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.
And it is showing in the numbers that poverty makes the spread of the virus worse. Detroit and New Orleans are both poor cities and it’s one reason (among many) that things are bad there. I get that Detroit has a lot of prosperity in parts of the city and the suburbs but once it gets loose in poorer areas, it can spread much more easily in other areas.
As far as Asian immigrants are concerned, no. Detroit’s Asian immigrants are overwhelmingly from the Middle East, India, and Bangladesh. There are not very many Chinese or Koreans relative to its size. That’s irrelevant for this argument.
Very much disagree. Below is a map of the county by county case count in Michigan as of yesterday.
Of the cases in Michigan 13,492 (85.84% of state total) have been confirmed in the counties in and around the 3 county Detroit Metro core.
The three core 3 counties(Wayne, Oakland, Macomb) 12,196 -77.59% of state total.
Wayne Co. 7,158
Oakland 3,035
Macomb 2,003
The city of Detroit accounts for 4,495 confirmed cases within those counties or 36.85% (28.59% of state total)
So while yes it is definitely disproportionately affecting poor people it is NOT the overwhelming reason Metro Detroit has emerged as the 2nd biggest hot spot after New York. I stand by my position, that a late to the game State of Michigan, combined with an internationally connected resident base and supply chain allowed a wider spread of infection.
combined with an internationally connected resident base and supply chain allowed a wider spread of infection.
That’s not a reason.
There are other cities that are more connected to Asia than Detroit that don’t have near the number of cases nor that have a per capita case count that Metro Detroit has. Chicago, Houston, and Dallas are as/more connected to Asia yet it’s not hitting them as hard for now. Chicago is being significantly hit, nothing like Detroit especially per capita. The Texas metros have building case counts but again, nothing even close to Detroit.
Yet Houston and Dallas are as served to Asia as Detroit and Chicago has many more flights to Asia as others mentioned.
According to IATA numbers from 2018, Detroit has less O&D to Asia than Chicago, Dallas, or Houston meaning less people fly to Detroit as a destination than the other three.
Therefore, connectivity to Asia is not the reason why Detroit is struggling so much with this.
There are other cities that are more connected to Asia than Detroit that don’t have near the number of cases nor that have a per capita case count that Metro Detroit has. Chicago, Houston, and Dallas are as/more connected to Asia yet it’s not hitting them as hard for now. Chicago is being significantly hit, nothing like Detroit especially per capita. The Texas metros have building case counts but again, nothing even close to Detroit.
Yet Houston and Dallas are as served to Asia as Detroit and Chicago has many more flights to Asia as others mentioned.
According to IATA numbers from 2018, Detroit has less O&D to Asia than Chicago, Dallas, or Houston meaning less people fly to Detroit as a destination than the other three.
Therefore, connectivity to Asia is not the reason why Detroit is struggling so much with this.
You can't confirm that anymore conclusively than I can. Detroit is the primary hub for Asian travel through Delta, and even if it's not always the "destination" it is still the major connection. Not sure what the point of bringing in your homer cities into the argument is. Texas confirmed it's first case on March 4th, Michigan didn't confirm a case until a full week later on the 10th. If you don't think that amount of time had an impact on how people acted, and took precautions you're being intellectually dishonest for the sake of winning a debate. So I'll take the Asian connectivity out of my argument so as not to derail the thread.
Even with that taken it out, your argument is invalidated that metro Detroit's high infection is due to the poverty within the city itself. As evidenced by the numbers and the dispersion of cases.
You can't confirm that anymore conclusively than I can. Detroit is the primary hub for Asian travel through Delta, and even if it's not always the "destination" it is still the major connection. Not sure what the point of bringing in your homer cities into the argument is. So I'll take the Asian connectivity out of my argument so as not to derail the thread.
Even with that taken it out, your argument is invalidated that metro Detroit's high infection is due to the poverty within the city itself. As evidenced by the numbers and the dispersion of cases.
From another post:
NY Tri-State 533.3
New Orleans 430.8
Detroit 229.7 Seattle 132.4
Boston 96.6
Miami/Ft Lauderdale 90.0
Denver 88.9
Indy 84.1
Philly 78.3
Chicago 77.8
Milwaukee 73.3
Las Vegas 72.2
Buffalo 60.0
Nashville 54.0
Salt Lake City 53.1
Other than the two cities bolded, none of the other cities are heavily Asian? LA and San Francisco are though and they're not in the top ten, at least according to this post.
NY Tri-State 533.3
New Orleans 430.8
Detroit 229.7 Seattle 132.4
Boston 96.6
Miami/Ft Lauderdale 90.0
Denver 88.9
Indy 84.1
Philly 78.3
Chicago 77.8
Milwaukee 73.3
Las Vegas 72.2
Buffalo 60.0
Nashville 54.0
Salt Lake City 53.1
Other than the two cities bolded, none of the other cities are heavily Asian? LA and San Francisco are though and they're not in the top ten, at least according to this post.
I never said being Asian had anything to do with contraction the virus. So the percentage of Asian population is moot, at least relative to how often people travel to and from any area that was prone to infection. If you're interpreting it as such that was never the intention.
I do think the amount of business heavy travel to and from the region could obviously play a role in it. I work for a company that has several facilities scattered throughout China, and I have along with my Detroit counterparts traveled there many times. Our company suspended international travel in January, but I know several peer companies that didn't until several weeks later. With the nature of the industries based in the area I do think it could have played a role. But as another poster pointed out, I have nothing but anecdotes and hunches so I won't argue it further.
Good work on the NY area for starting to have less cases and flattening the curve a little bit.
I still don't know what to make of California and Washington's numbers. It may be a few things:
1) The early shutdowns have actually worked in their favor, which flattened the curve a bit (the least popular answer, I know)
2) The states aren't as aggressively as testing as say - New York or New Jersey. It's not because of something nefarious but if testing is only restricted to those who have symptoms, it could explain a lot.
3) Something I thought of but could be a contributing factor - many people on the West Coast were already exposed to COVID-19 before it became a national issue and had already recovered by the time the lockdowns and testing really started ramping up.
The ties to Asia thing would be a much more major factor two or three months ago when COVID-19 was an Asian thing, but now that it's become worldwide, its not nearly as much of a factor.
Remember, the curve for every city is going to be different because of when the crisis started in each area. And to think, there's most likely going to be a second wave of this in a few months.
Good work on the NY area for starting to have less cases and flattening the curve a little bit.
I still don't know what to make of California and Washington's numbers. It may be a few things:
1) The early shutdowns have actually worked in their favor, which flattened the curve a bit (the least popular answer, I know)
2) The states aren't as aggressively as testing as say - New York or New Jersey. It's not because of something nefarious but if testing is only restricted to those who have symptoms, it could explain a lot.
3) Something I thought of but could be a contributing factor - many people on the West Coast were already exposed to COVID-19 before it became a national issue and had already recovered by the time the lockdowns and testing really started ramping up.
The ties to Asia thing would be a much more major factor two or three months ago when COVID-19 was an Asian thing, but now that it's become worldwide, its not nearly as much of a factor.
Remember, the curve for every city is going to be different because of when the crisis started in each area. And to think, there's most likely going to be a second wave of this in a few months.
Is it, though? LA is testing far more per million. So many of these stats are very far off because some states are not testing as quickly and heavily as others, especially NY. Yes, NYC is the current epicenter, but consider how many more tests NY has done per capita. OTOH, CA's raw numbers are 4th highest, yet it is testing 8th fewest per 1 million.
https://covid19tracker.health.ny.gov...r=no&%3Atabs=n
NY has tested 1.55% of its state population. When considering testing just in downstate (LI + NYC + Westchester + Rockland), about 2% of the population has been tested.
I mean, yes, those aren't huge differences in percentages, but it's still significant that large states like FL and Texas and CA have tested such a smaller number of their residents per capita than NY. Yes, those states don't rely as heavily on public transit like Downstate NY does and that was likely how it spread so quickly here, but it doesn't mean the numbers in CA FL TX are actually that low. They're artificially low because the states are not testing as aggressively as NY.
Yes, objectively I think we can say Florida is faring better than Louisiana. Here is why:
1) Louisiana has more cases than Florida despite having a smaller population.
2) Of tests that have been done, 21.56% of people who have been tested in Louisiana have tested positive. In Florida, 10.71% of people who have been tested are positive. In Florida, 59k tests have been done in the last week, in Louisiana that number is 26k. I get that Louisiana is still higher per capita, but breaking down the number of people who test positive as a total of the whole says a lot.
3) Lousiana's death rate is 11 per 100,000. Florida's death rate is 1 per 100,000.
So, yeah. Much worse in Louisiana.
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.
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.
