What derailed St Louis Growth

St. Louis references in the news. Oh yeah, don't forget our favorite "Top Lists."
Interesting piece in today's paper. The author says Washington's repeal of anti-trust laws in the 1990s, originally passed in the early 20th century, opened the door for St Louis to lose all it headquarter companies and banks. The author blames Washington and influential economists pushing for the law changes. Thoughts?

http://m.stltoday.com/business/local/wh ... 09bee.html
I think its just another piece that is making excuses for St. Louis' poor economic performance. Yes, a lot of things have happened that were outside our control, but the regional fragmentation makes it almost impossible to respond or proactively work against these forces.
I think it's fair to say that globalization is a headwind in the face of cities that are not in the world's top 10. But it only goes so far.
Interesting thesis that I think certainly has some merit to it but I think its just one of many pieces to the puzzle... and when you take a look at A-B, for example, it was more of a matter eat or be eaten for why it's no longer hq'd here.
I've also heard the risk-averse culture also could be in play.

I do wonder if the fortunes of a number of places will change in the coming decade or two, mainly due to momentum can't keep going one way or the other. The main reasons I see that could be an impact is cost of living in an area and any effects due to climate change in terms of sea level and water availability. Since most places will have at least one of those issues in play while here will not have impacts in relation to that.
Biggest factor is people. People here suck at leading and often settle.
I mean look at the chamber of commerce hosting award ceremonies for job well done while we rank near bottom 5% of growth and many other economic indicators
dbInSouthCity wrote:
Biggest factor is people. People here suck at leading and often settle.
I mean look at the chamber of commerce hosting award ceremonies for job well done while we rank near bottom 5% of growth and many other economic indicators


I've always thought the biggest benefit of bringing the city into the county, and other regional merger ideas, is that it would encourage the top people in the region to step up and take on larger leadership roles. Those people might be better able to convince business leaders to make our region their headquarters and convince them that St Louis deserves their strong commitment. We see that sort of thing more in OKC, Charlotte, Nashville, Minneapolis, etc where local companies consolidate acquisitions in headquarters there, and demonstrate commitment to their regions with unreasonably large and visible skyscrapers downtown, among other things.
The thing I find interesting is that the author is not a a St. Louisan. He went to Wash U and has lived in a couple Midwestern cities, but he wrote this for the Washington Monthly.

I'm not sure you can argue that federal policy since the 1980s has not encouraged the consolidation of businesses into fewer entities based in larger global cities. That has made it harder for smaller cities like St. Louis.

I thought his point about the Reagan administration's non-enforcement of the 1936 Robinson-Patman Act was eye-opening. That's what enabled Wal-Mart to purchase products at a cheaper price than local stores. That empowered the rise of the big box and collapse of the local -- and not just in St. Louis.