Angeles would have been about the same. Its losses were concentrated in the early 1990s, as defense contracts dried up.
http://laedc.org/reports/Manufacturing_2011.pdf
During World War II, southern California’s factories employed 2 million people and produced 300,000 airplanes, or one every 15 minutes in some plants.
http://equitablegrowth.org/report/eq...pace-industry/
The mass migration to California in the early and mid 20th century, while seemingly similar to today's sunbelt migration; is different in one big way: California by the end of migration was wealthier than the national average by far, and more advanced by health, education or development standards. The current sunbelt migration is to poorer to average parts of the US.
Between 1929 and 1945, California’s population swelled by nearly 40 percent, yet this population achieved the greatest per-capita economic growth in the nation, with average incomes 40 percent higher by 1945 than the national average.
http://equitablegrowth.org/report/eq...pace-industry/
Hmm, just found an article on earlier western migration vs current sunbelt migration:
Adding to the anomaly is a historic reversal in the patterns of migration within the United States. Throughout almost all of the nation’s history, Americans tended to move from places where wages were lower to places where wages were higher. Horace Greeley’s advice to “Go West, young man” finds validation, for example, in historical data showing that per-capita income was higher in America’s emerging frontier cities, such as Chicago in the 1850s or Denver in 1880s, than back east.
But over the last generation this trend, too, has reversed. Since 1980, the states and metro areas with the highest and fastest-growing per capita incomes have generally seen hardly, if any, net domestic in-migration, and in many notable examples have seen more people move away to other parts of the country than move in. Today, the preponderance of domestic migration is from areas with high and rapidly growing incomes to relatively poorer areas where incomes are growing at a slower pace, if at all.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/...iverge/417372/