On 1/15/08, Andrew Lentvorski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > In addition, Richard Florida (author--look him up on Amazon) argues that > the game is no longer played country vs. country. It is played city vs. > city. His arguments are pretty compelling. > > -a <quote> According to Richard Florida, this is wrong. Place is not only important, it's more important than ever.
Globalization is not flattening the world; on the contrary, the world is spiky. Place is becoming more relevant to the global economy and our individual lives. The choice of where to live, therefore, is not an arbitrary one. It is arguably the most important decision we make, as important as choosing a spouse or a career. In fact, place exerts powerful influence over the jobs and careers we have access to, the people meet and our "mating markets" and our ability to lead happy and fulfilled lives. </quote> http://creativeclass.com/richard_florida/books/whos_your_city/ This sounds right to me. I would go further. Cities are spiky. Some cities are more spiky than others. Spiky is a good description of the phenomena. In San Diego we have a number of different neighborhoods each with its own hooks into the larger economy. La jolla is _not_ North Park. Nor is it Little Italy. Nor Hillcrest. Nor north coast, e.g. Leucadia. But tribes and markets are what glue these spikes together. And we are not required to participate in only one spike. We do not have to live in one place. I live in several within the USA, Mexico and the Philip[pines. >From my perspective borders just present silly hassles that I do _not_ need but am from time to time forced to deal with. BobLQ "Not much of a nationalist" -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
