How to Become a Licensed Commercial Real Estate Agent

Illinois, it's time to take a lesson from Henry Ford

In 1914, Henry Ford shocked the nation when he raised wages for his factory workers to $5 an hour. Observers scoffed, but Ford had the last laugh.

from nicholemhearn digest http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20170831/OPINION/170839965/illinois-its-time-to-take-a-lesson-from-henry-ford?utm_source=OPINION&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=chicagobusiness

Presence Health misses turnaround goals

Merger talks and the divestiture of two downstate hospitals robbed the Catholic-sponsored system of some of its momentum.

from nicholemhearn digest http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20170831/NEWS03/170839966/presence-health-misses-turnaround-goals?utm_source=NEWS03&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=chicagobusiness

Breakthrough gene therapy for childhood leukemia gets FDA OK

U of C Medicine and Lurie are among the hospitals working to be part of what one doctor calls "a brand new way of treating cancer" with a treatment from Novartis Pharmaceuticals.

from nicholemhearn digest http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20170831/NEWS03/170839967/breakthrough-gene-therapy-for-childhood-leukemia-gets-fda-ok?utm_source=NEWS03&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=chicagobusiness

Press Release: Trump’s DACA rollback makes congressional action urgent

Washington, D.C., August 31, 2017 – It is being widely reported that President Donald Trump will be announcing the end of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, which was established in 2012 by executive action. With this, Congress’s responsibility to enact legislation to protect Dreamers is more pressing than ever before.

“A DACA rollback requires Congress to act immediately,” says Linda Chavez, senior fellow at the Niskanen Center and former official in multiple Republican administrations. “The 800,000 young people whose lives have been upended deserve better than political squabbling. Forcing those who’ve grown up here and known no other country to leave would be an indelible stain on this nation.”

Chavez continues, “It serves no purpose whatsoever, and would wreak havoc on many communities across the nation, forcing some of the best educated and most productive young immigrants to leave after we’ve invested in their schooling and could benefit for years to come from their contributions.

We call on members of Congress to take on this issue immediately, and pass legislation like the Recognizing America’s Children (RAC) Act, to ensure that Dreamers can stay in the United States and continue contributing to our economy and our society.

The Niskanen Center is a Washington, D.C.-based libertarian think tank that works to change public policy through direct engagement in the policymaking process.

###

The post Press Release: Trump’s DACA rollback makes congressional action urgent appeared first on Niskanen Center.

from nicholemhearn digest https://niskanencenter.org/blog/press-release-trumps-daca-rollback-makes-congressional-action-urgent/

Matter bags Baxter

The Deerfield-based hospital supplier rounds out health tech incubator Matter's roster of major corporate partners.

from nicholemhearn digest http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20170831/BLOGS11/170839970/matter-bags-baxter?utm_source=BLOGS11&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=chicagobusiness

GTCR buys into digital ad platform firm

One of the city's biggest private-equity firms bought a majority stake in a Fort Worth company that executes high-volume, digital ad campaigns.

from nicholemhearn digest http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20170831/NEWS01/170839972/gtcr-buys-into-digital-ad-platform-firm?utm_source=NEWS01&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=chicagobusiness

Rauner pivots to center as romance with right wing cools

Just six weeks after turning over much of his government to hard-core conservatives, Bruce Rauner is starting to act like a Jim Edgar Republican. What's up?

from nicholemhearn digest http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20170831/BLOGS02/170839974/rauner-pivots-to-center-as-romance-with-right-wing-cools?utm_source=BLOGS02&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=chicagobusiness

Centegra Health's condition worsens

As the suburban health system continues negotiations to merge with powerhouse Northwestern Medicine, its financial situation deteriorates.

from nicholemhearn digest http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20170831/NEWS03/170839975/centegra-healths-condition-worsens?utm_source=NEWS03&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=chicagobusiness

City puts brakes on development of key Cabrini-Green site

The city has decided to hold off on picking a developer for the prime seven-acre parcel at the corner of Halsted and Division streets.

from nicholemhearn digest http://www.chicagobusiness.com/realestate/20170831/CRED03/170839976/city-puts-brakes-on-development-of-key-cabrini-green-site?utm_source=CRED03&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=chicagobusiness

Four Kites lands a key hire

Sean Fallon, ex-CEO of OpinionLab and a BigMachines top exec, signs on as president of the hot logistics-technology startup.

from nicholemhearn digest http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20170831/BLOGS11/170839977/four-kites-lands-a-key-hire?utm_source=BLOGS11&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=chicagobusiness

The best 'Made in Indiana' logo ever

This logo is great because it's simple, clean, and instantly processed. And it could be free, if the Hoosier State is smart enough to take the creator up on his offer.

from nicholemhearn digest http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20170830/OPINION/170839984/the-best-made-in-indiana-logo-ever?utm_source=OPINION&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=chicagobusiness

Southwest quietly takes delivery of its first Boeing 737 Max

The jet's Tuesday arrival at Southwest marks the first at a North American carrier for the Max, which has shattered sales records at Chicago-based Boeing.

from nicholemhearn digest http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20170830/NEWS10/170839986/southwest-quietly-takes-delivery-of-its-first-boeing-737-max?utm_source=NEWS10&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=chicagobusiness

What have Republicans said about Dreamers?

Republicans are conflicted about Dreamers, the young immigrants who were brought here unlawfully as children. On the one hand, they oppose protections that they believe were enacted unconstitutionally without Congress, like the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. On the other hand, Republicans favor the policy of protecting Dreamers itself. 

In fact, a recent Morning Consult/Politico poll found three of four Trump voters support legal status for Dreamers. However, Republicans continue to debate about what the specifics of any proposal should look like. A Republican proposal called the Recognizing America’s Children (RAC) Act, introduced by Rep. Carlos Curbelo (R-FL26), is gaining traction among Republicans as the conservative answer to Dreamers.

Many prominent Republicans have expressed sympathy for Dreamers which they could act on by supporting bills like the RAC Act. Here are some examples of what Republicans have had to say about Dreamers:

Senate Republicans

Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY): “What I did say is I’m very sympathetic with this particular situation with these youngsters who were brought here at an early age and who have largely grown up here.” (February 2017) (Source)

Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX): “I have great sympathy for students brought to the United States at a very young age who have no moral culpability for being in this country in violation of
our laws...I continue to believe that our Nation would benefit from the DREAM Act being introduced and debated in committee; amended to address concerns with the bill; and incorporated into a credible immigration reform package that begins with border security and can win the support of the American people.” (December 2010) (Source)

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK): “I support the goal of the Dream Act which is to enable children who were brought to the United States by their parents to earn citizenship through service in the armed forces or pursuit of higher education. I do not believe that children are to blame for the decision of their parents to enter or remain in the United States unlawfully. The reality is that many of these children regard America as the only country they ever knew. Some were not even told that they were unlawfully in the United States until it came time for them to apply for college. America should provide these young people with the opportunity to pursue the American dream. They have much to offer America if given the chance.” (2010) (Source)

Sen. Roy Blunt (R-MO): “There will be a lot of sympathy for kids who were brought here when they were kids. I just think it’s an easy thing to understand.” (2016) (Source) Senator Blunt also “told the Guardian it was important to be ‘thoughtful’ about young undocumented immigrants who ‘have no real connection with the country their parents brought them from.’…‘I think we can do that,’ he said.” (2016) (Source)

Sen. John Thune (R-SD): “I think there’s always sympathy for people who are in a circumstance like that, through no fault of their own.” (2016) (Source)

Sen. Cory Gardner (R-CO): “I believe members across the aisle can unite and agree that providing these children with some sort of immigration relief is the just and fair thing to do. The children do deserve to have the opportunity to continue the American dream and we, as members of Congress, should have the compassion to provide them with this.” (2014) (Source)

Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA): “There are a number of children that have been brought here not of their own accord. And I do support allowing those children some of the freedoms that are here in the United States.” (2014) (Source)

Sen. Jerry Moran (R-KS): “I’m supportive of DACA and believe that the humanity aspect of this important… no fault of their own, circumstances beyond their control… DACA has made sense to me.” (2017) (Source)

Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME): “It seems to me that if a child is brought here by his parents that that child really didn’t have any say in the decision to come here. I don’t support illegal immigration. But that isn’t the child’s fault.” (2017) (Source)

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY): “If you’re one of the Dreamer kids, I think we can get you permanence to stay and legalize you.” (2017) (Source)

Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV) said “she isn’t ‘for deporting families and breaking up families.’” (2016) (Source)

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA): “In my judgment, this is a very exceptional case. We have a person that loves his country so much that he wants to serve in the military.” (2000) (Source)

House Republicans

Rep. Bob Goodlatte (VA-6): “These children came here through no fault of their own and many of them know no other home than the United States”. (2013) (Source)

Rep. Paul Ryan (WI-1): “What we have to do is figure out how to have a humane solution to this very legitimate, sincere problem.” (2017) (Source)

Rep. Kevin McCarthy (CA-23): “I would like to work out a situation there because the children were brought across, they were under the age of 18, it was not their issue. They did not come themselves. I think they have a right to do it. We should secure the border, but I think the children we should not hold them liable.” (2017) (Source)

Rep. Martha McSally (AZ-2): “These children were brought here at no fault of their own. In Arizona, there are 57,000 of them. They came forward to the government, they gave their personal information—where they live, their biometric data and fingerprints—they graduate from high school and served in our military.” She said to former Secretary Kelly: “Uncertainty brings fear to my constituents in this position. Can you assure me that they will be protected?” (2017) (Source)

Rep. Doug Lamalfa (CA-1): “One of the great founding principles of our country was that children would not be punished for the mistakes of their parents. It is time to provide an opportunity for legal residence and citizenship for those who were brought to this country as children through no fault of their own, those who know no other place as home. For those who meet certain eligibility standards, and serve honorably in our military or attain a college degree, we will do just that.” (2014) (Source)

Rep. Ken Calvert (CA-42): “I’ve always been sympathetic to the so-called DREAMers, and I would hope in the process of doing the things that we’re doing on immigration that we can work out a reasonable compromise…I don’t think you’re going to see any activity to deport children from the United States.” (2017) (Source)

Rep. Scott Tipton (CO-3): “Instead of acting unilaterally, the president should have worked with Congress to enact real immigration reforms to provide options for children who had no say in being brought to the United States at a young age.” (2017). (Source)

Rep. Ted Yoho (FL-3): “I’ve met some of them. I’ve sat with them. I’ve talked to them. We’re in a tough situation. We’ve got these kids — some of them are valedictorians of their schools. They’ve been here all of their life. There has to be a way to work through this.” (2017) (Source)

Rep. Jody Hice (GA-10) said “Congress and the administration should bring ‘a great deal of compassion and sensitivity’ to the plight of people who were brought illegally into this country as children, and who have some protection under the federal Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.” (2017) (Source)

Rep. Raul Labrador (ID-1) told The Huffington Post later that he “would support a bill to give a path to citizenship to Dreamers so long as other conditions, such as additional border security, were met.” (2013) (Source)

Rep. Rodney Davis (IL-13): “I truly believe that anybody who is willing to fight for our country and came here through no fault of their own as a child ought to be given a special place in line to legally become an American citizen.” (2016) (Source)

Rep. Susan Brooks (IN-5): “Lastly, DREAMERS, children who have not committed crimes and whose parents entered the country illegally, present a difficult issue for all of us. I am committed on working towards finding a compassionate resolution to their immigration status and that of their families.” (Source)

Rep. Dave Reichert (WA-8): “What we need today is to find a way to educate and retain bright and talented students who apply themselves, work hard and wish to contribute as productive members of our society. That is what makes our country great, and that’s why Democrats, Independents, and Republicans all must work together to develop solutions that will make this goal a reality. We must treat with compassion, respect and dignity those people who are currently living here as the federal government works to develop those solutions.” (2010) (Source)

Rep. Dan Newhouse (WA-4): “From our founding, America has been a nation of immigrants and a nation of laws…Our own communities in Central Washington are a testament to the contributions of immigrants to the fabric of American society. It is the sole responsibility of Congress to write laws that provide a humane solution to our broken immigration system…I am proud to join my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to protect children brought here through no fault of their own. These children and young adults deserve stability here in the U.S. while Congress comes together on long term immigration reform.” (2017) (Source)

Rep. Chris Stewart (UT-2): “We cannot abandon these young men and women who have arrived here, through no fault of their own, and are currently seeking to further their education and lives in the United States.” (2017) (Source)

Rep. Blake Farenthold (TX-27) “referred to ‘people facing deportation that were brought here as very young children’ as ‘the victims,’ according to the Gonzales Cannon. ‘We’ve spent all this money educating them; we need their productivity,’ he said.” (2013) (Source)

Rep. Lamar Smith (TX-21): “We need to address the status of children who were brought to the U.S. illegally at a young age through no fault of their own. They should not be blamed for their parents’ actions.” (2013) (Source)

Rep. Bill Flores (TX-17): “What would be better would be for Congress to pass a path to citizenship for Dreamers. . . . Then you don’t need DACA. . . . Look, if you take someone who was brought here when they were 2 years old and say, ‘Now we’re going to ship you to Venezuela,’ they’d be lost. They’re Americans. We’ve educated them. Why not make Americans out of them? Legal Americans.” (2017) (Source)

Rep. Mac Thornberry (TX-13): “There are instances in which a child is brought into the United States illegally and does not discover it until it is time to apply for college or a job…We should find a compassionate way to deal with such situations that does not undermine the rule of law or encourage others to violate our laws.”(2011) (Source)

Rep. Joe Barton (TX-6): “They are Americans and we need to acknowledge that and find a way, to those that wish to be a part of the American dream for opportunity, to make them legal.” (2014) (Source)

Rep. Ted Poe (TX-2): “The kids that are here and getting older, who are here through no fault of their own, we have to make sure they have the opportunity to get legal status.” (2013) (Source)

Rep. Trey Gowdy (SC-4): “The issue of how to treat children brought to this country is not new. Congress has considered it since at least 2001. But it is a new issue for this Congress and several members of this Subcommittee. We all view children as a special, protected class. We have all witnessed acts of heroism where total strangers risk and sacrifice their lives for other people’s children. We admire teachers and other professionals who dedicate their lives to teaching and helping other people’s children. Children and the issues that impact their lives unite us like nothing else. And because children are a special class, the law treats children differently in almost every regard. When children wander into neighborhood yards, we don’t call that trespassing. When children cry and yell and scream at restaurants or on airplanes, we don’t call that a violation of the noise ordinance. When children eat a grape at the grocery store or eat a piece of candy waiting in line before mom or dad pays for it we don’t have them arrested for petty larceny. Children can’t sign contracts, vote, purchase certain items, or even work in some instances becaus

from nicholemhearn digest https://niskanencenter.org/blog/republican-dreamer-quotes/

Pritzker sets off on a road trip

Hoping to shore up his status as the emerging Democratic gubernatorial front-runner, Chicago businessman J.B. Pritzker is off on a six-day, 22-stop statewide bus tour.

from nicholemhearn digest http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20170830/BLOGS02/170839987/pritzker-sets-off-on-a-road-trip?utm_source=BLOGS02&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=chicagobusiness

The Parallel Fears Driving Perceptions of AI and Genomics

In a recent statement, Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Scott Gottlieb announced that the Agency would be releasing a new framework addressing regenerative medicine sometime before the end of 2017. This is a heartening development, especially given the Commissioner’s focus on developing “clearer lines” regarding the Agency’s authorities and oversight mechanisms for new and innovative medical technologies. As Adam Thierer and Jordan Reimschisel of the Mercatus Center point out in a recent article, this innovation-friendly perspective will be especially important in helping to usher in an age of more personalized medicine made possible by advancements in gene therapy and genetic modification treatments. Unfortunately, the road ahead is likely fraught with fear.

People are often skeptical of the likelihood that emerging technologies will end up delivering on purported promises. However, that healthy skepticism very quickly turns to anxiety once notable milestones in its development are reached. At that point, the public discourse quickly and inevitably shifts away from “uncertainty” towards “rising panic”—the initial stage of the techno-panic cycle. Indeed, as I’ve discussed previously, we’re already at the peak hysteria phase of this cycle with regards to perceptions of artificial intelligence (AI), even with potentially momentous economic gains close at hand. While a similar hysteria hasn’t yet materialized with regards to genetic modification technology, it’s ascent is likely close at hand, and will only grow with each new research milestone. So how does the current AI techno-panic compare to what’s likely coming down the road for genetic modification?

To start, public attitudes towards AI and genetics are primarily defined by narrative themes in popular culture and media. Terminator has been a driving source of fears over AI, portending a war-torn post-apocalyptic hellscape in which human civilization gives way to the onslaught of killer robots. Likewise, the movie Gattaca echoes concerns over the possibilities that advanced genetic manipulation will lead to a society of perpetual class stratification based on the genetic haves and have nots, resulting in an everlasting eugenic dystopia. Both visions are representative of the worst types of apocalyptic doomsaying, and neither is grounded in a realistic assessment of what these technologies are actually capable of.

But the similarities don’t stop at blockbuster hits.

At a technical level, the core of AI systems are processes by which seemingly inscrutable algorithms make decisions. In the same way that AI is something of a “black box,” so too are the cells in the human body. There’s a great deal we still don’t understand about how (or why) certain processes within cells unfold the way they do. This is especially true when discussing the limitations of CRISPR technology. It’s unclear why some guide RNAs work better than others at targeting nucleotides along the DNA helix. Nor can we fully understand why certain types of cells prefer the use of one type of genetic repair pathway over another. (For a detailed look at these limitations, I highly recommend this TED talk by Dr. Ellen Jorgensen.)

In short, our limited knowledge of AI decision-making and molecular biology is a significant limiting factor on what we can achieve. Just as we cannot create conscious synthetic systems capable of human-level intelligence, nor can we design therapies or treatments that allow us full control over genetic expression. The complexities of molecular biology are at least the equivalent of those involved in AI systems. (Ironically, the recognition of these similarities in complexities has actually driven a great deal of applied AI research into “genetic algorithms”—programs designed to find near-optimal solutions to complex problems that are based on biological evolutionary design properties.)

Edward Dickson discussed many of these parallels almost three decades ago in an article for AI Magazine. Even back in 1984 he recognized that “[t]here are many striking similarities that suggest that examination of the commercialization of genetic engineering contains lessons valuable to the budding artificial intelligence industry.” Among other insights into the then-emerging fields of AI and genetics, he was keenly aware of the potential public backlash against the normalization of these two fields, noting that:

AI and genetic engineering are both names with which the general public cannot feel immediately comfortable. These futuristic names carry within them the hint of meddling in areas best left alone.

As the techno-panic surrounding AI reaches levels of peak hysteria, we should be prepared to encounter those same anxieties in the context of genetic modification. Policymakers and regulators would do well to take a balanced and measured approach in parsing outlandish fears from scientific realities. We cannot anticipate how, precisely, the age of genomics will materialize; the research milestones are not likely to suddenly and unpredictably open the doors to “designer babies” or induce an overnight Gattaca-style transformation of our society. To that end, as we inch ever closer towards the inevitable genetic modification scare, policymakers should embrace policies that promote, rather than inhibit, new scientific innovations. “The main lesson,” according to Dixon, “is that the future will be good, but its evolution will be different than [we] imagine.”

The post The Parallel Fears Driving Perceptions of AI and Genomics appeared first on Niskanen Center.

from nicholemhearn digest https://niskanencenter.org/blog/parallel-fears-driving-perceptions-ai-genomics/

Ruxbin shutters abruptly after 7 years of foodie acclaim

The 32-seat BYOB West Town restaurant, which just finished a major renovation, will close in September for what chef/owner Edward Kim calls a sabbatical.

from nicholemhearn digest http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20170830/BLOGS09/170839989/ruxbin-shutters-abruptly-after-7-years-of-foodie-acclaim?utm_source=BLOGS09&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=chicagobusiness

The End of the Working Class

Increased income inequality; wage stagnation; skill-biased technological change; productivity growth slowdown; rising college wage premium; labor-market polarization; declining prime-age labor force participation; low intergenerational relative mobility; declining absolute mobility—all of these are concepts developed by economists to describe the dimming prospects for ordinary American workers. Taken together, they inform the consensus view that something is wrong with the American economy that isn’t going away anytime soon.

But if we follow the experts in looking at our problems solely from an economic perspective, we will fail to appreciate the true gravity of our situation. Yes, the relevant data on “real” or inflation-adjusted incomes have been disappointing and worrisome for decades. In particular, the sharp rise in income inequality, created mostly by a rollicking rise in the top 1 percent of incomes, has meant that incomes for typical American households have not kept pace with the overall growth of the economy. Nevertheless, a careful and dispassionate review of the data shows that incomes continued to inch upwards since the 1970s. Indeed, of those who “fell” out of middle-class status over the past 25 years, depending on how one defines it, a good many fell “up” to higher income brackets. Although the Great Recession knocked incomes downward, they have now recovered almost all the ground they lost. When we factor in the fact that comparisons of real incomes can never capture access to new products that previously were unavailable at any price, the reasonable conclusion is that overall material living standards in the United States today are at their highest levels ever. Relative stagnation may frustrate our expectations, but isn’t the same thing as collapse.

If we pull back from a narrow focus on incomes and purchasing power, however, we see something much more troubling than economic stagnation. Outside a well-educated and comfortable elite comprising 20-25 percent of Americans, we see unmistakable signs of social collapse. We see, more precisely, social disintegration—the progressive unraveling of the human connections that give life structure and meaning: declining attachment to work; declining participation in community life; declining rates of marriage and two-parent childrearing.¹

This is a genuine crisis, but its roots are spiritual, not material, deprivation. Among whites, whose fall has been from greater heights, the spreading anomie has boiled over into headline-grabbing acts of self-destructive desperation. First, the celebrated findings of Anne Case and Angus Deaton have alerted us to a shocking rise in mortality among middle-aged whites, fueled by suicide, substance abuse—opioids make headlines these days but they hardly exhaust the list—and other “deaths of despair.”² And this past November, whites in Rust Belt states made the difference in putting the incompetent demagogue Donald Trump into the White House.

What we are witnessing is the human wreckage of a great historical turning point, a profound change in the social requirements of economic life. We have come to the end of the working class.

We still use “working class” to refer to a big chunk of the population—to a first approximation, people without a four-year college degree, since those are the people now most likely to be stuck with society’s lowest-paying, lowest-status jobs. But as an industrial concept in a post-industrial world, the term doesn’t really fit anymore. Historian Jefferson Cowie had it right when he gave his history Stayin’ Alive the subtitle The 1970s and the Last Days of the Working Class, implying that the coming of the post-industrial economy ushered in a transition to a post-working class. Or, to use sociologist Andrew Cherlin’s formulation, a “would-be working class—the individuals who would have taken the industrial jobs we used to have.”

The working class was a distinctive historical phenomenon with real internal coherence. Its members shared a whole set of binding institutions (most prominently, labor unions), an ethos of solidarity and resistance to corporate exploitation, and a genuine pride about their place and role in society. Their successors, by contrast, are just an aggregation of loose, unconnected individuals, defined in the mirror of everyday life by failure and exclusion. They failed to get the educational credentials needed to enter the meritocracy, from which they are therefore excluded. That failure puts them on the outside looking in, with no place of their own to give them a sense of belonging, status, and, above all, dignity.

Here then is the social reality that the narrowly economic perspective cannot apprehend. A way of life has died, and with it a vital source of identity. In the aftermath, many things are falling apart—local economies, communities, families, lives.

This slow-motion catastrophe has been triggered by a fundamental change in how the capitalist division of labor is organized. From the first stirrings of the Industrial Revolution in the 18^th century until relatively recently, the miraculous technological progress and wealth creation of modern economic growth depended on large inputs of unskilled, physically demanding labor. That is no longer the case in the United States or other advanced economies. Between automation and offshoring, our country’s most technologically dynamic industries—the ones that account for the lion’s share of innovation and productivity growth—now make little use of American manual labor.

The U.S. economy still employs large numbers of less-skilled workers, of course. They exist in plentiful supply, and U.S. labor markets are functional enough to roughly match that supply with demand for it. But all of this is occurring in what are now the backwaters of economic life. The dynamic sectors that propel the whole system forward, and on which hinge hopes for continued improvement in material living conditions, don’t have much need today for callused hands and strong backs—and will have less need every year going forward.

Economists describe this situation drily as “skill-biased technological change”—in other words, innovation that increases the demand for highly skilled specialists relative to ordinary workers. They contrast the current dynamics to the skill-neutral transition from an agrarian to an industrial economy. Then, workers displaced from farm jobs by mechanization could find factory work without first having to acquire any new specialized expertise. By contrast, former steel and autoworkers in the Rust Belt did not have the skills needed to take advantage of the new job opportunities created by the information technology revolution.

Here again, exclusive reliance on the tools of economics fails to convey the full measure of what has happened. In the heyday of the American working class during the late 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s, the position of workers in society was buttressed by more than simply robust demand for their skills and effort. First, they had law and policy on their side. The Wagner Act of 1935 created a path toward mass unionization of unskilled industrial workers and a regime for collective bargaining on wages and working conditions. And during World War II, the Federal government actively promoted unionization in war production plants. As a result, some three-quarters of blue-collar workers, comprising over a third of the total American workforce, were union members by the early 1950s. The Wagner Act’s legal structure allowed workers to amass bargaining power and direct it in unison against management, suppressing wage competition among workers across whole industries. Unionized workers were thus empowered to negotiate wages roughly 10 to 15 percent above market rates, as well as a whole raft of workplace protections.

It is important to note that the strictly legal advantages enjoyed by labor at the height of its powers have diminished very little since then. There has been only one significant retrenchment of union powers since the Wagner Act, and that occurred with the passage (over President Truman’s veto) of the Taft-Hartley Act in 1947—a few years before organized labor reached its high-water mark. What really transformed labor law from words on a page into real power was the second great prop of the working class’s position in society: collective action. Congress did not unionize U.S. industry; mass action did, never more dramatically than in the great General Motors sit-down strike of 1936–37, which led to the unionization of the U.S. auto industry. And once unions were in place, labor’s negotiating strength hinged on the credibility of the threat of strikes. Coming out of World War II, when strikes had been strongly discouraged, American workers hammered home the seriousness of that threat with a wave of labor actions, as more than five million workers went on strike during the year after V-J Day—the most strike-ridden year in American history.

This militancy and group cohesion paved the way for the 1950 “Treaty of Detroit” between Charlie Wilson’s General Motors and Walter Reuther’s United Automobile Workers. The deal provided the basic template for labor’s postwar ascendancy, in which workers got automatic cost-of-living adjustments and productivity-based wage increases while production schedules, pricing, investment, and technological change were all conceded to fall within the “managerial prerogative.” “GM may have paid a billion for peace,” wrote Daniel Bell, then a young reporter for Fortune, but “it got a bargain.”

The declining fortunes of organized labor are a direct result of workers’ ebbing capacity for collective action. After the great wave of unionization beginning in the 1930s, organizing rates peaked in the early 1950s and then went into long-term decline. As employment in smokestack industries started falling in the 1970s, the number of newly organized workers lagged badly behind and the overall strength of unions progressively waned.

This flagging commitment to union solidarity cannot be explained satisfactorily without reference to the changing nature of the workplace. The unique—and uniquely awful—character of factory work was the essential ingredient that created a self-conscious working class in the first place. Dirty and dangerous work, combined with the regimentation and harsh discipline of the shop floor, led workers to see themselves as engaged in something like war—with their employer as the enemy. Class warfare, then, was no mere metaphor or abstract possibility: it was a daily, lived reality.

“It is a reproach to our civilization,” admitted President Benjamin Harrison in 1889, “that any class of American workmen should in the pursuit of a necessary and useful vocation be subjected to a peril of life and limb as great as that of a soldier in time of war.” At that time, the body count of workplace deaths and injuries hovered around one million a year. Such conditions begat efforts to organize and fight back—often literally. The “Molly Maguires” episode in the Pennsylvania coal fields, the Great Railroad Strike of 1877 that claimed more than a hundred lives, Haymarket, Homestead, Cripple Creek, the Ludlow Massacre—these are just some of the more memorable episodes among countless violent clashes as the agents of capital struggled to keep a lid on the pressures created by the demands they made of their workers.

The best part of working-class life, solidarity, was thus inextricably tied up with all the worst parts. As work softened, moving out of hot, clanging factories and into air-conditioned offices, the fellow-feeling born of shared pain and struggle inevitably dissipated.

But at the zenith of working-class fortunes, the combination of law and collective action gave labor leaders powers that extended far beyond the factory floor to matters of macroeconomic and geopolitical significance. This capacity to affect domestic politics and international relations further bolstered the position and influence of the working class. When steel or autoworkers went on strike, the resulting disruptions extended far beyond the specific companies the unions were targeting. Labor unrest in critical industries affected the health of the overall U.S. economy, and any threat to the stability of America’s industrial might was also a threat to national security and international order. Consider Harry Truman’s decision in April 1952, during the Korean War, to nationalize the U.S. steel industry just hours before workers were planning to walk out on strike. We generally remember the incident as an extreme overreach of Executive Branch power that was slapped down by the Supreme Court, but the point here is to illustrate the immense power wielded by unions and the high stakes of any breakdowns in industrial relations.

The postwar ascendancy of the working class was thus due to an interlocking and mutually reinforcing complex of factors. It was not just favorable labor laws, not just inspired collective action, but the combination of the two in conjunction with the heavy dependence on manual labor by technologically progressive industries of critical importance to national and global welfare—all of these elements, working in concert—that gave ordinary workers the rapid economic gains and social esteem that now cause us to look back on this period with such longing. And the truly essential element was the dependence of industry on manual labor. For it was that dependence, and the conflicts between companies and workers that it produced, which led to the labor movement that was responsible both for passage of the Wagner Act and the solidarity that translated law into mass unionization.

No sooner was this working-class triumph achieved than it began to unravel. The continued progress of economic development—paced by ongoing advances in automation, globalization, and the shift of output and employment away from manufacturing and into services—chipped relentlessly away at both heavy industry’s reliance on manual labor and the relative importance of heavy industry to overall economic performance.

These processes began in earnest longer ago than many observers today remember. U.S. multinational corporations quadrupled their investments overseas between 1957 and 1973—from $25 billion to $104 billion in constant dollars. And back in 1964, the “Ad Hoc Committee on the Triple Revolution” made headlines with a memorandum to President Johnson on the threat of mass technological unemployment as a result of automation. But this was just the beginning. As information technology supplanted smokestack industry at the vanguard of technological progress, and as demand for labor generally shifted in favor of more highly skilled workers, the working class didn’t just go into decline. It eventually disintegrated.

There is a great deal of nostalgia these days for the factory jobs and stable communities of the egalitarian 1950s and 1960s—when working-class life was as good as it ever got. The sense of loss is understandable, as nothing as promising or stable has replaced that way of life now gone. But this lament for what has been lost is the cry of the Children of Israel in the wilderness, longing for the relative comforts of Egypt. We must remember that, even in the halcyon postwar decades, blue-collar existence was a kind of bondage. And so the end of the working class, though experienced now as an overwhelmingly negative event, opens up at least the possibility of a better, freer future for ordinary workers.

The creation of the working class was capitalism’s original sin. The economic revolution that would ultimately liberate humanity from mass poverty was made possible by a new and brutal form of domination. Yes, employment relations were voluntary: a worker was always free to quit his job and seek a better position elsewhere. And yes, over time the institution of wage labor became the primary mechanism for translating capitalism’s miraculous productivity into higher living standards for ordinary people. Because of these facts, conservatives and libertarians have difficulty seeing what was problematic about the factory system.

We can dismiss the Marxist charge of economic exploitation through extraction of surplus value. Meager pay and appalling working conditions during the earlier stages of industrialization reflected not capitalist perfidy but objective reality. The abysmal poverty of the agrarian societies out of which industrialization emerged meant that nothing much better was affordable, or on offer to the great majority of families.

But that is not the end of the inquiry. We need to face the fact that workers routinely rebelled against the factory system that provided their livelihoods—not a normal response to mutually beneficial exchanges. First were the individual mutinies: no-shows and quitting were commonplace. During the early 20^thcentury, absenteeism rates stood at 10 percent or higher in many U.S. industries, and the usual turnover rate for factory employees exceeded 100 percent a year. For those who made it to work, drinking, drug use, monkeywrenching to slow the line, and other acts of small-scale sabotage were regularly availed outlets for sticking it to the man.

More consequential than these acts of private desperation were the incessant attempts to organize collective action in the teeth of ferocious opposition from both employers and, usually, the state. Mass labor movements were the universal reaction around the world to the introduction of the factory system. These movements aimed to effect change not only in the terms of employment at specific workplaces, but in the broader political system as well. Although socialist radicalism did not dominate the U.S. labor movement, it was the rule elsewhere as the Industrial Revolution wrought its “creative destruction” of earlier agrarian ways. Whether through revolutionary or democratic means, elimination of private ownership of industry and the wage system was the ultimate goal.

Since grinding poverty had long been the accepted norm in agrarian economies, what was it about industrial work that provoked such a powerfully negative response? One big difference was that the recurrent want and physical hardships of rural life had existed since time immemorial, and thus seemed part of the natural order. Likewise, the oppressive powers of the landed aristocracy were inherited, and sanctified by ancient custom. By contrast, the new energy-intensive, mechanized methods of production were jarringly novel and profoundly unnatural. And the new hierarchy of bourgeois master and proletarian servant had been erected intentionally by capitalists for their own private gain. There had been solace in the fatalism of the old Great Chain of Being: all the orders of society, from high to low, were equally subject to the transcendent dictates of God and nature. Inside the factory, though, industrialists subjected both nature and humanity to their own arbitrary wills, untethered from any inhibition of noblesse oblige. The traditional basis for the deference of low to high had been wrecked; the bourgeoisie’s new position at the top of the social pyramid was consequently precarious.

Another reason for the restiveness of industrial workers was the factory system’s creation of enabling circumstances. In other words, workers engaged in united resistance because they could. In the agrarian era, highly dispersed and immobile peasants faced nearly insuperable obstacles to organizing on a large scale—which is why peasant revolts were as uncommon as they were futile. The factory system dramatically reduced the costs of organizing for collective action by concentrating workers in large, crowded workplaces located in large, crowded cities. Toiling and living together at close quarters allowed individualized discontent to translate into concerted resistance. Solidarity was a consequence of falling transaction costs.

At the heart of the matter, though, was the nature of the work. According to the cold logic of mechanized production, the technical efficiency of the human element in that process is maximized when it is rendered as machine-like as possible. Machines achieve their phenomenal productivity by performing a sequence of discrete, simple tasks over and over again, always the same, always precisely and accurately, as rapidly as possible. Humans are most productive in filling in the gaps of mechaniz

from nicholemhearn digest https://niskanencenter.org/blog/end-working-class/

Big deals heat up west suburban apartment market

Deals for five properties totaling more than $350 million suggest the suburban Chicago apartment market is still going strong after a record year for multifamily sales.

from nicholemhearn digest http://www.chicagobusiness.com/realestate/20170830/CRED03/170839991/big-deals-heat-up-west-suburban-apartment-market?utm_source=CRED03&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=chicagobusiness

Pat Ryan's insurance group expanding Loop offices

It's adding employees at Two Prudential Plaza and 500 W. Monroe St.

from nicholemhearn digest http://www.chicagobusiness.com/realestate/20170830/CRED03/170839995/pat-ryans-insurance-group-expanding-loop-offices?utm_source=CRED03&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=chicagobusiness

Lake Forest's own roller coaster: this estate's asking price

In the past seven years it's gone in both directions. It went up this week by $3 million.

from nicholemhearn digest http://www.chicagobusiness.com/realestate/20170830/CRED0701/170839996/lake-forests-own-roller-coaster-this-estates-asking-price?utm_source=CRED0701&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=chicagobusiness

Mattis and the Military-Society Gap

A viral video of Secretary of Defense James Mattis giving an impromptu speech to U.S. military personnel began making the rounds this weekend. In it, Mattis tells those present that the country has problems that the military does not. He implores them to “hold the line,” before articulating the “two powers” the United States has. The first is the “power of inspiration,” which he believes the country is lacking at the moment. The second is the “power of intimidation,” which is expressed through U.S. military power.

While it is understandable that some would take heart from the video and what they see as the steadiness of Mattis’ leadership, Mattis’ comments can also be interpreted as an example of an increasing gap between the military and the society it serves.

Fred Kaplan, a longtime commentator on national security affairs, had an interesting take on the video in his column for Slate. Kaplan saw in Mattis’ comments about the United States losing its power of inspiration a rebuke of the commander-in-chief. He worried that, while is better to have “adults” such as Mattis in positions of authority to contain Trump’s impulsiveness and incompetence, the speech by the secretary of defense could undermine civilian control of the military.

Toward the end of his piece Kaplan quotes Isaiah Wilson, a retired U.S. Army colonel now at the New America Foundation that focused on what Mattis’ comments said about the relationship between the military and American society. The passage is worth quoting in full:

However, Wilson is troubled by this particular passage in Mattis’ pep talk. The secretary of defense seemed to be telling his troops “that they are different and separate from—and morally better than—the nation itself,” Wilson told me on Monday. “This is a thin, dangerous line.” In the end, Wilson said, “this arrogant sense of professional self as ‘better than the public we serve’ will prove our undoing.” It could also erode “the vital and necessary trust that we now place—and must have—in our military. Once this kind of trust-bond is lost, it is hard, if not impossible, to recover. You can’t ‘surge’ trust.”

This is an important issue given the amount of trust the American people place in the U.S. military as an institution, as opposed to that which they place in elected civilians. It is important to avoid alarmism about a burgeoning crisis in civil-military relations. But coupled with other recent incidents, some of the sentiments expressed in Mattis’ comments suggest that relations between the U.S. military and American society are not in peak health at the moment.

While these issues predate the Trump administration, the forty-fifth president certainly seems likely to exacerbate them given his tendency to politicize the military. His recent speech on Afghanistan, for example, started off by referring to the members of the military as a “special class of heroes,” before suggesting the rest of society needs to emulate the unity—and, oddly, the loyalty—that military personnel display. But Trump’s predecessor expressed similar sentiments. In his 2012 State of the Union address, President Obama began by discussing the previous year’s mission to kill Osama bin Laden before pivoting to declare the U.S. military a model for how society should operate:

These achievements are a testament to the courage, selflessness and teamwork of America’s Armed Forces. At a time when too many of our institutions have let us down, they exceed all expectations. They’re not consumed with personal ambition. They don’t obsess over their differences. They focus on the mission at hand. They work together.

Imagine what we could accomplish if we followed their example.

Obama concluded with a similar theme: civilian society should be unified and mission-focused like the U.S. military.

And pundits are not immune to it either. A year before Obama lauded the military as a model for civilian society, Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times claimed that the U.S. military lives by “an astonishingly liberal ethos.” To back up this argument, Kristof cited the desegregation that occurred in the U.S. military prior to its occurrence in the American South, the smaller gap in pay that exists between general officers and enlisted than corporate executives and most companies’ janitorial staff, and the fact that the military’s health care system covers all those who serve.

While the U.S. military has sometimes been at the leading edge of issues related to equality and has provided opportunities for social mobility for some, military organizations are the opposite of “liberal.” For one, it was the civilian commander-in-chief, President Harry Truman, who ordered the military to desegregate. But more importantly, and by necessity, military organizations are hierarchical and authoritarian. They are so structured to ensure compliance and discipline in the execution of their organizational specialization. That specialization, as Samuel Huntington referred to it, is the management of violence.

To ask society to emulate the military is to ask it to no longer be liberal, free, or open. But encouraging a sense of moral superiority among the military is dangerous as well. Not only does it intensify the unquestioning reverence for the military among the public, it might also engender a sense of elitism among the military as an institution—where members might come to not only see themselves as a separate caste but one superior to the society they serve.

As discussed here previously, part of the problem lies in the lack of any tangible connection between American society and the military that serves it. The weak ties between society and the military have led to a situation where the former reveres the latter but has little knowledge of it. Mattis’ comments, while well intentioned, might have the same effect from the opposite direction if they encourage military personnel to see themselves as separate from and superior to the society they serve.

—

Matthew Fay is the Director of Foreign and Defense Policy Studies at the Niskanen Center

The post Mattis and the Military-Society Gap appeared first on Niskanen Center.

from nicholemhearn digest https://niskanencenter.org/blog/mattis-military-society-gap/

Summer is ending but the fun goes on

Chicago Jazz Festival, five 10-minute plays staged for you alone, beach volleyball championships, African Festival of the Arts, an animation fest, and more.

from nicholemhearn digest http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20170830/NEWS0701/170829862/summer-is-ending-but-the-fun-goes-on?utm_source=NEWS0701&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=chicagobusiness

It's the unofficial end of summer but not of fun

Chicago Jazz Festival, five 10-minute plays staged for you alone, beach volleyball championships, African Festival of the Arts, an animation fest, and more.

from nicholemhearn digest http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20170830/NEWS0701/170829862/its-the-unofficial-end-of-summer-but-not-of-fun?utm_source=NEWS0701&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=chicagobusiness

Why Amazon's Whole Foods acquisition will not revolutionize food retailing anytime soon

Amazon has the money and ambition to upend the grocery industry. But Whole Foods alone won't take the fearsome e-commerce company to the top of the food chain.

from nicholemhearn digest http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20170830/BLOGS10/170839997/why-amazons-whole-foods-acquisition-will-not-revolutionize-food?utm_source=BLOGS10&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=chicagobusiness

Chicago's new property tax hit

The must-read stories to get your day started.

from nicholemhearn digest http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20170830/MORNING10/308309999/chicagos-new-property-tax-hit?utm_source=MORNING10&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=chicagobusiness

Illinois' political map rigging takes back seat to Wisconsin, others

Illinois Republicans hoping to shrink Democratic control of Springfield seek salvation in an upcoming Supreme Court case that could undermine GOP might in Wisconsin. But there's a catch.

from nicholemhearn digest http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20170829/NEWS02/170829860/illinois-political-map-rigging-takes-back-seat-to-wisconsin-others?utm_source=NEWS02&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=chicagobusiness

United CEO Munoz to offer $1 million relief for staffers hurt by Harvey

He's pledging as much as $1 million of his own money to match donations to the company’s employee-aid fund.

from nicholemhearn digest http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20170829/NEWS10/170829861/united-ceo-munoz-to-offer-1-million-relief-for-staffers-hurt-by?utm_source=NEWS10&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=chicagobusiness

Now here's an uneasy partnership

Mayor Emanuel stands with Attorney General Madigan as she sues for federal oversight of the police department. It's a flip for the mayor—and despite talk of unity, the reality is much darker.

from nicholemhearn digest http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20170829/BLOGS02/170829863/now-heres-an-uneasy-partnership?utm_source=BLOGS02&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=chicagobusiness

Buying or Renting Medical Office Space? – Consider These Factors

The following post is copyrighted by Austin Tenant Advisors - .

Doctors often wonder whether it is better to own or rent their medical office space at one time or another. Owning a medical office building can range from an office condo to a multi-tenant medical office building. The decision to own or lease is strictly a business decision and depends on a number of factors that must be considered. Before making a decision for your medical practice consider the elements below.

• Upfront Cash Outlay – When leasing medical office space you typically don’t need to put as much money upfront as you do when buying. For example when renting all you typically need is to write a check for the first months rent, the security deposit, and possibly any tenant improvement dollars above the allowance given by the landlord. When you buy a medical office space you have to pay for building inspections, appraisals, loan fees, all improvement cots, and a down payment ranging from 10% to 25%.
• Room for Growth – When you lease medical office space and you need to grow later on you typically have options to move within the building or take adjacent space as it comes available. If you buy a building that is exactly the right size and your practice grows in a few years what do you do? It’s not ideal however you could lease out your space and relocate to a larger one, or you could open up another office. Growing out of a medical space that you own is more inconvenient than growing out of a medical space that you rent. It’s important that you think about not only your current needs but also your future medical office space needs.
• Fixed Vs Variable Costs – If you purchase a medical building you have more control of costs and have a pretty good idea of what your costs will be each year, especially if your loan is fixed rate. However depending on your loan term you need to be prepared for refinance charges. With a lease when it’s time to renew your subject to paying “market” lease rates which means they could significantly go up depending on the market you are in. You don’t have control over market conditions and tax increases. Also, most leases have annual increases of $0.50 to $1.00 or tied to whatever the Consumer Price Index (CPI) is at that time (typically 3% to 4%)
• Appreciation – Owning medical office space makes you a commercial real estate investor. If you are in an appreciating location you could sell your building at a profit later on. If you only occupy a portion of the building you own and lease out the remaining space you become a landlord. This can be a profitable endeavor or you end up losing money, however either way owning a building is a lot more work than you think. 
• Taxes – When buying medical office space you have to consider all the taxes. Consult with your CPA about what you can and can’t deduct from taxes. When leasing you can deduct the total amount you pay in rent. When you own rental property you are able to write off repairs and maintenance immediately, however improvements and depreciation to your medical office are deducted over 39 years. For example let’s say you purchase a commercial medical property for $300,000 and the land is valued at $100,000. You can only write off about $5,100 of the purchase price annually regardless of how much money you put down. You are also able to deduct loan interest and property taxes. Additionally many practices purchase their medical space under an entity (e.g. LLC, S-Corp, etc) then that entity leases the space back to your practice. Doing this gives you more flexibility in writing off expenses, etc. Discuss this with your CPA and attorney.
• Location – It many cases the best locations have already been purchased which means if you want to be in a particular location your only option is to lease. On the flip side it could be that there is nothing to rent in the most desired location so your only option would be to buy an existing building or build a new one.
• Return on Investment – Before purchasing you need to determine the profitability of your practice. If you are getting a return of 20% you need to compare that to the potential ROI you might get from owning commercial real estate. Although some doctors have made wise choices and purchased a location with great returns and amassed a retirement fund, others haven’t been so lucky. If you overpay or over-leverage for the property, don’t maintain it, or market conditions dictate that it’s not as a desirable location as it once was you could be in for a disappointment. You make your money at the time of purchase so do your homework and run the numbers.
• Run the Numbers – I can’t stress this enough. Ask your CPA or accountant to create financial projections and tax benefits of leasing vs buying. Make sure to include all out of pocket costs for both (e.g. improvement costs, down payments, debt service, taxes, security deposits, etc.)
• Consult With Your Lender – Get them involved early on in the process as you want to get an idea of rates and terms for financing. 

Overall renting makes sense if you don’t have the money for the large upfront investment needed to buy, you’re not sure how much space you will need now or in the future, or you don’t want to deal with the responsibility that comes with owning medical office space. If you are more established, want to be in one location for a long time, don’t have plans to grow later on, and you have the financials to take on a commercial real estate investment then buying might make more sense. Keep in mind that this is a business decision and it’s important to run the numbers  to determine the best course.

Owning medical office space is not for everyone. Don’t listen to everyone that tells you that it’s better to own than rent as everyone’s situation is different. Do you own homework, gather info, and ask a lot of questions that will help you make a decision.

If you are still on the fence then consider asking other doctors who own or have previously owned their medical office space. You will benefit greatly from their experiences. If you have any questions about leasing or buying medical office space for sale in Austin feel free to give us a call.

The post Buying or Renting Medical Office Space? – Consider These Factors appeared first on Austin Tenant Advisors.

4 Reasons to Rent Medical Office Space Vs Buying

The following post is copyrighted by Austin Tenant Advisors - .

When it makes business sense and they meet certain criteria many healthcare practitioners are better off owning their medical office space. However in reality it’s more common for them to lease or rent medical office space instead of buying. Below are 3 reasons why it would make sense for a practice to rent medical office space rather than purchasing:

1. Less Upfront Cash Needed – When you purchase a medical office building for sale you typically have to put down a large sum of cash usually between 10% and 25% depending on the type of loan you get. Even for an established practice this large down payment is not always doable, especially in cities where medical office space is at a premium. By renting you only have to put down a security deposit typically equal to one months gross rent as long as you have good credit.
2. Medical Office Buildings For Rent Are Well Equipped – Most medical office buildings for lease will already be equipped with the infrastructure (electrical power, plumbing, back up generators, etc.) needed for medical office use. They also already have parking ratios suitable for your needs. When you purchase a building you may end up having to make upgrades and customize the space to make it ready for medical use before moving in. The same would be true if you leased a traditional profession office.
3. Access to the Most Popular Locations – In most large cities the premium locations have already been cherry picked which means you won’t typically find any available medical office space for sale. If you do the prices are going to be very high or there will only be large buildings for sale and not small 2,000 to 4,000 sf medical office condos which may be more suited to your needs. By leasing you will be able to find space in more popular medical areas that would not be available any other way.
4. Convenient for Patients – Also keep in mind that your patients don’t want to have to travel all over town to go to their doctor appoints. They may prefer going to one main location where the majority of their doctors are located. It’s much more convenient for them to have most of their doctors in one location than scattered all over the metro area.

I’m not saying to not buy medical office space. You have to make sure it makes business sense and that you have the finances to do so. If you have any questions about buying or renting medical office space feel free to give us a call. 

 

The post 4 Reasons to Rent Medical Office Space Vs Buying appeared first on Austin Tenant Advisors.

Where Most Medical Office Space in Austin Tx is Located

The following post is copyrighted by Austin Tenant Advisors - .

If your looking to rent medical office space in Austin, Tx you will find that most of the spaces for rent or for sale will be located in close proximity to the major hospitals in Austin, Texas. That being said there are still certain pockets around town where doctors and other medical service providers tend to cluster. Depending on the medical services you provide if you are looking for referral sources then you want to locate your office near other hospitals or doctors that offer complementary services.

Based on the map on this post you can see that the majority of medical office space in Austin that doctors lease or purchase is located in South Austin around S 1st St and Ben White Blvd, Southwest Austin, West Austin along Bee Caves Road, and Central Austin around the intersection of Lamar and 38th Street. You will also find a lot of doctors offices at Far West and Mopac in Northwest Austin.

Also you want to consider your ideal customer and demographics. If you offer services related to plastic surgery (e.g. breast augmentation then you might want to consider opening your office more towards the Southwest, West, and Northwest areas of town where average incomes can range from $150,000 to $250,000. If your target audience is lower income then stick to South, Southeast, and Northeast Austin.

Need Help Finding Austin Medical Office Space?

We specialize in helping tenants & buyers search, select, and negotiate medical office space in Austin, Texas. Our services are free to you as landlords and building owners pay our fee, however we represent your best interests. Some commercial real estate agents represent tenants and landlords, however to avoid conflicts of interest we do not represent landlords or owners. We only represent tenants and buyers and are able to provide unbiased opinions on every property and give insider information that landlord agents are not allowed to since they represent the owners.

How to Find Medical Office Space in Austin Tx

There are thousands of square feet of medical properties and medical office building (MOB’s) in and around the Austin, Tx Metro area. You could spend a lot of time searching on your own or let us help. We will save you time, help you avoid costly mistakes, and negotiate the best possible deal.

1. Give us a call at (512) 861-0525 or fill out our contact form on the website.
2. After learning about your practice, size & location, budget, and timing we will will identify all the properties that make sense for your business
3. We will schedule tours with the best properties and walk them with you giving you our unbiased opinions on each one
4. We will help you do an apples and apples analysis of each property and then draft and submit proposals on the best options.
5. And finally we will help you negotiate the best price and recommend vendors to help prepare the space for occupancy.

The post Where Most Medical Office Space in Austin Tx is Located appeared first on Austin Tenant Advisors.

Map & List of All Austin Tx Hospitals

The following post is copyrighted by Austin Tenant Advisors - .

There are many healthcare related clinics and hospitals throughout the Austin, Texas Metropolitan area, however below we have created a list of all the hospitals in Austin, Tx. If you have any questions or need help buying or renting medical office space in Austin feel free to give us a call. 

Dell Children’s Medical Center of Central Texas

4900 Mueller Blvd, Austin, Tx 78723 | Website

This is one of the only hospitals that is dedicated to children and adolescents. With over 500,000 sf state of the art facility they offer the following services

• Anesthesiology
• Cardiology & Cardiovascular Surgery
• Dermatology
• Adolescent Medicine
• Ear Nose and Throat
• Allergy / Immunology
• Cancer Care
• Critical Care Medicine
• Emergency Medicine
• Neurology
• General Pediatrics
• Urology
• Much more

Northwest Hills Surgical Hospital

6818 Austin Center Blvd, Austin, Tx 78731 | Website

Opened in 1995 this is one of the premiere surgical hospitals in Central Texas. 

• Operating Room
• Physician Anesthesiologist
• Pre-Op / Recovery
• Recovery / Post Anesthesia Care Unit
• Impatient Unit
• Pharmacy / Lab

St. David’s Medical Center

919 E 32nd St, Austin, Tx 78705 | Website

Founded in 1924 this is the flagship location with a 350 bed acute care & 64 bed rehab hospital that is home to the Texas Cardiac Arrhythmia and St David’s Neuroscience and spine institutes.

• Cancer Care
• Cardiac Rehabilitation
• Cardiovascular Services
• Continence & Pelvic Floor Disorders
• Diabetes Education Programs
• Emergency and Urgent Care
• Endoscopy
• Heart and Vascular
• Hospitalist Services
• Imaging Services
• Intensive Care
• Joint Replacement Services
• Kidney Transplant Center
• Lymphedema
• Nutrition & Outpatient Clinical Nutrition Services
• Pediatric ER Services
• Rehabilitation Services
• Robotics
• Sleep Disorders
• Spiritual Care
• St David’s Neuroscience and Spine Institute
• Surgery
• Texas Cardiac Arrhythmia Institute
• Weight Loss Surgery
• Wound Care

St David’s North Austin Medical Center

12221 N Mopac Expwy, Austin, Tx 78758 | Website

This is part of St David’s Healthcare which is one of the largest Texas health systems. It has 378 beds and is an acute care, mult-specialty facility with a focus on women’s health services such as newborn and maternity care. This location offers the same services as the flagship location.

St. David’s South Austin Medical Center

901 W. Ben White Blvd, Austin, Tx 78704 | Website

Has 316 beds and has a nationally accredited oncology program with the only adult bone marrow transplant program in the area.

• Same medical services as the flagship however also includes Breast Care and Maternity & Newborn

Heart Hospital of Austin

3801 N Lamar Blvd, Austin, Tx 78756 | Website

Affiliated with St. David’s Healthcare and is one of the largest non-academic cardiovascular research programs globally. It has 58 beds and 24/7 emergency depart.

• Cardiac Rehab & Imaging Center
• Executive Wellnes
• Heart Valve Clinic
• Erectile Dysfunction & Heart Disease
• HeartSave CT
• Treatment of Advanced Aortic Disease
• Emergency Services

Dell Seton Medical Center at The University of Texas

1500 Red River Street, Austin, Tx 78701 | Website

This is a 211 bed teaching hospital that opened in downtown Austin in 2017. It’s owned and operated by Seton Healthcare

• Neurosciences, Brain, & Spine Center
• Major (Anticipated Level I) Trauma Center
• 24 hour emergency department
• Intensive Care Unit with Private Rooms
• Intermediate Care Unit
• Impatient Surgery
• Day Surgery
• Diagnostic Testing such as CT Scan and MRI
• Heart Stroke and Care
• Rehabilitation Services
• Specialty Outpatient Clinics
• Surgical Services such as Endoscopy

The Hospital at Westlake Medical Center

5656 Bee Cave Rd, West Lake Hills, Tx 78746 | Website

State of the art hospital and medical facility located in Westlake Tx, 20 minutes West of downtown Austin on Bee Caves Rd

• Imaging Services
• Sleep Center
• 24/7 Emergency
• Orthopedics and Spine
• Robotic Surgery
• Heart & Vascular Institute
• Rehab & Wellness
• Nursing
• Nutrition Services
• Case Management

Seton Main Hospital

1201 W 38th St, Austin, Tx 78705 | Website

This is Austin’s largest surgical / medical acute care center and the only hospital that performs heart transplants in Central Texas. They offer comprehensive healthcare services

• 24/7 Emergency Care
• Critical Care
• Intermediate Care
• Maternity Services
• OBGYN
• Oncology
• Neurosciences
• Medical / Surgical Services
• Diagnostic & Therapeutic Services
• Wellness & Education Services
• Much more

Seton Southwest Hospital

7900 Farm to Market Rd 1826, Austin, Tx 78737 | Website

Primarily serves the needs of residents in Southwest Austin and Travis County Communities. 

• Maternity Services
• Surgery
• 24/7 Emergency Care
• Bone Density Testing
• Imaging / XRay
• MRI
• Patient Surgical Care Unit
• Cardiac Rehab Services
• Pediatric Rehab Services

Seton Northwest Hospital

11113 Research Blvd, Austin, Tx 78759 | Website

124 bed hospital in Northwest Austin that provides comprehensive medical care.

• Women’s Health
• Emergency & Trauma Care
• Surgery
• Cardiovascular
• Rehab Services
• Imaging/X-ray
• Case Management & Social Services

Cedar Park Regional Medical Center

1401 Medical Parkway, Cedar Park, Tx 78613 | Website

This hospital opened in 2007 and provides the latest in technology and surgical suites. They provide comprehensive health care services.

• Heart Care
• Emergency Services
• Orthopedic Care
• Women’s Health
• Bariatric Weight Loss Services
• Imaging Services
• Maternity Care
• Wound Care
• Rehabilitation Services
• Cardiac Care
• And Much More

Baylor Scott & White Medical Center at Round Rock

300 University Blvd, Round Rock, Tx 78665 | Website

101 bed full service hospital that serves residents of Northern Travis and Williamson Counties. 

• Heart & Vascular Services
• Diabetes Management
• Orthopedic Services
• Women’s Health Services
• Children’s Services
• Emergency Services

Baylor Scott & White Medical Center Lakeway

100 Medical Pkwy, Austin, Tx 78738 | Website

106 bed Acute care hospital serving Bee Cave, Lakeway, and the hill country region.

• Anesthesiology
• Back & Spine
• Breast Imaging
• Cancer Care
• Critical and Intensive Care
• Dermatology
• Emergency Care
• Ear Nose & Throat
• Heart & Vascular
• Imaging and Radiology
• Men’s Health
• Orthopedics
• Urology
• Neuroscience
• Much More

The post Map & List of All Austin Tx Hospitals appeared first on Austin Tenant Advisors.

Understanding The Concept Of Real Property Gains Tax (RPGT)

In previous article, we’ve talked about what is Real Property Gains Tax (RPGT) as well as how to calculate RPGT while selling the property to others. So, let us continue the topic of what is the frequently asked question which may be relevant in understanding the actual concept of RPGT as follows;

When should I pay for RPGT?

As prescribed by law, the buyer’s lawyers are required to retain a 3% of the purchase price from the deposit and remit the same to the Inland Revenue Board within 60 days from the date of the S&P Agreement to meet the RPGT payable.

To read the full article, please visit Understanding The Concept Of Real Property Gains Tax (RPGT)

Wealth Mastery Academy - WMA is a reputable organization that is committed in empowering people with the right financial education, knowledge and proven skills to in order for individuals to attain financial freedom. Over the years, WMA has coached thousands of individuals from all walks of life and have guided them with powerful and proven skills towards the path of financial freedom.

Source: Understanding The Concept Of Real Property Gains Tax (RPGT)