Seattle isn't dead — far from it. But that doesn't mean this boom is all roses. How do you think it's being handled?

Share story

Earlier this week I wrote a response to a Gawker author who claimed Amazon “killed” Seattle. It was highly popular and generated more than 300 comments.

With July unemployment in King County at 4 percent, new skyscrapers continuing to be announced, startup activity and venture capital strong, rising house prices and much better than average median household income, Seattle is by no means dead economically. Quite the opposite.

Next week, I’ll write more about the perceptions and shadings of the discontents arising from relatively fast growth. For some perspective: Seattle added nearly 15,000 people from 2013 to 2014. But New York, Houston, L.A., Austin, San Antonio, Phoenix, San Diego, Dallas, Fort Worth and Charlotte all added more, some considerably so.

For now, a question:

The poll has expired. Thank you for your submissions.


 

This Week’s Links:

Hawkish Fed rumblings at Jackson Hole | Tim Duy

Rising anxiety that stocks are overpriced | Robert Shiller

Inequality persists amid overall growth | Emmanuel Saez

A Nobel winner explains why the Fed should keep rates low | Washington Post

The world’s longest tunnel is now complete | Motherboard (Bertha…no).

‘We’re seeing the beginning of a liquidity crisis’ in the startup boom | Wolf Street


Today’s Econ Haiku:

Adieu, Harbor Club

Yes, Seattle is changing

Is its soul adrift?