SassenKoob correctly identifies changes that occurred in the context of metropolitan area employment patterns in the United States during the 1980s. SassenKoob incorrectly attributed such changes to an economic evolution within the context of the free market concept. To read SassenKoob's assessment, one would conclude that manufacturing is a disappearing phenomenon and that the "production and export of advanced services" is now the essence of economic structure and purpose. Applying the above assumptions, it is a relatively easy leap of faith for SassenKoob to conclude that Los Angeles is the prototype of the new economy, while New York is dying because it is tied too strongly to the old economy.
There are three major flaws in the SassenKoob argument. First, SassenKoob essentially restricted her analysis to event occurring in the American economy, while acknowledging that economics is now essentially global but ignoring international economic developments. Second, SassenKoob failed to address the critical reason underlying the decline of traditional manufacturing in the United StatesNew York, Los Angeles, or anywhere else. Third, SassenKoob relied primarily on data reflecting the events in a single decade for conclusions applicable to a far longer period.
Manufacturing has not declined in the global context, nor has the consumption of manufactured goods declined in the United States. Manufacturing has declined in the United States because American corporations, abetted by the Reagan and Bush Administrations, has transferred manufacturing operations out of
the country. Through this strategy, American corporations hope to increase profits by reducing labor costs. In turn, they, and their political allies, hope that the highpaying financial and other service workers will buy their imported products. The number of highpaying service jobs, however, it not likely to ever number as many as the lost goodpayi...