AEIdeas

The public policy blog of the American Enterprise Institute

Subscribe to the blog

Discussion: (12 comments)

  1. morganovich

    while north dakota has undoubtedly been enjoying a boom, i think we may need to be a bit careful with prescribing the “north dakota model”.

    clearly, they have done a number of things right, but a model that starts with “find a massive amount of a valuable resource in the ground” and then leads to “enjoy the trickle down effects of the new wealth” is not going to be useful for everyone.

    try as they might, this will not work in vermont. this model does not seem applicable nationwide any more that telling haiti to act like kuwait would be.

    1. MacDaddyWatch

      TUNA FISHING WON’T WORK IN KANSAS EITHER.

    2. Isn’t that kind of like saying: “Since i’m not Lebron James, there’s no point in playing basketball”?

      Just because Vermont doesn’t have the same attributes as North Dakota does not mean having a more business friendly state wouldn’t help other sectors.

      1. Except that it isn’t, Chris.

        If you’re very average on Basketball it’s no point in trying. It’s much better to maximize what you ARE good at, this is the point of Ricarco’s theory of the comparative advantage.

        And by the way, if you discount North Dakota and Texas, the two-fastest growing states(in large part because of an oil boom, not exactly easy to copy for other states) the next three fastest-growing states were Oregon, Washington and California. All solid deep-blue states.

        None of them have the crutch of a gift from nature in terms of massive oil for exploitation.

        And California is ranked dead last for ease of doing business, remember?

        Oregon and Washington, not exactly the parable of business-friendly states either yet if you discount the “American OPEC states” as I’d like to call them, who rely on oil, the picture you get is a lot different than the propaganda you usually hear.

        1. marque2

          California does have massive oil wealth as well and cracking is helping CA increase production even with all the Eco nuts trying to stop drilling

      2. morganovich

        chris-

        of course being more business friendly helps. but that’s a separate argument.

        it’s not that ND is booming just because it became more business friendly. it’s booming because technology has allowed the exploitation of a natural resource that most states do not have.

        to use your metaphor, it’s like saying “hey, go play in the nba and get rich” to a guy that is 5′ 5″ and not athletic.

        the results will not look like the ones kobe got.

    3. Sprewell

      I was going to make the same point as morganovich. It’s great that ND is a gusher, but let’s not conflate this with an economically sustainable model for other states. The big growth is going to come from information and services, or coming up with substitutes for these old-fashioned technologies eventually, not from digging oil out of the ground. It’s great that we have ND to tide us over in the meantime, because job growth in information and services is certainly nowhere where it needs to be yet, but this fracking boom is a one-off, nothing more.

      Clara, Oregon, Washington, and California don’t “have the crutch of a gift from nature?” What about being situated on the coast with idyllic terrain, so that a bunch of wannabe hipsters and “innovators” flock there for the nice weather while dumping a bunch of VC money down the drain? All those states are about to fall off a cliff, as the tech market widens and globalizes, or TV and movies in Hollywood get destroyed by the internet, not to mention their horrible business-unfriendly policies. There’s already a big sucking sound as people leave for more business-friendly adjacent states, that’s about to be greatly amplified. :)

      1. morganovich

        sprewell-

        i was thinking the same thing on we pacific coast.

        it’s an accident of geography and primarily testament to the fact the if the land is beautiful and fertile enough and the weather is good, educated young people will flock there in spite of bad government and high taxes.

        clara-

        i think a simple thought experiment here may prove enlightening.

        let us imagine that we took the governmental polices of north dakota and applied them to califiornia and vice versa.

        what would happen?

        california would boom and ND would crumble back into poor, empty badlands.

  2. juandos

    this model does not seem applicable nationwide“…

    True morg but look at where it might work but isn’t being allowed to…

    NIMBY hypocrites

    More NIMBY hypocrites

    1. morganovich

      don’t forget california whose rich oil deposits are largely off limits and whose oil production has dropped by about 50% since 1985.

      than then there’s anwr.

      so yes, clearly, some of these states could learn somehting from north dakota.

      1. than then there’s anwr.

        so yes, clearly, some of these states could learn somehting from north dakota.

        In all fairness, I think the “N” in ANWR is the problem, not the Alaskan people or elected officials who want very much to drill there.

  3. I’m amused by “The Dakota Model”.

    Perhaps 10-20 years ago there was a move afoot in North Dakota to change the name of the state to just plain Dakota … because the North part was identified with cold winters.

Comments are closed.

Sort By:

Refine Content:

Scholar

Additional Keywords:

Refine Results

or to save searches.

Open
Refine Content