Yet the area seems stymied by a quagmire of political, racial, economic divisiveness and “old boy” curuption. Education has low statewide priority.
“Missourah” views St. Louis as an enemy instead of an economic engine.

Metro area Light rail is so limited that it is useless for the majority of the residents. High speed rail to Chicago, Indianapois, KC, Memphis – not even on the radar as a concept. Carpetbaggers repeatedly profit then walk away, leaving behind failed initatives and civic frustration. It seems that lack of vision, lack of stong leadership and resistance to cooperation will continue to obstruct St. Louis’s path to the RESET.

Yes, there’s a mall downtown, but there is also record unemployment, readily apparent corruption, and among the highest taxes anywhere. It’s not walkable (if that were the standard), nor does it have an adequate public transit system. The small city is divided by several interstete highways.

Great Pizza, and some thriving arts, mostly due to the Rhode Island School of Design, but pretty buildings alone do not make for a happy or prosperous citizenry.

What’s the basis of calling Providence a success?

I’ve heard a number of these “the future is so bright we have to wear shades” guys. And I put down his book on the creative class after a couple of pages.

It’s elitism. What Christian Lander calls “stuff white people like” with a website by that name. It’s pretentious and condescending and quite frankly I don’t know who pays this guy’s tab for food.

Note that “stuff white people like” is about class not race. It’s about the affectations, perquisites and presumed entitlements of this so-called creative class more properly defined as a bloated bourgeoisie.

Much more flexible than rail and cheaper also.

Point #2–folks like the good professor (and Friedman) are on the one hand convinced that the world is balanced on the shoulders of an oligarchical ruling class a-la Ayn Rand, while on the other hand expecting the vast “under classes” to simply go along with the program. What they’ve forgotten–or probably never knew in the first place–is that the disappearance of a vibrant middle class is what will finally de-flower the gilded lily the good professor is talking about. I noticed nothing in the interview this morning to indicate that anyone is worried about the steadily declining middle class in this country.

Furthermore, there is nothing I hear in the good professsor’s rhetoric that would suggest a means of support for of his “mega centrist” model including fast rail transportation and all the other goodies he talks about. Who is going to care if they can be whisked between population centers if they don’t have jobs? And since we’re not headed toward great wealth redistribution in America–not while the neocons and their wrong headed ideologies have any degree of control–the good professor is simply dreaming.

Think back. Where was the Western Roman Empire in the Sixth Century? It was a society of the very, very rich at one end and the very, very poor at the other. In other words, no middle class. This could also describe most Third World nations that we see today. And this, professor, is where the future of the great U.S. of A. is headed if we don’t give up our greed and the idea that policy needs to center around the wishes and the whimsy of those in the upper economic eschelons of American society.

So where are we going when this is over? We’re going right back to where we were–with less than we had, but nothing that a little more belt tightening won’t cure. It’s boom and bust, professor–the new wave of the future. And the reason? The reason is because too many in our top heavy society make their fortunes both on the way up and again on the way down. It’s simply too lovely a system for them to give up, and as long as they can keep the under classes satisfied with making do with less, they will continue to milk the system until the cash cows have all run dry.