Opinion: Daily Journal

North Carolina is no exception

Although North Carolina encompasses many islands, our state is certainly not an island when it comes to economic growth and social development. We are part of a region, the Southeastern United States, that has been growing and developing for many decades.

I know this is hardly a profound insight. What’s next, will I observe that Hillary Clinton is deeply dishonest and Donald Drumpf is dangerously shallow? But while the regional dynamic to North Carolina’s recent past ought to be obvious, many of the state’s politicians, historians, and journalists have sought to deny it.

They offer a narrative I call “North Carolina Exceptionalism.” It goes something like this: even as the rest of the South remained mired in stagnation, racism, and backward thinking, North Carolina developed more rapidly because its leaders were more willing to tax their citizens in order to “invest” in public services such as infrastructure and universities.

The Exceptionalism narrative has several logical and empirical flaws. The most basic one is that North Carolina did not, in fact, develop more rapidly, by most standard economic measures. Take disposable income per person. North Carolina’s annual average growth rate in per-capita income from 1948 to 2010 was 5.9 percent. The average for the Southeast as a whole was 5.9 percent. Among neighboring states, the rate was 5.8 percent in Georgia, 5.9 percent in South Carolina, and 6 percent in Virginia and Tennessee.

This is not a case of our state beating the average at first and then taking a dive at the end. North Carolina either matched or lagged behind in the rest of the region in most of those 62 years. Our strongest period of relative growth was fairly recent, during the 1980s and 1990s.

It is certainly true that the Southeast as a whole grew faster than the national average. In fact, of the top 10 states in income growth after World War II, nine of them (including North Carolina) were Southern. Why? Theories abound.

One is called “conditional convergence.” This theory is based on the fact that capital — both financial and human — tends to flow to places where the potential return is greater. Investors want to buy low and sell high. People want to live in places where living costs are lower and jobs are more plentiful. All other things being equal (there’s the “conditional” in the convergence), these places will tend to grow faster than the national average as a result.

Other factors clearly facilitate the flow. Pro-growth public policies that keep taxes and regulatory impediments as low as possible, while providing necessary public services, are linked to faster growth in most scholarly studies of the subject. In general, Southern (and Western) states have opted for this policy mix, at least when compared with the likes of New York, New Jersey, and Illinois. The South also became a more attractive place to live and do business as segregation receded, technology created a common national culture, and air conditioning because ubiquitous.

Because North Carolina has become a contested electoral prize, the causes and effects of state growth have become highly political questions. The statistic I cited earlier cannot answer them, yet. In the five full years since the Republicans won their first legislative majorities in 2010, North Carolina’s disposable personal income has grown slower than the Southeastern average during the first three and then faster than the average during the last two (from 2013 to 2015).

What all sides ought to understand and admit is that North Carolina politicians are not fully the masters of their ship of state. When the nation sinks into recession or climbs out of one, we go along for the ride whether we like it or not. And as part of the Southeast region, we have benefitted from long-term economic trends in our favor.

It’s still important that we get our state policy mix right. Even small differences in annual growth rates can add up over time. Indulging those who peddle the myth of North Carolina Exceptionalism, however, is not going to help.

John Locke Foundation chairman John Hood is the author of Catalyst: Jim Martin and the Rise of North Carolina Republicans.



  • Vigilant2

    Why is it that elites shy away from discussions about good and bad of different parts of America. I grew up in Massachusetts, escaping via the Army as a boy of twenty years. In all those years … and since … I never, ever heard a Bay Stater say, “Gosh, I love living in Massachusetts.” Yet I’ve heard those sentiments uttered with gusto and sincerity and with spontaneity in Georgia, in South Carolina and here in the Old North State, all the time, and all of which I’ve called home at different times over the course of fifty years. There are exceptional ATTITUDES that cannot be readily scored, but that are readily recognized and valued by we unwashed here in the wonderful towns and villages of the South. I love living in, and being a citizen, of North Carolina. There, I’ve said it in front of the elites. Don’t hold your breath listening for similar from states in the Northeast and on the Far Left coast.

  • Luth Stirner

    So we are riding a wave of regional growth and thus particular policies or parties shouldn’t take credit for NC “exceptionalism”? Seems like a fair argument. Are you using “disposable income per person” as the metric throughout the article? What about when you are talking about growth?

    Anecdotally, it seems as though we are doing a better than our more southerly neighbors, but that could be bias. This whole region was basically in “developing-nation” status (compared to the North) from the end of the civil war until the end of WWII. Air conditioning helped, but so did many federal programs including the TVA and better roads, better universities, modernized agricultural practices… basically all of the things they have been doing in rural india, rural china and elsewhere to improve economic output. Aside from racial strife, people forget that the south is also still dealing with the long-term ramifications of the civil war and the fact that the south was very slow to industrialize.

    The “pro-growth” policies you mention can be found in many other underdeveloped societies. China, until recently, couldn’t care less about labor standards, environmental protection, consumer safety, etc. That stance gave them a major advantage (along with cheap labor, like the southeast, in relative terms), in terms of short term economic development, but where do they go now? It’s a comparison we should really consider. What I’d like to see is someone really address where the line should actually be drawn – what labor standards are actually too burdensome, what environmental protection is too costly, what consumer safeguards are worth forgoing? It’s easy to just rail against the absurd extremes, but where the “rubber meets the road” is what I’d like to see discussed.

    Should the government confiscate all firearms? Should a ten year old be able to purchase a ready-made IED? No one agrees with these extremes, lets talk about the actual, real crossroads where policy has to happen. You seem like the kind of person who could provide an insight into a realistic conservative position on subjects like that. I’m tired of reading political diatribes on this site, I can check any blog for that sort of thing, I want more articles like what you’ve just published here. I’m a centrist who has been unwittingly subscribed to the paper version of Carolina Journal for many years. I don’t cancel because I like to read views that I don’t agree with. But so much I see now is just echo-chamber group-think. The left does not have a monopoly on intellectual freedom – do not grant them one. Dissent against Trump and Clinton is the first sign in my eyes that someone isn’t a sock-puppet. Trump especially… he is the most unqualified, anti-intellectual…. I’ll just end it there.