I thought the most interesting reading this week was Chapter 4 of Bloomberg’s New York, about the branding of NYC. Chapter 5 talks about Bloomberg’s Way of treating New York as a product. He really branded New York as a “luxury product,” in which the value of its location was greater than the high costs. New York has come a long way in changing its image from the city of crime, drugs, and disorder to a modern, cosmopolitan, luxurious city. It’s not even that the negative aspects of New York have disappeared, but rather that the thought of New York instills the positive aspects of New York instead. New York is the most famous city, filled with the best, the brightest, the most talented, and the richest. This makes others–tourists and businesses–want to come to New York and gives its residents a sense of pride for living in New York. I know a family who lives in a very nice, newly renovated, 5 bedroom house in New Mexico, and they pay $800 a month for rent. This is unimaginable in New York, but much more people live here than in New Mexico. As Bloomberg said, New York’s greatest economic asset is its labor pool, its workforce. We can move to New Mexico and pay cheaper rent but there would be no jobs available. Just as richer people would pay more for name brand bags and better quality clothes, businesses come to New York because it is a luxury brand. It will never be the cheapest place to do business, but it will be the most efficient and it will be the best because it is “New York.” The thought that the value of New York trumps over its costs is fascinating and my favorite quote from chapter 4 was “If New York City is a business, it isn’t Wal-Mart—it isn’t trying to be the lowest-priced product in the market. It’s a high-end product, maybe even a luxury product” because this made the “branding” idea so much easier to understand.
Mike Wallace’s idea of a new New Deal was very interesting as well. I think what he is saying essentially is that we should go back to our old ways of manufacturing and large government spending, as we did during the depression. His plan isn’t something radical, but I am dubious of its effectiveness. FDR’s New Deal was a series of brilliant plans to bring the nation out of its greatest economic depression. The ideas were good but ultimately, I believe it was WWII that brought America out of depression, not FDR’s New Deal. Wallace calls for a massive program to invest in people and resources. He also suggests more taxes and fees for more support programs. I sense a bit of nostalgia from him, as if going back to our old ways will put New York in the right direction. I guess if we go back to manufacturing and channeling federal money to the states in this way, there will be more jobs for people. But I am not very convinced from this reading that the new New Deal will have an appeal for the people, or even that it will alleviate New York’s economy.
