MA 1, Boston 4, in competitiveness

[Cotuit]

Massachusetts ranks No. 1 in competitiveness study; Boston No. 4 city

By Associated Press, 11/17/2004

BOSTON (AP) A study that measures the competitiveness of states and cities based on ability to generate income and promote growth ranks Massachusetts No. 1 in the nation and puts Boston fourth among metro regions.

The fourth annual report released Wednesday by Boston-based Suffolk University's Beacon Hill Institute moves the Bay State to the top ranking from the runner-up slot it held the past two years to Delaware.

The institute attributed Massachusetts' higher ranking and Delaware's drop to No. 18 in this year's rankings in part to improvements in the quality of data available and to a better index used to measure competitiveness in eight categories.

''But it mainly reflects the commonwealth's very real competitive advantages in technology, business incubation and human resources,'' the institute said in a news release. ''For now, these offset weaknesses in infrastructure and in policies that make it expensive to hire low-skilled labor.''

The study's authors, Jonathan Haughton and Cagdas Sirin, define competitiveness as ''the policies and conditions that ensure and sustain a higher level of per capita income and its continued growth.''

Massachusetts won No. 1 rankings in two of the eight categories: technology and business incubation. The state was fourth in human resources, seventh in ''openness,'' 11th in security, 37th in environmental policy, 38th in infrastructure and 39th in government and fiscal policy.

The top 10 states also included Utah, Washington, Minnesota, Colorado, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Vermont, Virginia and Kansas.

The lowest-ranking state was Mississippi, followed by Louisiana (49), West Virginia (48), Alabama (47), Hawaii (46) and Arkansas (45).

Among the 50 cities compared, Seattle was first, followed in the top five by Raleigh, N.C., Portland, Ore., Boston and Denver.

Boston headed the list on technology, and is in the top five for security, human resources and business incubation. Boston ranked poorly on infrastructure (45th) and government and fiscal policy (37th).

''The poor showing on infrastructure reflects long commuting times, high electricity prices and inflated housing costs items that demand attention if the Boston area is to remain competitive,'' the institute said.

The report's authors also examined state rankings based on voting during this month's U.S. presidential election. So-called red states that voted for President Bush and blue states supporting Democratic challenger Sen. John Kerry ''are equally likely to be competitive, or uncompetitive,'' the institute said.

From Boston.com

[Benhamin]

Good news, even more surprising considering that Massachusetts' economy is just starting to turn around due to the anti urban Northeast policies of the Bush administration. It'll be a while before Boston sees any substantial growth because of it.

[BOSDevelopment]

Benhamin, are you kidding me? Maybe you're being sarcastic... You really think President Bush's policies have in any way been "anti northeast"? How so? Let's get specific here.

What the hell kind of name is Benhamin anyway

[PghUSA]

Nice article Cotuit, never heard of this study but I'd be interested where Pennsylvania ranks.

[Cotuit]

Benhamin, are you kidding me? Maybe you're being sarcastic... You really think President Bush's policies have in any way been "anti northeast"? How so? Let's get specific here.

What the hell kind of name is Benhamin anyway

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Welcome to the forum BOSDevelopment. Attacking another member about his screen name isn't a terrific opening post however.

[BOSDevelopment]

Nice article Cotuit, never heard of this study but I'd be interested where Pennsylvania ranks.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Whatever. His post was ignorant. The whole point was to stir up some controversy.

[knuckle50]

Whatever. His post was ignorant. The whole point was to stir up some controversy.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If you're a fan of George Bush, please don't preach to us about ignorance. Look in the mirror for that.

[Cotuit]

Whatever. His post was ignorant. The whole point was to stir up some controversy.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No the point is to have discussions like adults, you're not off to a good start.

If you're a fan of George Bush, please don't preach to us about ignorance. Look in the mirror for that.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No need to escalate things.

Democrats and Republicans are usually able to get along in Massachusetts, let's not make us all look bad to everyone else, we can all be civil.

[Benhamin]

BOSDevelopment, I will not respond to your post, or provide any supporting evidence. I do this because people who say things like you said usually don't care anyways, you're just offended. Sorry.

For the record, I'm not ignorant.