New Geography

Author: Susanne Trimbath

  • The Balance Sheet of US Households ($US billion)

  • Knowledge Worker Migration: Going Where the Brains Are

    At a time when national unemployment is rising, Nebraska is working overtime to attract labor. At the inaugural Sarpy County Economic Summit, Governor David Heinemann (R) talked about the need to “market the state to 16- to 20-year-olds.” Nebraska, apparently, has more jobs requiring college degrees than it has college graduates. (Interested college students can call the Director of the Nebraska Department of Economic Development, Richard Baier, at 402-471-3746.)
    Special incentives are in place for any employer who will bring in jobs that will drive up the average local salary. The idea is to keep young college graduates here by bringing in better jobs.

    Nebraska is not alone in this regard. In the middle of all the economic turmoil, the Federal Reserve districts in Cleveland, Chicago and Kansas City reported high demand and resulting upward pressure on wages for skilled labor. The industries most in need of additional skilled workers are energy, health care, and manufacturing. Yes, manufacturing. Skilled financial services workers were easier to come by in Dallas as a result of mergers in the industry. The same was true for financial workers in Chicago. The only minimum-wage jobs going wanting are in the leisure and hospitality industry in the Kansas City district.

    I did an analysis comparing States (plus Puerto Rico and D.C.) by the high percentage of workers with graduate degrees in 2007 and the change in that figure from 2005. For example, Nevada ranked 45th among the States for workforce with graduate degrees in 2007; yet they ranked number 1 for increasing that percentage since 2005 (from 6.6% to 7.5%). The Knowledge Score is simply the difference in the two ranks. Nevada has the highest score at 44. The States with the lower scores are falling behind: although they rank high this year other states are moving up faster in gaining educated knowledge workers. Delaware has a score of -37: they rank 15th for an educated workforce but next to last (better only than New Mexico) for going from 11.1% of the workforce with graduate degrees in 2005 to 10.4% in 2007.

    The Minneapolis district “reported continued strength in professional business services.” Our analysis scores them 2, meaning they are currently attracting a more educated workforce. In contrast, San Francisco and Philadelphia reported that “demand for professional business services was down.” I score California at -30 and Philadelphia at -14, meaning that they are losing their educated workforce. It’s likely that knowledge workers are leaving because of the lack of opportunity and, in California especially, high housing costs.

    Although Illinois ranked 12th among the states for percentage of the workforce with graduate degrees, their increase from two years ago was about the national average, giving them a Knowledge Score of -21. The demand for skilled labor in manufacturing, healthcare, and some professional services remained strong in the Chicago Federal Reserve district, which will put upward pressure on wages. These higher wages will serve to attract more knowledge workers to the State. The Chicago district, which includes northern Illinois, southern Wisconsin, southern Minnesota, Michigan, and northern Indiana, reported shortages of skilled workers. Among the States included in the Chicago district, only Wisconsin and Indiana have positive Knowledge Scores.

    The relationship between education and income is well-known. The median-income in the U.S. was $33,452 for 2007, about what is earned by the worker with some college or an associate’s degree. Workers with only a high school diploma make about 20% less than that. A bachelor’s degree translates into a 40% increase in income; a worker with a graduate degree earns 83% more than the median-income. And this curve gets steeper every year: from 2006 to 2007 the slope increased 3%.

    So where are the knowledge workers going to and coming from? Nevada, Hawaii and DC lead the way in attracting them while New Mexico, Delaware and Louisiana are the biggest losers. Actually, only 10 States are losing knowledge workers as a percent of the workforce, including North Dakota, West Virginia, New Hampshire, Alaska, Arizona, California and Mississippi. In addition to educating the workforce, the U.S. also benefits from international migration. In the face of some of these shortages for skilled-labor, US immigration routinely increases the allowance for workers in industries like technology and others requiring advanced education. However, there has been little change in the overall percentage of the US workforce with advanced degrees: 10% in 2005, 9.9% in 2006 and 10.1% in 2007. Among the many other states increasing the share of their workforce with advanced degrees, Montana, North Carolina, Maine, Vermont and Maryland led the way with increase of more than 0.5%.

    You are probably surprised to find Nevada at the top of the Knowledge Scores. From September 2007 to September 2008, Nevada decreased the overall number of jobs by 7,600. In fact, the loss of 14,300 construction jobs was offset by a gain of 7,600 jobs in health services, transportation, utilities, education, and other services. The shift is toward jobs requiring skilled workers, those with higher levels of education, the Knowledge Workers.

    Down the road, it appears that the balance of knowledge workers are shifting to states that, for years, lagged behind perennial leaders like Massachussetts, California and New York. Now the balance is shifting and as the economy moves from speculation to productive jobs – such as those related to manufacturing, logistics, food and energy – we will also see an increase in new opportunities in these states for knowledge workers who are increasingly critical to these fields as well.

    Susanne Trimbath, Ph.D. is CEO and Chief Economist of STP Advisory Services. Dr. Trimbath’s credits include appearances on national television and radio programs. Dr. Trimbath is a Technical Advisor to the California Economic Strategy Panel and Associate Professor of Finance and Business Economics at USC’s Marshall School of Business. Dr. Trimbath was formerly Senior Research Economist at the Milken Institute and Senior Advisor on the Russian capital markets project for KPMG.

  • US States Change in Percent of workforce with Graduate Degrees, 2005-2007

  • Percent of population over age 25 with an Advanced Degree, 2007

  • Why Omaha?

    I lived in or near cities for 30 years because that’s where the jobs are. I left southwestern Pennsylvania in 1977 as the closing of coal mines and steel mills wrecked the local economy. It cost almost $1,000 per semester to attend the state college, many times that for the state university. There were no opportunities for a young person. I moved to California where residents received free tuition at state universities. I earned 2 college degrees in California and advanced my career from Prudential Insurance through the Federal Reserve Bank and to the Pacific Stock Exchange. When the stock exchange closed my subsidiary, I was hired by the Depository Trust Company and moved to New York. Working in the city gave me the opportunity to further advance my career and my education. In 2000 I graduated with a PhD in economics and was hired by a think-tank in Santa Monica. In 30 years, I moved cross-continent 3 times, worked in 5 countries on 4 continents, and earned 3 college degrees.

    In 2004, I started my own business in Santa Monica to provide research and consulting in economics and finance. I attended a lot of local networking meetings for the financial services industry, chambers of commerce, economic development groups, etc. After 3 years, my business was proving quite successful, but I didn’t have any clients in Southern California. My clients were in Houston, New York, Washington DC, Chicago, London, Cairo and Taiwan. It occurred to me that I didn’t need to live in or near a city anymore. I might be able to work from anywhere that had phones and internet access.

    In May 2007, I went to Honolulu for 5 days. The time difference allowed me to work in the morning, answering emails and writing research reports. In the afternoon, I took conference calls on the beach and set up business meetings in DC for the end of the month. Pretty cool. In August 2007, I considered a job in Santa Barbara and that was the jumping off point. I didn’t take the job but I realized I could leave Santa Monica. I spent five or six months looking around in Southern California before I realized I couldn’t afford to expand there. I couldn’t increase revenue without getting more office space and bringing on staff; and I couldn’t afford the office space and staff without increasing the revenue. Call it the SoCal Catch-22: it’s just too expensive to do business there.

    In December 2007 I started looking around for a city with a lower cost base and an educated workforce. I have relatives and siblings spread around the country, so it could be any one of a dozen cities that have universities, military bases and research hospitals. I was looking for a city that understands that small-businesses are the fundamental driver of economic development. I found it in Omaha. Because my clients are outside the area, my small business also provides a layer of insulation to the local economy.

    Omaha has several universities, including the University of Nebraska and Creighton University. Offutt Air Force Base, home of Strategic Command (and the bunker where they secured the President on 9/11) is in Sarpy County, just twenty minutes to the south. Omaha ranked #22 by CNNMoney for best places to live and launch a business. The “Nebraska Advantage” tax incentives reach down to businesses of my size. By investing $75,000 and creating 2 jobs, my business receives tax incentives that can be used to recover sales tax and/or to offset my personal income taxes.

    Instead of a 6 hour flight from Los Angeles, I can reach my New York clients with a non-stop flight under three hours. I’m still only twenty minutes from the airport. For what I was paying just for a residence in Santa Monica, I have a residence, a 3-office suite and 2 assistants in Omaha. That means I can grow my business. As my business grows, the local economy will come with it.

  • Financial Innovation: Wall Street’s False Utopia

    In the popular media much of the blame for the current crisis lies with sub-prime mortgages. Yet the main culprit was not the gullible homebuyer in Stockton or the seedy mortgage company. The real problem lay on Wall Street, and it’s addiction to ever more arcane financial innovation. As we try to understand the current crisis, and figure ways out of it, we need to understand precisely what, in the main, went wrong.

    I have studied financial innovation for years and worked with some of the best minds in that business. In 2003, I wrote in Beyond Junk Bonds that financial innovation is the “engine driving the financial system toward improved performance in the real economy”. Innovative debt securities, like collateralized mortgage obligations (CMOs), I had hoped, would add value to the economy by reallocating risk, increasing liquidity, and reducing agency costs. Like the broken promises of communism, it turned out to be a utopia that was not achieved.

    CMOs were designed to diversify risk by shifting risk to larger, better capitalized and diverse institutions. Traditionally, a bank in Riverside, California would write and hold the mortgages for homes in the area. Then, if some negative shock impacted jobs and income in the area, that bank would have to absorb all of the resulting defaults. This would put the local bank at an inordinate risk. With CMOs, the risk would be spread out across banks and investors in a broader geographic area. Since CMOs could be held internationally, even a nationwide economic downturn might have little impact on any single mortgage holder.

    Unfortunately, the dealmakers sold the riskiest pieces to a few hedge funds, thereby consolidating the risk rather than allocating it broadly. The result was the spectacular crash of Bear Stearns and the incendiary damage done to a slew of US and international financial institutions.

    CMOs were supposed to produce more money available for lending to homeowners than would otherwise have been the case. Instead it produced more paper, more heavily leveraged and less secure. Securitized mortgages were misused to the extent that $45 trillion in bonds were issued on $5 trillion in assets; it’s as if someone bought insurance for 9 times the value of the house. By 2007, the market was over-sold: more bonds had been sold than could be delivered, possibly even more than had been issued. On average, nearly 20% of CMO trades have failed to settle since 2001, driving down the price of the bonds.

    CMOs should have been used to protect against conflicts of interest between managers, stockholders and bond holders (agency costs). Instead, the same companies that issued the CMO were buying large positions in the securities. Most CMOs are typically initiated by banks seeking to remove credit risk from their balance sheets while keeping the assets themselves. Normally, these securities are issued from a specially created company so that the payments from the riskiest borrowers, i.e. the sub-prime mortgages, can be separated from the more credit-worthy payees. A trustee and a portfolio manager receive fees from the newly created company.

    While CMOs reduced some of the risk to the local banks, it also led some of those banks to lend imprudently. With the cash flowing easily back to the banks after the CMOs were sold, some lenders became increasingly risk-seeking – the opposite of the intended purpose of CMOs. Companies like Bear Stearns, who acted as trustee and portfolio manager for the CMOs, also purchased the CMO securities (usually through a subsidiary hedge fund).

    Critically missing from the market for CMOs was the lack of a standard for the issuance. In more than one case, when a CMO investor attempted to foreclose on a property for mortgage delinquency, courts found insufficient documentation to support the CMO’s lien on the property. Without legally binding “receipts” of ownership, CMOs
    have had insufficient real backing — producing results we are still trying to cope with.

    Sure, sub-prime mortgage defaults were the straw that broke the camel’s back. But Bear Stearns was in financial difficulty three to six months before the sub-prime mortgage default rate spiked. The real fundamental problem lay in the multiple sales of mortgages through CMOs – the result of too much faith in financial innovation. Experts believe that, for every $1 of mortgage that defaulted, the investment banks fell behind as much as $15 in payments on the CMOs. These, not the actual mortgages of homeowners, represent the bulk of the securities that Treasury Secretary Paulson wants $700 billion to buy.

    Susanne Trimbath, Ph.D. is CEO and Chief Economist of STP Advisory Services. Dr. Trimbath’s credits include appearances on national television and radio programs. Dr. Trimbath is a Technical Advisor to the California Economic Strategy Panel and Associate Professor of Finance and Business Economics at USC’s Marshall School of Business. Dr. Trimbath was formerly Senior Research Economist at the Milken Institute and Senior Advisor on the Russian capital markets project for KPMG.

  • Susanne Trimbath