Move money, not people

Have you ever wondered why there are so many people in big cities? People might guess jobs, opportunity, culture or social life. Our work shows a different picture. We see that cities grow primarily because that is where capital networks choose to operate.  All of the other opportunity derives from capital, not the other way around. This means that we have altered the communities and networks of all our smaller cities and towns to suite the capital. Is this optimum?

Why not instead, as I am proposing in other work, expand and embed capital into more areas, obviating the concentrating effects of capital? It seems easier and less expensive to move capital access than it does to move all of the other infrastructure of life back into crowded cities. Moving a buck around is certainly easier than moving a school or church.

We did this on a huge scale with microcredit in India. We extended access to capital into about 8,000 villages across that country. When capital was available, locally, it appeared to staunch the flow of people into already crowded cities. Smaller places became a little more vibrant.

We are now embedding a smaller, simpler private equity access into smaller American cities and towns. We do think this will bring about more growth and opportunity.

Seems simple, move the money, not the people.



Popular posts from this blog

Black Fleet Brewing

Jennells Flowers & Pie