BCT Editorial – 2/28/07

This page was last updated on March 4, 2007.

A real bargain; Editorial; Beaver County Times; February 28, 2007.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“Forget the Sunbelt and the local whiners. Pittsburgh is a great place to retire.

“MarketWatch reports that according to geographer Warren Bland, Pittsburgh is No. 7 when it comes to what he calls ‘value cities’ for retirees in 2007.

“Bland, author of ‘Retire in Style: 60 Outstanding Places Across the USA and Canada,’ used 12 criteria to come up with this final score: landscape, climate, quality of life, cost of living, transportation, retail services, health care, community services, cultural activities, recreational activities, work/volunteer activities and crime.

“Other top 10 cities were Hot Springs, Ark., No. 1; Winston-Salem, N.C., No. 2; Fayetteville, Ark., No. 3; Bowling Green, Ky., No. 4; Lawrence, Kan., No. 5; Columbia, Mo., No. 6; Gainesville, Fla., No. 8; San Antonio, Texas, No. 9; and Colorado Springs, Col., No. 10.

“If you think about it, the high ranking makes sense. When it comes to culture, sports, health care and education Pittsburgh packs a lot in a small package. The cost of living and overall quality of life are second to none.

“Significantly, Pittsburgh is the only traditional Rust Belt city in Bland’s top 10.

“It certainly caught the notice of MarketWatch’s Web site. Aside from Hot Springs, it was the only city to draw special attention in the article.

“‘Making the No. 7 spot on Bland’s list of top 10 value cities is Pittsburgh, a city with ‘a lingering reputation as a dirty, steel-mill town, a blue-collar town where middle- and upper-middle class people wouldn’t want to be.’

“‘Yet the reality, Bland said, is that the quality of life that can be found in Pittsburgh has improved tremendously over the years as it has switched to more of a service-based economy. Air quality is better, he said, and replacing some of the steel mills have been entertainment complexes, restaurants and stores. The town also gets high marks for its health care, culture and recreation.’

“Pittsburgh doesn’t just hold its own going up against the likes of Winston-Salem, Fayetteville and Bowling Green. The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reported that when Bland looked at cities with regional populations that exceed 1 million, Pittsburgh was No. 2. The only traditional Northeastern/Midwestern city to make the list was Chicago at No. 9.

“Bland’s ranking just adds to the list of other studies that show living in the Pittsburgh area is a real bargain.

“You’d never know that if you listened to the natives, at least the most vocal of them. As much as anything else, their negativity is holding our region back. Like Oscar Wilde’s cynic, they know the price of everything and the value of nothing.”

[RWC] All the aforementioned is nice, but it means nothing. The “ratings” that matter are those made by individuals and businesses for themselves. Remember, Pittsburgh has been getting nice ratings for over 20 years. Despite the ratings, however, more than most areas in the country, residents are voting with their feet and based on overall economics.

For example, since 1970, Beaver County’s population has dropped by over 31,000 (14.9%), by about 8,700 (4.7%) since 1990, and by about 4,000 (2.2%) since 2000.

Ratings are nice revenue generators for those publishing the ratings, but they don’t put “butts in seats.”

I have one last point. We routinely read editorials telling us the U.S. in on the verge of becoming a Third World nation. If the Times were to stick to its alleged principles, shouldn’t it recommend people relocate to some socialist paradise, like Cuba or Venezuela?