Thompson Such a distribution of national population would also greatly simplify national economic policy in many ways. Expansionary monetary and fiscal policy is complicated when significant infla-tion begins to appear in some places (with leading industrial sectors) before full employment is attained in other places (with lagging sectors). Similarly, repressive monetary and fiscal policy can create serious unemployment in, say, durable goods centers while strong inflationary pressures persist in service centers. Variation in local business cycles can not be fully explained by differing industry-mixes but the industrial diversi-fication that accompanies larger size would certainly make an important contribution to inter-regional symmetry in the response to national economic fluctuations and their treatment. (It is only fair to point out that the inner city ghettoes of our largest metropolitan areas would have to be intégrât much better into the regional econorrry of which they are only nominally a part now before we could make a fully convincing case for the employment stabilizing virtues of the very large loc I economy.) Again, the industrial diversification characteristic of large metropolitan areas tends to generate similar income patterns, and thereby reduces the need for heavy inter-regional fiscal transfers. Federal policy-makers are then freer to concentrate on programs or incentives that induce a more efficient land-use pattern or that create a more effective organization of local government, if they were less bound by equity considerations or income goals. It is much easier to deny an average, rather than a low, income area 27 May 1971

DOI link for Thompson Such a distribution of national population would also greatly simplify national economic policy in many ways. Expansionary monetary and fiscal policy is complicated when significant infla-tion begins to appear in some places (with leading industrial sectors) before full employment is attained in other places (with lagging sectors). Similarly, repressive monetary and fiscal policy can create serious unemployment in, say, durable goods centers while strong inflationary pressures persist in service centers. Variation in local business cycles can not be fully explained by differing industry-mixes but the industrial diversi-fication that accompanies larger size would certainly make an important contribution to inter-regional symmetry in the response to national economic fluctuations and their treatment. (It is only fair to point out that the inner city ghettoes of our largest metropolitan areas would have to be intégrât much better into the regional econorrry of which they are only nominally a part now before we could make a fully convincing case for the employment stabilizing virtues of the very large loc I economy.) Again, the industrial diversification characteristic of large metropolitan areas tends to generate similar income patterns, and thereby reduces the need for heavy inter-regional fiscal transfers. Federal policy-makers are then freer to concentrate on programs or incentives that induce a more efficient land-use pattern or that create a more effective organization of local government, if they were less bound by equity considerations or income goals. It is much easier to deny an average, rather than a low, income area 27 May 1971

Thompson Such a distribution of national population would also greatly simplify national economic policy in many ways. Expansionary monetary and fiscal policy is complicated when significant infla-tion begins to appear in some places (with leading industrial sectors) before full employment is attained in other places (with lagging sectors). Similarly, repressive monetary and fiscal policy can create serious unemployment in, say, durable goods centers while strong inflationary pressures persist in service centers. Variation in local business cycles can not be fully explained by differing industry-mixes but the industrial diversi-fication that accompanies larger size would certainly make an important contribution to inter-regional symmetry in the response to national economic fluctuations and their treatment. (It is only fair to point out that the inner city ghettoes of our largest metropolitan areas would have to be intégrât much better into the regional econorrry of which they are only nominally a part now before we could make a fully convincing case for the employment stabilizing virtues of the very large loc I economy.) Again, the industrial diversification characteristic of large metropolitan areas tends to generate similar income patterns, and thereby reduces the need for heavy inter-regional fiscal transfers. Federal policy-makers are then freer to concentrate on programs or incentives that induce a more efficient land-use pattern or that create a more effective organization of local government, if they were less bound by equity considerations or income goals. It is much easier to deny an average, rather than a low, income area 27 May 1971