Without being wooed by economic development officials, Fluor, the international construction firm, is moving its headquarters from Orange County to an unselected location in the Dallas area. Naturally, the move has prompted commentary suggesting that California's high taxes, abundant regulation, and expensive housing are to blame. I'm sure those costs didn't help the O.C. (which was never called that before the TV show). But the main factors seem to ones no policy change could overcome: Dallas is in the middle of the country and on Central Time. As I always say, those are the very best things about this place compared to Southern California.
Posted by Virginia Postrel on May 12, 2005 • Comments
I've long enjoyed the email edition and occasionally linked to items on their site. Now John Paczkowsk's Good Morning Silicon Valley (part of San Jose Mercury News spinoff SiliconValley.com) is a full-fledged blog.
Posted by Virginia Postrel on May 10, 2005 • Comments
In a piece that nicely unites wonks and fashionistas, Reason's Kerry Howley examines the fashion implications of restricting (or liberalizing) textile and apparel trade, especially with China. Here's the beginning:
No sane person considers Washington D.C. to be fashion-forward, but trend watchers should take note: The capital is gearing up to decide what the rest of us will be wearing next season.
We may not all be forced into bowties or pantsuits, but a congressional push to re-impose quotas on Chinese imports will determine how well, and how cheaply, America dresses. Ever since trade quotas on Chinese textile imports fell away in the U.S. and Europe on January 1, and the U.S. has been buried in a downy avalanche of cheap tees and underwear. Imports of knitted shirts are up 1,250 percent this year. Cotton pants are up 1,500 percent; underwear, 300 percent. The dramatic surge in imports is an indication of just how obscenely low the old quotas were set, and how needlessly high clothing prices were. Recent studies put the cost of protectionism for the U.S. textile and apparel industry at as much as $13 billion annually.
The domestic textile industry was given ten long years to prepare for the deluge, but instead of modernizing, trade groups are legislating. With the support of the Bush administration, The U.S. Committee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements (CITA) has announced "China Safeguard Proceedings" to protect us from all Commie underwear, the first step in what will likely end with re-imposed quotas or worse. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) says "it is time to bring out the big stick" and defines "stick" as 27.5 percent tariffs on all things Chinese. U.S. Trade Representative Rob Portman has promised "a tougher approach" with Beijing, as if decades of onerous quotas were an example of American largesse.
If politicians can resist the urge to stem the flow of imports, cheap Chinese clothing will create a better-dressed America and a sleeker fashion industry. Clothing prices have been falling for a decade, helped along by the rise of cheap chic a la H&M, Zara, and Forever 21. These stores have earned fat profits ripping off the work of Donna Karan, Michael Kors, Ralph Lauren and other fashion luminaries. By pumping out cheaply made imitations from the developing world, the shops have created a world of disposable fashion, letting teens stay trendy without sinking hundreds in a look that won't last. A $10 H&M camisole — likely China-made — will last about as long as the trend it's following, which is to say, a wash or two. It's not just moral depravity driving your 14-year-old to stuff her closet with trampy knock-offs; she can afford to approximate Beyonce's bling and Lil' Kim's decolletage like never before.
Read the whole thing.
Posted by Virginia Postrel on May 10, 2005 • Comments
Speaking of the LAT, the paper has wisely redesigned its website, eliminating its most annoying characteristic--subscriber-only access to the Calendar section, which includes all the LAT's arts and culture coverage. The changes are explained here. For all its flaws (see Kausfiles for running commentary), the LAT is a good newspaper that deserves a national readership. East Coast bias is hard to break down, but easy Internet access helps.
Posted by Virginia Postrel on May 10, 2005 • Comments
As far as I know, there's been no social-constructionist outcry against this interesting LAT feature on the significant biological differences between men and women--including some brain structures. Why not? Because of how the article is framed. It's a health article, with no sociological context other than the assumption that readers are female. Here's a bit:
For example, functional magnetic imaging of women's brains after strokes have revealed that one reason women recover the use of language after a stroke in their left hemisphere is because women's language centers appear to exist on both sides of the brain, whereas in men, they are concentrated on the left side.
But why does this difference in brains exist at all? The answer to this question, and to the questions of the susceptibility of women to lung cancer, to increased sensitivity to pain, even to certain medicines, may well be revealed as the X chromosome is more fully explored.
From chromosomes to cells, from hearts to brains, from livers to intestines and from skin to blood, the vast and fascinating realms--and the elegant details--of the differences between the two sexes are slowly being understood.
Posted by Virginia Postrel on May 10, 2005 • Comments
,,,makes a lot of respectable journalists hyperventilate."
That's the lead of my new Forbes column, which tries to explain blogging in terms professional journalists (and, of course, Forbes readers) can understand. Bizarrely, the online version of the story does not include the "blog sampler," with links, at the end of the column. I deliberately selected blogs that not only might appeal to a business audience but would demonstrate that blogging is not all about politics. [Note: The link above is a new one that should not require registration.--vp] Here it is:
A Blog Sampler
Marginal Revolution (economics):
Daniel Drezner (international relations and trade)
Two Blowhards (arts and culture)
Grant McCracken (anthropology meets economics)
Metacool (design and marketing)
Manolo's Shoe Blog (shoes, fashion, humor)
The Volokh Conspiracy (law)
Thanks to Eugene Volokh for comparing blogs to books.
Posted by Virginia Postrel on May 06, 2005 • Comments
I'm off to Las Vegas for some research at HD Expo, the hospitality design (hotels, restaurants) trade show. Then I'll go on to L.A., on the way to Santa Barbara to help moderate a panel of big shots discussing media concentration and media bias. Regular blog readers will not be surprised to learn that I don't think concentration is the most significant source of media bias--but I do think that believing in the power of media concentration keeps journalists from asking rather critical questions about business. That hurts business coverage. A lot. Think AOL Time Warner.
The panel features Bill Keller, executive editor of the NYT, Lionel Barber, U.S. managing editor of The Financial Times, and Jacob Weisberg, editor of Slate. Ann Louise Bardach of UCSB and Slate is the co-moderator and organized the panel. For more information, go here. (Don't ask me why they decided to leave my primary affiliation--as an author of books--off the main page and omit my main job at Reason; both are on the press release. I guess blogging is more glamorous. Besides, the main page gets Bill Keller's job wrong.)
Posted by Virginia Postrel on May 03, 2005 • Comments
What makes these lamps glamorous? (Left: Chiasso. Right: Crate & Barrel.)
How about this photo? Why isn't it as glamorous as it used to be? (Source:David Olsen.)
In a new article for the NYT's now-bimonthly Circuits section, I look at the charms of wireless glamour.
For some fun mid-century examples that were too complicated for the article, check out these illustrations from Ephemera Now.
Posted by Virginia Postrel on May 03, 2005 • Comments
Stephane Fitch of Forbes suggests that letting consumers legally clean up DVDs is only the beginning.
LOS ANGELES - You tinker with the recipes in Bon Appetit and add ice cubes to your white wine. You prefer the shuffle mode on your iPod and you skip the boring parts of The Tonight Show with your TiVo. Now, thanks to the U.S. Congress, maybe you can skip the boring parts of movies, too.
No, this wasn't really what legislators intended. The Family Movie Act of 2005, signed by President George W. Bush on Wednesday, was aimed at folks who use software to cut out four-letter words, nudity and graphic violence from movies they rent or buy for home viewing.
But the law may also loosen Hollywood's tight control over its products. It passes some of the control over how movies are edited to you and, hypothetically, a mini-industry of movie remix artists.
As long as movie creators get to see their work on screen, reap the profits, and get credit for their ideas, I don't see any reason they should object to private remakes. It's just another example of user innovation. Maybe moviemakers should try to emulate other industries and see how they can tap, rather than stamp out or grudgingly tolerate, user ideas.
Posted by Virginia Postrel on May 02, 2005 • Comments
My friend Sean Dougherty sends this link to a USA Today feature on the success of the Toyota Scion. It's a good piece about the critical importance of aesthetic personalization to young buyers, including those on tight budgets.
Sean does add a caveat, however: "I wonder about a 24-year-old who spends 'a whole day' on the Scion website because its part of her lifestyle -- as a PR man I found that quote suspect. However, the overall article is quite interesting."
Posted by Virginia Postrel on May 02, 2005 • Comments