As I was reading an article in Fast Company on the US cities where creative job growth was happening, the results seemed in direct opposition (NY has both the largest AND one of the fastest-growing creative class populations) to a recently controversial NY Times article that implied creatives were leaving NYC for Los Angeles. It's easy because of the income inequality gap and the extraordinarily high cost of living in New York City to buy into the Zeitgeist of creative class decline, but maybe the numbers tell a different story.
As both a marketer and in the tech industry, and having lived in Montreal, NYC and San Francisco, I of course have an insider view to much of this debate. I think part of what makes a city livable is how creative is it's population. And more studies seem to verify this. When the creative class is healthy, a city is more livable and interesting. When it declines (like my much beloved Montreal), I think the city loses out.
Sadly, San Diego saw a significant drop over the same time period. If we're going to attract more Millenials and creatives, we need to do a lot more to evolve the San Diego city scape to be competitive to LA, Austin, Portland, Seattle, and yes, New York: more density, more alternative transportation, more startups.
I'm certainly not arguing we lose San Diego's essential charms (outdoor lifestyle, laid-back atmosphere, etc.) but our long-term prospects aren't good when we're arguing about how many billions in taxpayer dollars to give to NFL fat cats that in all probability will not generate a whole heck of a lot of benefit for the local economy, versus. the types of neighborhood, educational, and job creation projects that money could buy us.
***07/13 update: looks like John Oliver is also getting on the anti-stadium bandwagon with his usual, outrageously funny take.***