Devon Tower in OKC Unveiled

[TheArtist]

quote:Originally posted by swake

quote:Originally posted by Hometown

Swake, I think you've been drinking the same koolaid as everyone else in local government.

You say, "What Tulsa needs to do is to continue to add new hotel space and new residential units and we need to continue to convert our older classic deco office buildings into other uses."

But you are getting the cart before the horse.

Tulsa needs new business.  Good paying business.  Everything else flows from that.

Kool-aid?  Maybe I am misreading the tea leaves or the astrological impact of a rising moon but I think you are the one drinking the kool-aid. You have message board malaise. Tulsa's poor! There are no jobs! Taxes are too high!

That's all crap.

Let's not sell us short on what Tulsa does do well. We have among the lowest unemployment rates in the nation. We have no housing crisis. Tulsa is a well educated city and has a per-capita income average that is in the top quintile of all metropolitan areas, higher than Dallas or Houston in fact. And that's while we are near the bottom in cost of living. "Good paying jobs" is a nice political campaign sound bite but it's not something that we are lacking. We need better job growth but in my experience in the companies I have worked for the problem with Tulsa isn't in getting jobs to move here, it's with getting people to move here to fill those jobs. I know of a number of very high paying jobs that have left Tulsa because no one would fill the job here.

What we need more than anything is better population growth. Job growth can and will follow more overall growth. To get that population growth we need improved community amenities and improved urban living options to encourage more people to live here. We have great suburban areas and great midtown areas and some outstanding local school districts and private schools. We are what we always wanted to be which is a great city to raise a family. But that's not enough anymore, we need more young people that haven't yet started a family to move here and that means we need to address an urban living option that we are currently badly lacking in.

+1!

You summed up the situation quite well.



One thing about this OKC passing Tulsa stuff.  OKC imo is finally living up to what it should be. Its a bigger city, the seat of government with all those advantages, a large public college nearby etc. It SHOULD have always been ahead of us and with bigger buildings, a bigger downtown, etc.  Then on the flipside, Tulsa has been living a virtual dream world compared to other cities its size, city and metro, and age. Combine OKC not being where it should be, Tulsa having more than it would otherwise have... this has given the illusion that both cities were somewhat comparable. Todays reality is that they are not and this will likely continue to become more apparent. Tulsa has lived a blessed existance, OKC has, until recently, seemingly squandered what it has had.

Take away the 3 or 4 tallest buildings in our downtown... look at the result and then ask me if we should stack up to OKC? We would look like Wichita or Little Rock. Those buildings are an illusion. Does 3 or 4 buildings make the city? I have often wondered if I would have even lived here if those buildings werent there. We would look very small city if they werent there. And indeed we are a small city imo, not a medium sized one, especially if you take metro into consideration. We are an island in this area.

You can either see Tulsa as a great and lucky small city, or a lousy medium one lol. OKC has been a lousy medium one lol, but is catching up to where it should be.

Here is the skyline of a city about Tulsas size, but without the blessings of oil. If you look at Tulsas skyline and then expect it to be more than it really is, your going to be let down. If it looked like Tucson, which actually has a larger population I believe, would we be expecting the same things of Tulsa?

Tucson



I think whats disconcerting to many Tulsans is the combined effect of seeing OKC become what it should be, while at the same time Tulsa without oil, is having to face up to what it really is.

BUT,,, if we come to realize that we can be a great small city, and OKC a great medium sized city. Each evolving into unique and wonderful places to live. This can be one really neat state.

[swake]

quote:Originally posted by Hometown

Sweetheart, sometimes very well intended people, who mean no harm, kind of like you, can't see the forest for the trees.  

We all love Tulsa or we wouldn't be hanging out at TulsaNow but Tulsa has many needs, chief among them is a better economy.

I want the big fat skyscraper paid for by oil money and filled up with energy companies and their competitive wages.

Now, if you are going to rant about what I've said try to accurately represent what I have said.  Please.

Oh sweetie,
I'd hate to argue with facts when you have astrology, but let me take a stab at it:


Tulsa's current unemployment rate is 4.0%, which is well under the national rate of 5.7%


http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/article.aspx?articleID=20080816_46_E1_hMetro125451


Tulsa per capita income is much better than the national average and is growing faster than the nation. We gained 5.3% in income per capita just last year outpacing the national and state gains in income:

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2008/08/07/ap5302109.html

Tulsa in fact ranked 55th in average per capital income out of 363 metro areas, ahead of almost every metro area in our region of the nation:

http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/article.aspx?articleID=20080808_46_E1_hMONET203826

And our cost of living is among the lowest in the nation:

http://swz.salary.com/CostOfLivingWizard/layouthtmls/coll_metrodetail_187.html

Tulsa's job growth is not great, but is still better than the national rate and job growth can't happen without people to fill the jobs

http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/article.aspx?articleID=20080807_46_E1_hTulsa868873

But, despite all of that we are one of the slower growing metro areas:

http://www.census.gov/popest/metro/index.html



Our problem is not the local economy.

[Hometown]

Don't get fresh with me.  That's Mr. Hometown to you.

The only local industry that pays competive wages is the oil business.  I can drive to Dallas and double my income.  Tulsa is badly worn around the edges.  Our downtown almost died.  Tulsa has many virtues but not the ones you are touting here.  Pick your facts.  Pick your experts.  

Anyway, it's a little United Nations around here.  Takes all kinds.  Just one big happy family.  Right cuz?

And I suspect the earlier post saying any new tower would be built in South Tulsa is probably on target.

Paying customers are welcome wherever they build as long as it is the city limits.

[USRufnex]

Define "competitive wages."
Then define "liberal elitist."

[YoungTulsan]

I had already theorized earlier in this thread that Tulsa has lots of SMALL BUSINESS jobs.  Our economy looks good because there are plenty of that type of job.  These small businesses don't have a need for a grand big money headquarters, and they also don't attract people from all over the country to work for.  I agree with HT that we need some big player in the mix to really drive things.  People aren't going to relocate to Tulsa to work at Fred's Oil Pipe Warehouse in West Tulsa.  They would relocate to Tulsa to work for a company like Devon, especially with an iconic headquarters like they are planning.  And just the taxes on that damn thing are going to allow OKC to do even more improvements to the local infrastructure/amenities.

[Conan71]

Distinction of the tallest building in Oklahoma, but OKC will still suck.  I mean what is the view from 900 feet in OKC? [8D]

[OUGrad05]

quote:Originally posted by Hometown

Don't get fresh with me.  That's Mr. Hometown to you.

The only local industry that pays competive wages is the oil business.  I can drive to Dallas and double my income.  Tulsa is badly worn around the edges.  Our downtown almost died.  Tulsa has many virtues but not the ones you are touting here.  Pick your facts.  Pick your experts.  

Anyway, it's a little United Nations around here.  Takes all kinds.  Just one big happy family.  Right cuz?

And I suspect the earlier post saying any new tower would be built in South Tulsa is probably on target.

Paying customers are welcome wherever they build as long as it is the city limits.

Because YOU could double your pay in Dallas doesn't mean everyone else could or that even 20% of us could.  Tulsa and OKC both have decent wages for MOST jobs out there.  When I graduated in 2005 I compared job offers from multiple companies in multiple industries and many companies gave me a choice of where I wanted to work.  Salaries were higher in Dallas but only by about 10%.  In some cases they were no different.

[OUGrad05]

On another note, I do not know when Tulsa started losing its energy business.  What I do know is last week I was trying to scrounge up some info on a few leases.  These leases were very old, dating back to the 1940s and as I went through the paperwork I was stunned at just how many oil companies were headquartered in Tulsa.  The number of letters/paperwork originating in Tulsa fell off sharply in the late 70s through the late 80s until only two companies (in the paperwork I was going through) were in Tulsa.  In the 1960s for example I counted a total of 7 companies with correspondance originating in Tulsa.  

As time went by the correspondance moved to Houston and Dallas.  

[Oil Capital]

quote:Originally posted by swake


Tulsa is a well educated city and has a per-capita income average that is in the top quintile of all metropolitan areas, higher than Dallas or Houston in fact.

... or maybe not.

   
2006 per capita incomes, according to US Census Bureau, for metropolitan areas:

Tulsa:  $22,663
Houston: 24,917
DFW:     26,174

[USRufnex]

Well, if you don't have anything good to say about Tulsa, sit next to Oil Capital....

http://www.bea.gov/regional/reis/mrius.cfm

Per Capita Personal Income by MSA for 2007
1  14860  Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk, CT (MSA)   80,192  
2  34940  Naples-Marco Island, FL (MSA)   61,788  
3  41860  San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA (MSA)   61,337  
4  41940  San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA (MSA)   58,716  
5  42680  Sebastian-Vero Beach, FL (MSA)   58,144  
6  47900  Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV (MSA)   54,211  
7  14460  Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH (MSA)   53,763  
8  35620  New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-PA   53,423  
9  14500  Boulder, CO (MSA)   52,438  
10  45940  Trenton-Ewing, NJ (MSA)   52,388  
11  33260  Midland, TX (MSA)   52,294
12  34900  Napa, CA (MSA)   50,817  
13  42660  Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA (MSA)   48,499  
14  14600  Bradenton-Sarasota-Venice, FL (MSA)   48,498  
15  12700  Barnstable Town, MA (MSA)   48,468  
16  42100  Santa Cruz-Watsonville, CA (MSA)   47,923  
17  25540  Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford, CT (MSA)   47,641  
18  16220  Casper, WY (MSA)   47,354  
19  39900  Reno-Sparks, NV (MSA)   46,734  
20  33460  Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI (MSA)   46,458  
21  19740  Denver-Aurora, CO (MSA)   46,439  
22  26420  Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, TX (MSA)   46,235  
23  35380  New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, LA (MSA)   46,188  
24  42060  Santa Barbara-Santa Maria-Goleta, CA (MSA)   46,120  
25  42220  Santa Rosa-Petaluma, CA (MSA)   45,766  
26  37980  Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD (MSA)   45,460  
27  42140  Santa Fe, NM (MSA)   45,230  
28  12580  Baltimore-Towson, MD (MSA)   45,208  
29  37100  Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura, CA (MSA)   44,927  
30  41740  San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA (MSA)   44,832  
31  16180  Carson City, NV (MSA)   44,081  
32  11260  Anchorage, AK (MSA)   43,911  
33  35300  New Haven-Milford, CT (MSA)   43,820  
34  16980  Chicago-Naperville-Joliet, IL-IN-WI (MSA)   43,714  
35  31700  Manchester-Nashua, NH (MSA)   43,518  
36  36140  Ocean City, NJ (MSA)   43,232  
37  33100  Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL (MSA)   43,001  
38  35980  Norwich-New London, CT (MSA)   42,586  
39  36540  Omaha-Council Bluffs, NE-IA (MSA)   41,976  
40  26180  Honolulu, HI (MSA)   41,964  
41  14740  Bremerton-Silverdale, WA (MSA)   41,883  
42  31100  Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA (MSA)   41,875  
43  19100  Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX (MSA)   41,813  
44  31540  Madison, WI (MSA)   41,679  
45  33340  Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, WI (MSA)   41,358  
46  16940  Cheyenne, WY (MSA)   41,236  
47  11460  Ann Arbor, MI (MSA)   41,233  
48  19780  Des Moines-West Des Moines, IA (MSA)   41,085  
49  49340  Worcester, MA (MSA)   41,077  
50  38300  Pittsburgh, PA (MSA)   40,949  
51  15980  Cape Coral-Fort Myers, FL (MSA)   40,935  
52  38340  Pittsfield, MA (MSA)   40,898  
53  41500  Salinas, CA (MSA)   40,623  
54  16820  Charlottesville, VA (MSA)   40,375  
55  46140  Tulsa, OK (MSA)   40,227  
56  40340  Rochester, MN (MSA)   40,118  
57  10580  Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY (MSA)   40,047  
58  38940  Port St. Lucie, FL (MSA)   39,850  
59  29820  Las Vegas-Paradise, NV (MSA)   39,828  
60  40060  Richmond, VA (MSA)   39,773  
61  41180  St. Louis, MO-IL (MSA)   39,602  
62  19820  Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI (MSA)   39,419  
63  28140  Kansas City, MO-KS (MSA)   39,402  
64  23020  Fort Walton Beach-Crestview-Destin, FL (MSA)   39,309  
65  17460  Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, OH (MSA)   39,258  
66  13820  Birmingham-Hoover, AL (MSA)   39,247  
67  48620  Wichita, KS (MSA)   39,210  
68  34980  Nashville-Davidson-Murfreesboro-Franklin, TN (MSA)   39,040  
69  16740  Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC (MSA)   39,004  
70  26900  Indianapolis-Carmel, IN (MSA)   38,980  
71  15540  Burlington-South Burlington, VT (MSA)   38,951  
72  27260  Jacksonville, FL (MSA)   38,927  
73  20500  Durham, NC (MSA)   38,923  
74  38860  Portland-South Portland-Biddeford, ME (MSA)   38,889  
75  39300  Providence-New Bedford-Fall River, RI-MA (MSA)   38,868  
76  39580  Raleigh-Cary, NC (MSA)   38,648  
77  40900  Sacramento-Arden-Arcade-Roseville, CA (MSA)   38,570  
78  38900  Portland-Vancouver-Beaverton, OR-WA (MSA)   38,511  
79  17140  Cincinnati-Middletown, OH-KY-IN (MSA)   38,290  
80  39100  Poughkeepsie-Newburgh-Middletown, NY (MSA)   38,121  
81  40380  Rochester, NY (MSA)   38,068  
82  25420  Harrisburg-Carlisle, PA (MSA)   38,064  
83  42020  San Luis Obispo-Paso Robles, CA (MSA)   37,884  
84  36500  Olympia, WA (MSA)   37,809  
85  37900  Peoria, IL (MSA)   37,801  
86  30780  Little Rock-North Little Rock-Conway, AR (MSA)   37,785  
87  31140  Louisville-Jefferson County, KY-IN (MSA)   37,675  
88  18140  Columbus, OH (MSA)   37,664  
89  41620  Salt Lake City, UT (MSA)   37,620  
90  12420  Austin-Round Rock, TX (MSA)   37,517  
91  43620  Sioux Falls, SD (MSA)   37,453  
92  36420  Oklahoma City, OK (MSA)   37,385  
93  18700  Corvallis, OR (MSA)   37,341  
94  12060  Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA (MSA)   37,294  
95  13740  Billings, MT (MSA)   37,247  
95  30460  Lexington-Fayette, KY (MSA)   37,247  
97  43100  Sheboygan, WI (MSA)   37,209  
98  32820  Memphis, TN-MS-AR (MSA)   37,183  
99  46700  Vallejo-Fairfield, CA (MSA)   37,180  
100  10900  Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA-NJ (MSA)   37,066

[Oil Capital]

quote:Originally posted by USRufnex

Well, if you don't have anything good to say about Tulsa, sit next to Oil Capital....

LOL  Or, I guess one could sit next to USRufnex...

Thanks for confirming the veracity of my post, and that the relative rankings have continued into 2007 (except that Houston has moved ahead of DFW), and for decisively proving the incorrectness of Swake's original statement.

[sgrizzle]

quote:Originally posted by Oil Capital

quote:Originally posted by USRufnex

Well, if you don't have anything good to say about Tulsa, sit next to Oil Capital....

LOL  Or, I guess one could sit next to USRufnex...

Thanks for confirming the veracity of my post, and that the relative rankings have continued into 2007 (except that Houston has moved ahead of DFW), and for decisively proving the incorrectness of Swake's original statement.

So you're saying per capita income doubled in a year?

[swake]

quote:Originally posted by Oil Capital

quote:Originally posted by USRufnex

Well, if you don't have anything good to say about Tulsa, sit next to Oil Capital....

LOL  Or, I guess one could sit next to USRufnex...

Thanks for confirming the veracity of my post, and that the relative rankings have continued into 2007 (except that Houston has moved ahead of DFW), and for decisively proving the incorrectness of Swake's original statement.

I should have said "when adjusted for the cost of living"

[swake]

quote:Originally posted by Oil Capital

quote:Originally posted by swake


Tulsa is a well educated city and has a per-capita income average that is in the top quintile of all metropolitan areas, higher than Dallas or Houston in fact.

... or maybe not.

   
2006 per capita incomes, according to US Census Bureau, for metropolitan areas:

Tulsa:  $22,663
Houston: 24,917
DFW:     26,174

Census estimate numbers?  You believe estimates whose starting point is the average of what people filled in on a census long form eight years ago?

The same census whose estimate on Tulsa's growth from 1990 to 2000 turned out to be off by something like 40%? The same census that is currently trying to say that Oklahoma's Hispanic population INCREASED this year with 1804 coming into effect? The current census estimate on our growth this decade says Tulsa metro has grown by almost the same number as the number new residences that have been built so far this decade? I'm betting that the people "estimate" is off by close to half again at the next census. If they are consistently that far off on people how good is their income estimate?

The numbers I'm referenced are from the US Department of Commerce.

[OUGrad05]

quote:Originally posted by swake

quote:Originally posted by Oil Capital

quote:Originally posted by swake


Tulsa is a well educated city and has a per-capita income average that is in the top quintile of all metropolitan areas, higher than Dallas or Houston in fact.

... or maybe not.

   
2006 per capita incomes, according to US Census Bureau, for metropolitan areas:

Tulsa:  $22,663
Houston: 24,917
DFW:     26,174

Census estimate numbers?  You believe estimates whose starting point is the average of what people filled in on a census long form eight years ago?

The same census whose estimate on Tulsa's growth from 1990 to 2000 turned out to be off by something like 40%? The same census that is currently trying to say that Oklahoma's Hispanic population INCREASED this year with 1804 coming into effect? The current census estimate on our growth this decade says Tulsa metro has grown by almost the same number as the number new residences that have been built so far this decade? I'm betting that the people "estimate" is off by close to half again at the next census. If they are consistently that far off on people how good is their income estimate?

The numbers I'm referenced are from the US Department of Commerce.

Income statistics and estimates unlike the actual census population is tabulated from IRS data, which as you are probably aware comes out yearly based on ACTUAL tax return data.  IRS data is typically 18 to 20 months behind.  The latest year the IRS would have on file right now would be 2006 if we're lucky but it would be real data.