Thought you might like to read this.

Source: Best Cities For Jobs - Forbes.com (http://www.forbes.com/2007/02/15/best-cities-jobs-leadership-careers_cx_hc_0216cityjobs.html&partner=rss)

Wonder why we dropped in ranking though.

Here's the article. Links go dead after awhile. Anyhow it's not the first year OKC made the top 25. It's at least 2 years in a row. We actually got worse. Last year we were #9, this year we're #21


Best Cities For Jobs
Hannah Clark, 02.16.07, 6:00 AM ET


Oklahoma has inspired its share of songs and one memorable musical. But it's not exactly a top destination for recent college graduates looking for work. Usually, 22-year-olds flock to cosmopolitan cities like New York and San Francisco, assuming that's where they'll find the most opportunities for work (and, let's be honest, a social life). But they might be heading in the wrong direction. Oklahoma City made it on to our list of the 25 best American cities to get a job. New York's ranking? No. 75.

Of course, if you want a job in finance, you should still consider New York--Warren Buffett notwithstanding. And while Oklahoma City surely has a thriving arts community, the major metropolitan areas are probably your best bet if you want a career in theater. Our list looks only at statistics; we don't focus on which areas are best for specific careers. And for the second time in a row, the big cities performed poorly. While Washington D.C. is fifth on the list (down from No. 1 last year), Chicago (No. 82), Los Angeles (No. 88), San Francisco (No. 86) and Boston (No. 83) couldn't even break the top 75.

By The Numbers: The 25 Best U.S. Cities For Jobs
To compile the rankings, we used five data points, weighted equally: Unemployment rate, job growth, income growth, median household income, and cost of living. We measured the largest 100 metropolitan areas, as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau, and obtained the data from Moody's economy.com. But we've updated the methodology since the last time we did this survey. In 2006, we used a five-year average for job growth and income growth, so the 2001 economic downturn was included in the data. That disproportionately hurt financial centers like New York and technology hubs like San Francisco and San Jose. This year, we only used growth data for 2003 through 2006, which boosted the major cities a bit. Last year, New York, San Francisco and Chicago were all in the bottom 15.

A journey through our Best Cities For Jobs would start in Bethesda, Md., then head down the coast to Florida, west to Texas, Oklahoma, and Arizona and up through California. In fact, unlike last year, when Camden, N.J., made the list, few cities outside of this southern and western crescent were among the top 25 this year. The southeast and southwest benefit from great weather, lots of land available for development, a relatively low cost of living and a business-friendly tax climate. Other statistics confirm our findings. According to Manpower's latest employment outlook survey, employers in the south and west expect to hire the most employees in the first quarter of 2007, according to Melanie Holmes, vice president of corporate affairs.

Raleigh, N.C., topped our list this year. The city has low unemployment, strong income and job growth, and high incomes--yet it still maintains a relatively low cost of living. Raleigh is part of the "research triangle," including Durham and Chapel Hill. Three major universities--Duke, the University of North Carolina, and North Carolina State University--make their homes in the area. The result: A city with good weather, a relatively low cost of living and a highly educated population. "There isn't much of a negative in Raleigh," says Steven Cochrane, an economist with Moody's economy.com, which provided us with the data for this story. "It has a lot of the amenities of Florida, except not the hurricanes."

Despite those hurricanes and the much-heralded housing slowdown, Florida took top honors among the states; five of its cities made it into the top 25 this year. Jacksonville came in third, up from No. 8 last year, and Fort Lauderdale moved up from No. 25 to No. 9. While the construction industry isn't generating as many jobs as it was two years ago, tourism is still hot, especially with the dollar weak compared to the euro. But don't pack your bags and move to the Sunshine State just yet. When we redo this survey, we might find that a few Florida cities have dropped off the list. "The economy has shifted a lot in the past year, especially with the housing market cooling down," says Hugo Sellert, an economist and research manager with Monster. He's predicting Florida and Phoenix will weaken, while the Midwest and Texas will start generating more jobs.

So where should you look for work? We wouldn't rule out New York or Los Angeles; highly educated job-seekers should be able to find opportunities there. But the major metropolitan areas will probably never shine on this list. Despite high median incomes, they are generally plagued by unemployment, expensive housing and low job growth. "The big cities have more problems with their education systems, with their infrastructure," says Manpower's Holmes. "The big cities have the inner cities."

Oops, Metro beat me to it.

^Yeah, wonder why the ranking dropped. I'm guessing it's because of the loss of jobs in the auto industry and such. Am I right?

wonder why the ranking dropped.

Methodology probably effected it:


In 2006, we used a five-year average for job growth and income growth, so the 2001 economic downturn was included in the data. That disproportionately hurt financial centers like New York and technology hubs like San Francisco and San Jose. This year, we only used growth data for 2003 through 2006, which boosted the major cities a bit. Last year, New York, San Francisco and Chicago were all in the bottom 15.

The downturn didn't affect OKC as much relatively. So the drop can probably be accounted for more by them taking the downturn out, which would boost some cities relative to OKC, more so than any downturn in OKC's raw numbers. If I find last year's table, I'll post it and we can scrutinize my assumptions and you guys can insult my intelligence, if you want. :)

What's interesting about the study is that it really doesn't indicate where the highest number of good jobs are. There are a lot of factors that can pull a city way down, like unemployment (OKC has a lot people who do not work by choice and are not factored into that equation), the high importance of growth rates (which are percentages against previous data), and cost of living. As we all know, this in no way means that OKC has a lot more high paying jobs over than NY, Chicago, SF, etc. and that our job and income growth grows relative to our previous output at a faster rate than these cities, while our cost of living is relatively lower. All this is great for OKC, but, given the method, I can see that these results really say that OKC is a better job market than those cities. I guess it all depends on what kind of job you are looking for, but like the article suggests, I’d bet that a recent college grad without a job is going to seek out the highest availability of good jobs over any other factor and that’s what OKC still needs to work on attracting, imo.

Another interesting thing about it is that OKC is ranked higher than Tulsa in just about every category, except cost of living. Really, the differences are negligible, imo, but you certainly would have expected different numbers based on the occasional post we get from up the turnpike.

Those this Forbes list help out in any way??? I mean it's not like company's move on the list...

Those this Forbes list help out in any way??? I mean it's not like company's move on the list...

I don't think any companies would move based on the results of the list, but this will help potential companies who are looking for a location to set up shop. Oklahoma City has a lot to offer. The economy is kicking, the area is growing, and real estate is cheaper than most other major cities. If I'm an entrepreneur hoping for success, I would seriously consider setting up shop in OKC. I think the same applies if you're a major company looking to land a regional HQ or something of similiar nature. They could easily get tax breaks from the city, and if their product is sold abroad, could make more of a profit by locating to a place where wages are typically lower than most cities. Of course, these types of jobs are usually call center, industrial, or manufactoring, etc. but they're stable jobs and vital to a local economy.

^Yeah, wonder why the ranking dropped. I'm guessing it's because of the loss of jobs in the auto industry and such. Am I right?

Keep buying those Hondas and Toyotas and OKC will be in the same shape as Detroit someday...but it's already too late for that you should have helped save GM when you had a chance...People who dont work in this industry dont understand when companies loose market share that relates to lost dollars which trickles down to lack of budgeting to improve on the engineering of the vehicles..one reason why it is hard to compete with the offshore brands because trust me we do put alot of effort into testing and design but sometimes our hands are tied because of the lack of funds...I wont blame all that on the consumer..much of that is the fault of the CEO's greed...but the consumer has control over that to some extent...

Keep buying those Hondas and Toyotas and OKC will be in the same shape as Detroit someday...but it's already too late for that you should have helped save GM when you had a chance...People who dont work in this industry dont understand when companies loose market share that relates to lost dollars which trickles down to lack of budgeting to improve on the engineering of the vehicles..one reason why it is hard to compete with the offshore brands because trust me we do put alot of effort into testing and design but sometimes our hands are tied because of the lack of funds...I wont blame all that on the consumer..much of that is the fault of the CEO's greed...but the consumer has control over that to some extent...

Sooo... it's the consumer's fault for not buying a car they don't want so that the company could have more money to make a better car for the next guy?? Hey, I respect someone who would pay more for less because they want to buy American, but it’s ridiculous to suggest that the consumer bears responsibility for keeping companies in business. It’s up to the company to offer the product the consumers want at a price they want to pay for it.


Those this Forbes list help out in any way??? I mean it's not like company's move on the list...

Certainly not based on this list. This list is for job seekers and recent graduates. It gives them an idea of where unemployed workers should locate in order to better their job search.

Companies are going to look at data that tells them where the best workers are for their needs. They may not choose directly from a list, but it may help their recriuiters and location scouts focus on certain locales.

The Oklahoma City assembly plant makes the extended versions of the Chevrolet TrailBlazer, GMC Envoy and Isuzu Ascender SUVs

GM shut it down cause people just weren't buying large SUV's...OKC was hurt by producing 3 of GM's worst selling products

Why would anyone buy extended versions of SUV's when you are paying $2.50 for a gallon of gas?...Nothing the consumer could have done to save OKC with gas prices so high

The Oklahoma City assembly plant makes the extended versions of the Chevrolet TrailBlazer, GMC Envoy and Isuzu Ascender SUVs

GM shut it down cause people just weren't buying large SUV's...OKC was hurt by producing 3 of GM's worst selling products

Why would anyone buy extended versions of SUV's when you are paying $2.50 for a gallon of gas?...Nothing the consumer could have done to save OKC with gas prices so high

They dont sell Cobalts or Cavaliers in OKC?...I am not saying anyone should buy something they dont want just to save a company...as was previously said.. but people usually try to support the town they live in..or used to anyway...It's like if you owned a shop or resturaunt in OKC and when GM shut down you lost all your buisness and had to shut down driving away from your buisness in a Toyota then you'd have absolutley no right to whine that you shut down because no more GM people could eat at your place..you'd just have to say oh well thats life and I lost my future..so suck it up and be happy with what you have left...Sure that GM plant made SUV's that were sold in other parts of the country but you also have your choice of smaller more fuel efficient vehicles..Maybe I am old fashioned by thinking it's good to support American companies..oh well so be it silly me for trying to preserve whats left of a somewhat great America shame on me for trying guess I should just give in and buy a Toyota and be like every other baby boomer and follow the crowd without a mind of my own.

Your argument makes no sense. No matter how many Cobalts we buy, that isn't going to change the fact that people weren't buying the large SUV's, which is what was built here. So buying Cobalts or Cavaliers could not have saved the OKC plant.

I also don't know how you can compare us to Detroit. We are by no means comparably built around the struggling auto industry.

I recall Oklahoma officials offering $200M to GM in an attempt to keep the plant alive. Unfortunately, we can't control how people across the nation purchase automobiles, but locally, Oklahoma tried everything it could to keep the plant above water. If you're going to blame anyone, fault the EO's who failed to adjust their product to meet the needs of the consumer base. Rebuke the EO's who were unwilling to modify prices while the American market was losing ground. And ultimately, blame the EO's who would rather cut thousands of jobs than lose the precious billions they have stowed away for retirement. You're right, if more Americans bought American made automobiles, the plant might still be in business; but, there is nothing Oklahomans could've done to keep GM in Oklahoma City.

I am not saying anyone should buy something they don’t want just to save a company

Then what is this all about:


sometimes our hands are tied because of the lack of funds... the consumer has control over that to some extent


Maybe I am old fashioned by thinking it's good to support American companies..oh well so be it silly me for trying to preserve whats left of a somewhat great America shame on me for trying guess I should just give in and buy a Toyota and be like every other baby boomer and follow the crowd without a mind of my own.

Car companies go to school at Toyota to try to learn how to make their cars as good as Toyota. It is not built on some baby boomer trend. It's quite the opposite. GM was betting on the trendy fat cat road hog SUV trend loved by the boomers and lost... big time. Toyota built its business on quality sensible and affordable cars, not any trends. No Toyota owning restaurant proprietors are to blame. GM just lost on its own, by betting on the wrong thing.

I am the biggest advocate of supporting local businesses there is, but it only goes so far. The product has to be good or at least comparable to begin with.

Anytime we depart from the "best product wins" way
of consumership, we begin to build a society
and economy based on false realities.....

Best built product should prevail no matter what any flag waver
might say......

GM did not leave OKC because we weren't buying enough Cobalts.
They left for the same reason other domestic automakers are leaving
other cities, because American automakers aren't building competitively...
period.....

Noone put a gun to GM's head and said you "WILL NOT" build
a car as good as a Camry.......they just strategically decided not to......
and anyone who wants to debate the differences on merit is more
than welcome, but America votes with their walllet and the domestics
lose.....

Will it turn around? It has to.....

and when it does, it will NOT be thanks to the flag waving do gooders
who think that buying a Dodge minivan assembled in Canada from a company
based in Germany is a good way to show their patriotism.....

It will be because Toyota set the bar high and the others were forced
to reach it for the benefit of all......Then Toyota will go back to the drawing
board and we'll start all over again......

Think about it......would you really like to still be driving the quality
offered by GM in the early 80s? Without Toyota you would be......no
question about it.......

Well your all wrong...not one of you I bet works in the industry and hears the inside news I'd be willing to bet.........I do....you have no clue what goes on behind the scenes. Nobody listend to me five years ago when I said things were going to get bad around here and they thought I was nuts...now it is bad and going to get way worse and the same people who doubted me then are now complaining...go figure...so until any one of you works on the inside like I do and see's what I see you have no clue.

How can they get any worse? It's not like we have any more plants to lose.

We also lost AOL, Bill's Fish House and Dayton...Guess we should have stepped up our purchasing of cheap internet services, catfish and smaller outdated tires

Crap happens...Jobs aren't guaranteed for life...On each person if they haven't prepared themselves with enough education and/or skills to be able to transition to another job if they are ever let go

If it happens...Make adjustments, switch careers and continue to enjoy life...Not the end of the world

Wow, the top 25.....that's something! The good jobs in OKC are medical, finance, a few energy companies, and the goverment. The majority of the jobs are call centers, warehouse, hotel, restuarant, and retail. Mostly warehouse and call centers.
And we made the top 25????