And, now ... a word from our sponsor. Our sponsors

Fortunate to be in Michigan (0.00 / 0)

This past weekend, home alone due to the weather and making Christmas cookies, I spent a lot of time on the phone talking with my partner in Chicago and my four best friends in Portland, Chicago, Seattle and New Orleans.  All are Michigan natives.  Like most of my buddies from MSU, they are all gone now.  And all said how much they were looking forward to coming back to Michigan for the holidays and wished they could come back here for good.  Michigan has lost my generation.

The national exposure of the Pure Michigan campaign is more than just tourism advertising.  It has become the candle in the wind of our state's deep recession bringing visitors to our state as well as reminding now absent friends and family of the beauty of the places where they grew up.

Along with last week's huge victory with the smoking ban, the House can give Michigan a great second gift this year by approving continued funding for Pure Michigan.  It's an investment that will give back to our state budget many times over in coming year helping to fund things like education, public health, local government revenue sharing and public safety.  

Tourism is Michigan's often forgotten second largest industry. And Pure Michigan is far more than just America's best current travel marketing campaign.

---

by: Brady @ Tue Dec 15, 2009 at 00:13:57 AM UTC

Curious... (0.00 / 0)

And all said how much they were looking forward to coming back to Michigan for the holidays and wished they could come back here for good.

(Emphasis added.) Why?

Many of my classmates couldn't wait to get out of here. Sometimes it seems like more people from my high school live in Chicago than live in all of Michigan.

Combine n economic situation that provides little opportunity for folks in many fields, state laws on LBGT protection that put us on par with Indiana, and elected officials that prioritize prisons over an educated workforce, and, well, it is more than a little mistifying to me why someone who had the opportunity to leave and already went through the trouble of moving would want to come back?

(And as much as it may sound like a rhetorical question, it really isn't. As someone who's lived his entire life in this state, I realize I probably don't have an objective perspective on this, and I'm probably overlooking some key factor.)

---

by: boehmianrhapsody @ Tue Dec 15, 2009 at 02:18:30 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Personal decisions (0.00 / 0)

With my friends who have left the state their reasons have been jobs, relationships and weather in that order.  My partner, for example, works in Chicago during the week and comes home on weekends.  He's getting paid twice as much there as he was in Michigan.  Other friends have left because a spouse or girlfriend got a job out of state.  I have one friend that can't stand winter and moved south as soon as she graduated from MSU.  I suspect these are the most common reasons people leave Michigan.  I don't know of anyone who has left for the political reasons you've listed.  Even for LBGT people, legal marriage and better civil rights laws in other states usually aren't enough of an incentive on their own to cause someone to move.  LBGT benefits within a company are a different story.

In terms of wanting to come home, missing family and friends left back in Michigan would probably be the biggest reason.  Missing the places one grew up and all that goes with it would also be a big one.  Friendlier people, less stress from things like traffic, cleaner air, being able to see the stars at night, a four seasons climate with some of the best outdoor recreation in the world are also advantages Michigan has to offer over living in a place like Chicago.

I would agree that the majority of people from my high school class that went to college or into the military no longer live in Michigan.  And like you, more of my college friends live in Chicago than in Michigan.

It's part of the problem with the Michigan Promise Scholarship.  It's a very popular program because it's a government handout that isn't need-based.  But it doesn't make much economic sense for Michigan taxpayers to fund a program whose benefits largely go out of state.  It would make more sense to keep it as a grant for graduates that remain in Michigan and pay Michigan income tax after graduating and to turn it into a low-interest loan for those who leave.  Michigan doesn't have a shortage of residents with bachelor's degrees.  It has a shortage of jobs for them.  That's why many of them are forced to leave.

---

by: Brady @ Tue Dec 15, 2009 at 13:40:46 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Michigan Promise/Pure Michigan (0.00 / 0)

I wish you would stop calling this a government hand out and identify it for what it really is ... state investment in higher education on the cheap.  If we devoted as many resources towards higher education as we do to locking people up and keeping them there, we wouldn't need this scholarship program.

On the other hand, don't let that be interpreted in any way as opposition towards funding Pure Michigan.  I'm frankly in the camp that if people wish to leave Michigan, then let them go.  I would stack up my personal home turf on the Manistee River Trail with just about anyplace in terms of sublime natural wonder.

Among the Trees

---

by: Eric B. @ Tue Dec 15, 2009 at 14:09:46 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Investment in Michigan (0.00 / 0)

Eric, I would agree with you that the Michigan Promise is an investment in Michigan's future if the students being educated under the Michigan Promise remain in Michigan.  The problem is that many don't remain and provide no return on investment to state taxpayers.

---

by: Brady @ Tue Dec 15, 2009 at 15:53:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

You're missing my point... (0.00 / 0)

My point isn't that the Michigan Promise scholarship isn't an investment in Michigan, but that if the state invested in higher education properly, we wouldn't need it.  Over the last 30 years, the amount of every school's budget that came from direct appropriations from the state has shrunk dramatically.  If you want to find a culprit for the annual painful tuition hikes, that is it.  It's nothing more than the state Legislature passing the buck for making those decisions to someone else because the state Legislature appears institutionally enamored of saying that it is for reduced spending while passing the heavy lifting of paying for services to someone else.

Among the Trees

---

by: Eric B. @ Tue Dec 15, 2009 at 17:38:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Per capita income (0.00 / 0)

Keep in mind that Michigan's per capita income is 11% lower than the national average and is at the mid-point among states in total tax burden.  It also has the highest unemployment rate in the nation.  I don't agree with the tea party people who argue that Michigan's tax rate is holding it back.  But I also don't agree with simply raising taxes on people who are already struggling to make ends meet.  The Michigan Promise Scholarship would make far more sense if a tax increase to fund it provided a more solid return on investment by becoming a low-interest loan if the graduate doesn't remain in the state.

---

by: Brady @ Tue Dec 15, 2009 at 19:40:25 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Who said anything about raising taxes? (0.00 / 0)

You could very easily reprioritize the way the state spends money and do the same thing.  Or, you could institute small, targeted tax hikes that no sane human being would actually notice and that would bring up to date various taxes.  Or, you could close targeted special interest tax loopholes.

Among the Trees

---

by: Eric B. @ Tue Dec 15, 2009 at 20:52:22 PM UTC

[ Parent ]