Boston has a lot of historical and natural advantages, e.g., all of the colleges and universities that set up shop over the past 375+ years. This study, however, ranks us 56/78 in terms of public spending efficiency. Typically I would question a study such as this, but Washington, D.C. ranks dead last, which squares with common sense and direct personal experience. California cities buried under pension debt also rank pretty low, which makes sense due to the fact that they’ll soon be spending most of their budget on paying former employees. The authors of the study try to adjust for how challenging it is to run a public school:

To control for major cross-city differences in economic status among cities, we adjusted education spending levels by two key economic factors: poverty rate and median household income. Moreover, given that education spending is further affected by the percentage of children in single-parent families and the percentage of households that do not speak English as their first language, we adjusted expenditures on these two measures as well.

[Note that a Massachusetts resident who sets up what the authors describe as a “single-parent family” by having sex with a dermatologist, dentist, or other higher-income resident or visitor should be able to get $1-3 million tax-free under the Massachusetts child support guidelines and may have wage income on top of child support profits. So a “single-parent family” may well have a spending power that is above the median household income for the state, unlike in some other states where child support revenue is capped (e.g., Minnesota). Thus the authors might need to work with finer-grained data to sort out children with just one parent on food stamps from children with just one parent in a Beacon Hill townhouse next to John Kerry‘s. On the third hand, due to the higher financial stakes and winner-take-all outcomes, Massachusetts has much more intensive custody, and child support litigation than other states, which tends to result in children who are psychologically damaged and harder to educate even if the winner parent becomes fairly rich.]

And also for how tough it is to keep citizens from attacking each other:

To control for major cross-city differences in the economic status of cities, we adjusted police-spending levels by three key economic factors: poverty rate, unemployment rate and median household income. The adjusted “Per-Capita Police Spending” measure assumes all cities have an average for each of the three factors. This allowed us to compare return on investment (ROI) of police spending net of cross-city differences in these key economic indicators.

Under some of these adjustments Boston’s economic success, most of which is probably accounted for by stuff that happened 100+ years ago, works against us.

The same folks ranked Boston 52/65 in 2015’s Best & Worst Run Cities.

Readers: Based on your experience in other cities that are featured in the study, what do you think?

Related: