U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-16-2010, 08:05 PM
 
Location: Phoenix
5,361 posts, read 7,050,845 times
Reputation: 3973

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnDBaumgardner View Post
People love to trash both Cleveland and Detroit ... without having much of a solid base to establish such opinions, since many of those talking "speak blindly" ... leaning on the old "misconceptions" of the media and others. Most people should recognize that Cleveland is no longer a national "punchline" ... that's wayyyyyyyyyy out of style these days.
...and yet you do the same thing with cities like Phoenix.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnDBaumgardner View Post
Ummm ... since Cleveland isn't a prostitute, I must not be its pimp! Yes, there are variable opinions on "every city", including Phoenix ... some lack merit altogether, while some peoples opinions have some solid logic behind them. Phoenix doesn't really stand out for anything other than being a hotspot for wealthy retirees and having a few extraordinary resorts in its foothills ...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-16-2010, 08:10 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
7,732 posts, read 11,763,776 times
Reputation: 2774
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohio248 View Post
Not really.

Both metros are roughly flat in population since 2000.

Detroit and Cleveland are more stagnant than declining.

And Metro Detroit had very robust population and economic growth during the 1990's.
Yes, REALLY Mr. New York, er - Toledo.

Look it up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-16-2010, 08:12 PM
 
Location: Detroit's eastside, downtown Detroit in near future!
2,055 posts, read 3,700,060 times
Reputation: 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattClyde View Post
But it still has some dead parts. Not saying that all of Detroit is like this but people don't call it dead for a reason.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6WKMNmFsxM
first off do you realize that the videos they put on youtube about the blight and abandonment is usually one or two sections over and over again. Like ok we get it black bottom is blighted, the old packard plant is empty......gosh get over it. I mean hello Detroit was built to house 2 million ppl plus many commercial buildings and now has less than half the population and businesses.....no **** some of its going to be abandoned. But that's not exclusively a Detroit thing. The people who come here to tape those same areas over and over are the same mofo's who hang out at the clubs and bars downtown before going home. The media is going to be bias against Detroit...duh there is no money in showing the many intact neighborhoods or thriving businesses. But you people on C-D seem to not understand that
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-16-2010, 08:12 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
7,732 posts, read 11,763,776 times
Reputation: 2774
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnDBaumgardner View Post
While Cleveland "may" ultimately lose it's status as a hub for Continental Airlines ( Now United ), it's not going to obliterate the entire city ...
yes, it's NOT GOOD to lose this hub ... but there are many, many other important projects that are NEW to Cleveland, thus resulting in an ongoing transformation of the city.

It's no guarantee that Continental will pull it's hub out of Hopkins Int'l Airport, but it is rumoured ...
I'm really sorry, John - but you can pretty much bank on it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-16-2010, 08:15 PM
 
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
1,361 posts, read 2,697,940 times
Reputation: 778
Quote:
Originally Posted by AZLiam View Post
...and yet you do the same thing with cities like Phoenix.

Don't even go there with me, because you KNOW I'm not maligning Phoenix in the INSANE WAYS that people have continuously RAGGED on Cleveland for years and years ...

I merely stated an opinion on Phoenix, an opinion that belongs to me. I DID NOT ATTACK PHOENIX WHATSOEVER ... get it straight!
It's not the same as people who enjoy "dumping" on Cleveland, and you already know it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-16-2010, 08:15 PM
 
Location: Detroit's eastside, downtown Detroit in near future!
2,055 posts, read 3,700,060 times
Reputation: 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohio248 View Post
Definitely true. Detroit has tons and tons of blight.

I'm just saying that the vast majority of the metro is like any other U.S. metro.
I agree with some stuff you say but honestly I get the feeling you are suburbanite that doesn't really spend time in the city.....which is fine. I get this impression because most of your posts are about the burbs.....which is also fine. Yes Detroit has plenty blight, once again it was built to house 2million people and the population just is 900,000, but there are still PLENTY of neighborhoods that are fine
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-16-2010, 08:18 PM
 
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
1,361 posts, read 2,697,940 times
Reputation: 778
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnatl View Post
I'm really sorry, John - but you can pretty much bank on it.

Well, again, I don't see Continental's "possible" departure as bringing about the absolute destruction of an entire city ... in the same way a departure of Delta Airlines leaving Atlanta, would certainly NOT destroy that city ...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-16-2010, 08:19 PM
 
Location: Phoenix
5,361 posts, read 7,050,845 times
Reputation: 3973
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnDBaumgardner View Post
Don't even go there with me, because you KNOW I'm not maligning Phoenix in the INSANE WAYS that people have continuously RAGGED on Cleveland for years and years ...

I merely stated an opinion on Phoenix, an opinion that belongs to me. I DID NOT ATTACK PHOENIX WHATSOEVER ... get it straight!
It's not the same as people who enjoy "dumping" on Cleveland, and you already know it.
So basically, your opinions of other cities are all valid; however, when someone else presents facts about another city, they are considered insane? In your post that I responded to, you mentioned that some people "lean on old misconceptions". Don't you think your opinion of Phoenix is just a misconception? If it's OK for you to have an opinion, why isn't it OK for others?

BTW, what do you consider the bashing that Phoenix or other sunbelt cities get? Deserved "dumping"? Do you even read CD?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-16-2010, 08:20 PM
 
Location: Detroit's eastside, downtown Detroit in near future!
2,055 posts, read 3,700,060 times
Reputation: 646
.....but yet and still many companies have moved into both Cleveland and Detroit smh
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-16-2010, 08:23 PM
 
Location: the illegal immigrant state
757 posts, read 1,415,496 times
Reputation: 1013
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnDBaumgardner View Post
People love to trash both Cleveland and Detroit ...
Uh, why do you let it get to you? Unless you're personally responsible for cities' decline, why do you take offense to it?

Maybe the cities you identify with are in decline. If so, that's the way it is. Cities expand and can contract. Maybe those cites will be revitalized when they can attract commerce. Maybe not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MattClyde View Post
But it still has some dead parts. Not saying that all of Detroit is like this but people don't call it dead for a reason.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6WKMNmFsxM
Whoa, parts of that city looked post-apocalyptic and scary- those abandoned buildings can easily attract vagrants including drug addicts and the like.

I'm living in the opposite situation. San Jose sits on valuable real estate and our late 19th century/early 20th century houses are often torn down in favor of building new, bland-looking, soul-less apartment buildings. This is because the re/developers are politically connected and nearly anything in their way can eventually be demolished.

Neighborhood safety aside, from a historical preservation perspective I'm not sure which is worse- letting the older homes and buildings disintegrate or demolishing them long before they do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top