Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Lou2011 dw
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Introducing the official SlideShare app

Stunning, full-screen experience for iPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Lou2011 dw

388
views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Economy & Finance

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
388
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. www.michiganfuture.org 1
  • 2. Our goalA high prosperity Michigan 2
  • 3. What state do we want to emulate? State Per capita Unemployment Poverty Education income (09) (10) rate (09) attainment (09)Oklahoma $35,837 7.1 % 16.2 % 22.73 %Minnesota $41,854 7.3 % 11.0 % 31.50 %Michigan $34,315 12.5% 16.2 % 24.59 %U.S. $39,635 9.6 % 14.3 % 27.90 % 3
  • 4. 10 Most Prosperous StatesConnecticut New YorkNew Jersey VirginiaMassachusetts AlaskaWyoming WashingtonMaryland New Hampshire 4
  • 5. Looking at “income” more closely• Components of Per Capita Income – Private Earnings – Government Earnings – Dividends, Interest, Rent – Transfer Payments – Social Insurance Taxes & Resident Adjustments• Goal is to be high in Private Earnings 5
  • 6. Breaking down income Natural Other Dividends, Soc. Ins. Tax Personal Private Resources Private Govt Interest, Transfer & Residence Income Earnings Earnings Earnings Earnings Rent Payments AdjustmentU.S. $39,635 $23,427 $669 $22,758 $5,233 $7,143 $6,984 ‐$3,153Indiana $34,022 $20,555 $467 $20,089 $3,800 $4,968 $6,831 ‐$2,133Michigan $34,315 $19,785 $240 $19,545 $4,060 $5,499 $7,737 ‐$2,766Minnesota $41,854 $26,668 $639 $26,029 $4,658 $7,614 $6,891 ‐$3,977 Key numbers in our analysis 6
  • 7. Best states in private income Non-Nat Resources Govt. Earnings & Top 10 Earning Share of PI Transfers Share of PIConnecticut $33,070 59.8% 24.9%Massachusetts $32,957 66.4% 25.6%New York $29,479 63.4% 31.2%New Jersey $28,554 57.1% 26.1%Minnesota $26,029 62.2% 27.6%Delaware $25,792 65.1% 31.8%Illinois $25,789 61.6% 26.8%New Hampshire $25,546 59.9% 24.3%Colorado $25,515 60.9% 25.8%California $24,795 58.5% 28.3%United States $22,758 57.4% 30.8%Michigan $19,545 57.0% 34.3% 7
  • 8. Worst states in private income Non-Nat Resources Gov Earnings & Bottom 10 Earning Share of PI Transfers Share of PIOklahoma $17,114 47.8% 35.9%Alabama $17,094 51.2% 38.1%Kentucky $17,092 53.0% 39.9%Montana $16,663 47.8% 35.4%South Carolina $16,599 51.1% 38.6%Idaho $16,397 51.5% 32.3%Arkansas $16,308 50.5% 37.6%New Mexico $15,367 46.2% 41.2%West Virginia $14,450 45.0% 42.6%Mississippi $14,012 46.1% 42.3%United States $22,758 57.4% 30.8%Michigan $19,545 57.0% 34.3% 8
  • 9. Traits of prosperous states• High proportion of wages from knowledge industries• High proportion of college grads• Big metro with higher per cap income than state• Largest city in that metro has high proportion of college grads 9
  • 10. What is the knowledge economy? public goods 5% information leisure other administration 5% services 10% trade trans 3% utilities 7% financial activities health 11% 21% prof and business education services 21% 17% 10
  • 11. Michigan’s income rank alignedwith our college attainment rank Per Cap Income % 4 year degree 10 15 18 20 34 25 36 30 37 35 2000 2009 40 11
  • 12. 10 Most Prosperous Regions• San Jose/San Fran. • Seattle• Washington/Balt. • Houston• NY/Newark • San Diego• Hartford • Denver/Boulder• Boston/Worchester • Philadelphia 12
  • 13. Major metros smarter Education attainment by metro population35% 33% 30%30% 25% 26%25% 24% 23%20%15%10% Under .2 m .2-.5 m .5-1 m 1-1.6 m 1.6-3.5 m 3.5 m and up 13
  • 14. Major metros richer Per capita income by metro population$50,000 $45,667$45,000 $39,490$40,000 $37,470 $35,304 $35,734$35,000 $33,304$30,000$25,000$20,000 under .2 m .2-.5 m .5-1 m 1-1.6 m 1.6-3.5 m 3.5 m and up 14
  • 15. Big metros winners in private earnings Number of Private Earnings Gov Earn &Size of community communities Per Capita Transfers Per Cap3.0 million or more 17 $28,767 $11,7121.0 million to 3.0million 38 $22,684 $11,931500,000 to 1.0 million 45 $19,577 $12,250200,000 to 500,000 88 $18,800 $13,055under 200,000 122 $17,203 $13,586 Resources are flowing from largest metros to smaller communities 15
  • 16. Metro Detroit vs. Metro Minneapolis City Per cap Education Share of wages from income attainment knowledge industryMinneapolis 11 7 13 Detroit 41 39 31 2009 Rank among 55 metros 1 million population or more 16
  • 17. Metro Grand Rapids vs. Metro Minneapolis City Per cap Education Share of wages from income attainment knowledge industryMinneapolis 11 7 13 Grand 54 44 54 Rapids 2009 Rank among 55 metros 1 million population or more 17
  • 18. Metro Lansing vs. Metro Madison City Per cap % bachelors Share of wages from income degree or more knowledge industriesMadison $ 42,456 38.90 % 63.61 %Lansing $ 33,273 29.09 % 65.33 % 2009 data 18
  • 19. High education industries growing in U.S. 5.83% 6.00%Employment change 2001-09 4.00% 2.00% $45,558 $59,926 0.00% -2.00% -0.79% All industry -4.00% Low education $33,383 -6.00% High education -5.79% (2009 average wage) 19
  • 20. High education industries doing best in Michigan 0.00%Employment change 2001-09 $54,964 -5.00% -4.97% -10.00% $43,645 -15.00% All industry -15.66% Low education -20.00% $34,646 High education -22.59% -25.00% (2009 average wage) 20
  • 21. Index value (100 in Dec. 2007) 100 105 80 85 90 95 75 2007.12 2008.01 2008.02 2008.03 2008.04 2008.05 2008.06 2008.07 2008.08 2008.09 2008.1 2008.11 U.S. High Ed 2008.12 2009.01 2009.02 2009.03 2009.04 2009.05 U.S. Low Ed 2009.06 2009.07 2009.08 2009.09 2009.1 2009.11 Date Mich High Ed 2009.12 2010.01 2010.02 2010.03 2010.04 2010.05 2010.06 2010.07 Mich Low Ed 2010.08 2010.09 Employment in High and Low Education Attainment 2010.1 Industries, Michigan and the U.S., 2007.12 to 2011.05 2010.11 2010.12 2011.01 2011.02 Recession accelerates trends 2011.03 2011.0421 2011.05
  • 22. Our conclusion:The places with the greatest concentration of talent win! 22
  • 23. Young talent isaggregating inurban regions Younger college grads Blue = With children Red = Without children
  • 24. Our recommendations•Align Michigan culture with the flat world realities•Create places where talent wants to live•Ensure success of vibrant higher ed system•Reinvent K-12 education to align with new realities•Develop new public and – more importantly –private sector leaders 30
  • 25. Bottom lineWe must get youngerand better educated or we will get poorer 31
  • 26. For more information about MichiganFuture, our reports or what the media is saying, please visit our Web site at: www.MichiganFuture.org 32