Jump to content

Economic Development in South Carolina


goodbye

Recommended Posts

Its an odd situation. We have a problem transitioning to a knowledge based economy... but the reason is that there are not enough jobs for our college grads, so they tend to go to NC or Atlanta. Its sort of a chicken vs egg thing...we need the college grads to stay, but we need to be able to create the jobs so that the opportunity for them to stay is there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


This part of the editorial affirms what I've been saying all along, that we can't blame our present governor for our economic woes; past administrations failed to prepare this state for the economic shift that was occurring:

Despite a 30-year trend toward trade and service industries, South Carolina is still largely a manufacturing state, particularly in rural areas.

Now we're pretty much 30 years behind, and that's a lot of catching up to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its an odd situation. We have a problem transitioning to a knowledge based economy... but the reason is that there are not enough jobs for our college grads, so they tend to go to NC or Atlanta. Its sort of a chicken vs egg thing...we need the college grads to stay, but we need to be able to create the jobs so that the opportunity for them to stay is there.

Could this be because some regions in SC only focus on a small number of areas for job growth. For instance, in Florence County all the focus for creating jobs and other econ developement has been in one area. If the rest of the state thinks in this manner, then I can understand the gloomy outlook.

There needs to be a sense of building up on a more broader scale. The city of Florence is definately experiencing growth, but the rest of the county is not fairing very well. While I can understand the creation and mataining of an econ base, I don't see where neglecting other parts of a region is benefitting the whole.

Is this kind of thinking prevelent throughtout SC?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This state has been split between 'haves' and 'have nots' for decades. The cities that have the infrastructure to attract jobs do so, those that don't have not been successful. Success breeds more success.

Greenville, Columbia and Charleston attract jobs because they have the highways, railways, ports, water/ sewer, educated labor force, etc. to attract higher-skilled jobs. Low skills jobs (such as those in textiles that predominate the rural areas) are fleeing for China, Mexico, India and other off shore destinations.

In order for the Pee Dee, Lower Savannah River, etc. areas to pull out of their rut, there is going to have to be a concerted and successful effort to improve what these areas have to offer. That starts first with Education.

Industry goes where it wants to go, if one area doesn't meet the minimum requirements, it isn't even considered. The private sector (industry) drives the decision, not government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In order for the Pee Dee, Lower Savannah River, etc. areas to pull out of their rut, there is going to have to be a concerted and successful effort to improve what these areas have to offer. That starts first with Education.

The thing is, it's going to be hard to attract quality teachers to those areas which don't have as strong a quality of life as the larger areas, and compensation would be lower. Another chicken-egg situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The basic problem with South Carolina's economy is that it has exploited cheap land and cheap labor to sustain it's growth for the last 50 years. This is not counting the traditional textile, farming and tourist businesses. Companies where all too happy to locate a plant in SC where there were few restrictions on business, unions were non-existent, and there was workforce happy to get whatever jobs it could get.

Now that we are in the midst of globalization, that advantage has disappeared and all of this stuff is going overseas along with the traditional textile business. That leaves farming and tourism.

The other basic problem with changing this fact is that as noted earlier, success breeds success, and unfortunately for SC, its development policies have encouraged very low density development throughout the state. In fact most of the state seems to be concerned with keeping cities from growing much in order to preserve property rights, keep taxes low, and strangle urban governments. As a result there are no large cities in the state to attract new development that isn't looking for low cost and/or build up homegrown industry.

It's a very difficult problem to solve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^That's another thing I was thinking. Our restrictive annexation laws aren't conducive to good municipal fiscal health. Our state legislature fails to realize that cities, not corporations, are our primary economic engines, and if their growth is stunted, so is the growth of the state's economy.

Edited by krazeeboi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^That's another thing I was thinking. Our restrictive annexation laws aren't conducive to good municipal fiscal health. Our state legislature fails to realize that cities, not corporations, are our primary economic engines, and if their growth is stunted, so is the growth of the state's economy.

Houston, (we) sounds like you've got a very serious problem there in SC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^That's another thing I was thinking. Our restrictive annexation laws aren't conducive to good municipal fiscal health. Our state legislature fails to realize that cities, not corporations, are our primary economic engines, and if their growth is stunted, so is the growth of the state's economy.

I see your point, but I like the annexation laws the way they are. Columbia would have annexed all of Richland County by now. Part of Lexington and Kershaw too, if they thought they could.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see your point, but I like the annexation laws the way they are. Columbia would have annexed all of Richland County by now. Part of Lexington and Kershaw too, if they thought they could.

That's probably overstating it somewhat, but what would be the problem with that? As recently as 50 years ago Charlotte and Columbia were peer cities, now look at the difference. Annexation is the biggest factor in the difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ May be, but I wouldn't put it past them. What's the problem? Higher taxes with little or no benefits for the landowners for one. That's a HUGE minus in my opinion.

I don't care for a lot of decisions made by the Columbia either, although Richland County Council isn't a whole lot better, IMO.

If you lived in the city, you could vote for different candidates.

As for avoiding city taxes, it's a false economy for many people. Do you pay to have your garbage picked up? What about water and sewer, do you pay for that? You would pay lower rates on water and sewer if you were in the city limits. Homeowne's insurnace can often be lower as well.

Little benefit? Who do you think paid for the streetscaping going on all over town? Who paid for the Art Musuem? City Police patrol a fraction of the land area than Richland County does, so reponse times are better.

You probably pay more for homeowner's insurance and higher water rates than you would pay in city taxes. That is almost certainly true now that the LOST is in effect. You may only THINK you are saving money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see your point, but I like the annexation laws the way they are. Columbia would have annexed all of Richland County by now. Part of Lexington and Kershaw too, if they thought they could.

I seriously doubt that. There's still a good bit of Mecklenburg County left that Charlotte hasn't annexed and the city is somewhere around 250 sq miles, with the county being 526 sq miles.

I think that people fail to see the big picture when it comes to annexation, particularly its connection to good fiscal health. And if our largest cities suffer in this regard (which they do), then the whole state suffers (which it does). Check out this report (PDF file) for more detailed information.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I'll use my parents as an example because they live out past LR, an area that Columbia is consideriing annexing. They don't pay for garbage pick up (county does it), they don't pay for water (well), and they are within 5 miles of a fire station, so their homeowners won't decrease.

What would they see if they were annexed, other than higher taxes? There are many people in the Lower Richland area in the exact same boat that definitely are against annexation, and I can see their point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I'll use my parents as an example because they live out past LR, an area that Columbia is consideriing annexing. They don't pay for garbage pick up (county does it), they don't pay for water (well), and they are within 5 miles of a fire station, so their homeowners won't decrease.

What would they see if they were annexed, other than higher taxes? There are many people in the Lower Richland area in the exact same boat that definitely are against annexation, and I can see their point.

Past LR is pretty rural, or it was the last time I saw it. Are they in a subdivision or a farm/country lot? If the fire station is volunteer, there insurance might still go down. Do they pay a fee for garbage pickup, or do they take it to a dump?

Annexation is normally of dense suburban areas that require a higher level of services than a county nornally provides. Most subdivisions (especially newer ones) are too dense to support septic tanks, so water/sewer is required.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are on a farm. County picks up the garbage.

What's going on out there is that developers are pushing Columbia to annex the areas and run sewer lines and water lines out there so they can put their developments out there. So far, they mostly appear to be single family dwellings on lots from .1-.2 acre lots. Without water/sewer, the developments won't happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are on a farm. County picks up the garbage.

What's going on out there is that developers are pushing Columbia to annex the areas and run sewer lines and water lines out there so they can put their developments out there. So far, they mostly appear to be single family dwellings on lots from .1-.2 acre lots. Without water/sewer, the developments won't happen.

Thats different. It doesnt really benefit the city or your parents to be annexed, but that is a specific situation. These subdivisions exist purely because of Columbia, and they should be annexed into the city for that reason alone, besides the finicial benefits to homeowners and developers.

Besides that, the City has a much better chance of enforcing the Lower Richland master plan (which encourages density BTW).

Columbia is extending water and sewer lines out there because developers want the service so that they can build their subdivisions. Don't assume that the city is initiating it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Staples will bring 250 jobs to the Columbia area. "A new service center will house such financial functions as accounts payable and accounts receivable."

That means white collar jobs. It doesn't specify where they will locate, but I hope they choose downtown and not a new building in the suburbs somewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.