“Brain hubs” with well-educated workers, such as Austin and Raleigh, also create middle-class jobs for middle-skill workers with less than a bachelor’s degree, reports the Wall Street Journal.
Much the same way that assembly lines created millions of new jobs by reducing mass production to a sum of tasks, employers in Austin and elsewhere are constantly breaking down higher-skill jobs to “create new middle-skill, middle-income specialties,” according to a recent report by the McKinsey Global Institute.
Middle-skill workers complement expensive, highly-educated workers, said Enrico Moretti, a Berkeley economist. Less-educated workers benefit from “human capital spillovers,” as they learn valuable skills on the job.
Douglas Kanneman, a bored, poorly paid retail clerk, went to community college at age 25 for computer training. That qualified him for a customer-service job at SolarWinds in Tulsa. The company makes software that controls companies’ computers and phone systems.
Later, when SolarWinds moved to the tech hub of Austin, Mr. Kanneman went with it. As the company grew, he worked his way into the better-paying information-technology department. A year ago, he did something that he said validated the worth of his new skills: He quit for a higher-paying job elsewhere in Austin, and with overtime can now earn more than $90,000 a year.
As a computer-equipment technician, he owns a four-bedroom house with his wife, who works part-time and cares for their two children.
Comments & Trackbacks (1) | Post a Comment
at 6:14 am
Like a LOT of Wall Street Journal pieces, the anecdotal evidence backs up a semi-political social thesis, without demonstrating actual causation. While ‘Brain Hubs’ may have more middle-income jobs, simply because their economies are, simultaneously, growing as result of an increased demand for higher education/technological production—and less stressed by the costs of an aging physical and social infrastructure—the example citing Mr. Kanneman’s experience as a returning student doesn’t, necessarily prove the author’s thesis.
A deeper look at the article shows that Mr. Kanneman returned to school 12 years ago and his increase in income is merely par for those who work in his business sector. His story is the perfect example of a well-considered return to school, in which his socioeconomic ascendance can be traced directly to his educational/career path rather than his residency. In all likelihood, his story could just have easily been replicated outside of a ‘Brain Hub.’ After all, his story starts in Tulsa and not Austin.
Obviously, this could be an interesting dissertation topic, whereby one tests the career success of nontraditional students by controlling for geography, academic path, and career choice. However, we are given to surmise that his “success” is much less a function of geography than one of education and career choices.