Why do they keep picking on Cleveland? Agree or disagree? (Lakewood: 2013, crimes)
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.
Both those cities would rank higher if they were larger. Cleveland is still in the top 50 largest cities... for now. Neither of them are.
I don't understand the point of your post. What does the fact that Cleveland is on the 50 largest cities list have to do with this thread? The point was that Cleveland was on the worst 10 list at number 2. This list had nothing to do with the size of the cities, since #1 only had 41,00 people, but the size of the problems in the cities. The reason I used those cities was to point out that weather was not the main reason Cleveland made the list. If it had been those would have been higher on this list then Cleveland.
The actual point of my posts was to point out that the real main reason that Cleveland makes these worst of lists. It is POLITICAL CORRUPTION and to challange those who claim to love Cleveland to do something about it.
The actual point of my posts was to point out that the real main reason that Cleveland makes these worst of lists. It is POLITICAL CORRUPTION and to challange those who claim to love Cleveland to do something about it.
Perhaps. But it's more likely that Cleveland is just an easy target. The article basically summarizes the Forbes article. There's nothing original about this.
And forget about the citizens of Cleveland saving the city at the ballot box. Most American cities have very few educated inhabitants under the age of 30 who aren't gay. When most American families moved to the suburbs in the mid 20th century only the larger and more forward thinking cities experienced population growth. When these suburbanites left they took their family values and tax dollars with them.
So yes, political corruption(or at the very least, inaction) hurt Cleveland. In the 1970's. But that damage has long been done. The current corruption is only a continuation of the same old, same old.
The bottom line is that it's going to take a momentous comeback for Cleveland to turn it around. The solution to Cleveland's problem is simple. Beat. Back. the. Ghetto. Gentrification is the key. Cleveland has the architecture. Of that there's no doubt. What we don't have enough of is people.
Eh, most of the article isn't wrong. The only issue I have with it is the unemployment rate criticism, as pointed out earlier, though the employment in the city isn't exactly prospering either.
The rest of the criticisms are spot on. However, certain ones, like weather and sports, aren't very important to some people.
Sadly, the article doesn't even touch on some of Cleveland's worst problems (poverty, crime, development, education, etc).
Don't even get me started on education. Sure, the inner city is bad.. But how many Excellent with Distinction districts are there in the area?
After reading AlaskaPat's posts often, I believe this thread is attempt to start a flame war.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buckeyes440
The bottom line is that it's going to take a momentous comeback for Cleveland to turn it around. The solution to Cleveland's problem is simple. Beat. Back. the. Ghetto. Gentrification is the key. Cleveland has the architecture. Of that there's no doubt. What we don't have enough of is people.
A lot of cities have been doing that.. the result? Crime just spreads to the suburbs. We are lucky to have pretty much ALL our crime located in a couple neighborhoods.. just ask the south.
Perhaps. But it's more likely that Cleveland is just an easy target. The article basically summarizes the Forbes article. There's nothing original about this.
And forget about the citizens of Cleveland saving the city at the ballot box. Most American cities have very few educated inhabitants under the age of 30 who aren't gay. When most American families moved to the suburbs in the mid 20th century only the larger and more forward thinking cities experienced population growth. When these suburbanites left they took their family values and tax dollars with them.
So yes, political corruption(or at the very least, inaction) hurt Cleveland. In the 1970's. But that damage has long been done. The current corruption is only a continuation of the same old, same old.
The bottom line is that it's going to take a momentous comeback for Cleveland to turn it around. The solution to Cleveland's problem is simple. Beat. Back. the. Ghetto. Gentrification is the key. Cleveland has the architecture. Of that there's no doubt. What we don't have enough of is people.
Gentrification is key, but unfortunately it's an uphill battle here, heh. Cleveland, as-is, is not appealing to people. And when people don't come, new businesses don't either. I think two things are absolutely necessary to turn the city around.
First, the city needs to ***** itself out to big business. Hell, not just big business - ANY business. Offer tax abatements, heavily discounted real estate, less red tape involved with businesses, etc. Just get businesses here! The problem with that is that most of the poor are too narrow-minded to realize the benefits, resulting in backlash against the exact things that will attract businesses. Jackson & Co. need to take a stand and do what is best for the city, even if it doesn't please the poor.
Once you bring businesses, the people that come with them will inject more money into the city. Then you use the extra money to fund even more developments which would further increase the appeal of the city to outsiders. Bringing businesses would be the trigger for momentum that would turn around the economy and city as a whole. But bringing the businesses is step one and completing that step should receive almost all of the focus for the first few years because it is absolutely vital. Don't put the cart before the horse.
Another great way to attract people would be to ***** the city out to wealthy immigrants. Some guy from Pepper Pike organized a consortium of foreign investors for the Flats East Bank project by guaranteeing green cards for the investors and their families if their investments create at least 10 jobs. That is a genius idea, IMO, and the city should capitalize on the opportunity.
Second, the damn delays in development need to stop. Development ideas either take FOREVER to become a reality or they simply fall by the wayside. The most recent notable examples would be the casino (delayed), Flats East Bank (delayed), & medical mart (trying to be delayed). Hell, the University Circle project has been in the planning stages for half a decade and just finally broke ground this past Monday. Cleveland does not have time on it's side and it cannot afford to wait for delays on everything if it wants to survive.
If it wasn't obvious, the two censored words start with w and are synonymous with hooker.
Don't even get me started on education. Sure, the inner city is bad.. But how many Excellent with Distinction districts are there in the area?
After reading AlaskaPat's posts often, I believe this thread is attempt to start a flame war.
A lot of cities have been doing that.. the result? Crime just spreads to the suburbs. We are lucky to have pretty much ALL our crime located in a couple neighborhoods.. just ask the south.
Half of that ranking is kinda dumb IMO - specifically the workplace fatality rates and the natural disaster risk. People don't give a damn about workplace fatality rates and last I checked the natural disaster risk hasn't stopped anyone from moving to California, Florida, etc. To be fair, the area fares pretty well in the other two categories. While most of the suburbs here are excellent, the state of the city is a huge huge negative for the area. To put NE Ohio back on the right path, addressing the problems in Cleveland is key.
As far as education, yes, the suburbs do have good schools. But the inner city schools aren't just mediocre - they're pathetic. They have a graduation rate of 55% or something equally absurd. People aren't going to move to Cleveland and put their kids in that environment. IF they move here, they'll just chill in the 'burbs while the city itself continues to decay. Eventually that decay will begin to creep into the suburbs.
I wouldn't say all the crime is located in a couple neighborhoods. Most of the Eastside is pretty crappy, basically all the way out to the burbs like Shaker Heights, University Heights, Beachwood, etc. The Westside is better, but on the decline as well IMO. Obviously every major city has its share of crime, but in Cleveland it's still a bit too widespread. Condensing it even further would be great for the city. To do that, though, we need to attract more people from the middle and upper classes. Their extra tax money will also facilitate an increased police presence that would force the condensation of crime into certain areas and prevent it from spreading into the burbs.
Once you bring businesses, the people that come with them will inject more money into the city. Then you use the extra money to fund even more developments which would further increase the appeal of the city to outsiders. Bringing businesses would be the trigger for momentum that would turn around the economy and city as a whole. But bringing the businesses is step one and completing that step should receive almost all of the focus for the first few years because it is absolutely vital. Don't put the cart before the horse.
Oh, I agree 100%. Is there another(sustainable) way to build a city?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buckeyes440
As far as education, yes, the suburbs do have good schools. But the inner city schools aren't just mediocre - they're pathetic. They have a graduation rate of 55% or something equally absurd. People aren't going to move to Cleveland and put their kids in that environment. IF they move here, they'll just chill in the 'burbs while the city itself continues to decay. Eventually that decay will begin to creep into the suburbs.
An interesting comparison would be Cleveland city schools vs. Akron city schools. Actually, I think I might make this a new thread. After looking at the facts, there's some interesting trends.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buckeyes440
Obviously every major city has its share of crime, but in Cleveland it's still a bit too widespread. Condensing it even further would be great for the city. To do that, though, we need to attract more people from the middle and upper classes. Their extra tax money will also facilitate an increased police presence that would force the condensation of crime into certain areas and prevent it from spreading into the burbs.
^That. Cleveland's crime is much more widespread than many other American cities. Not that all of our suburbs are prospering(have you seen Euclid lately?) but I'm not all that worried about gentrification pushing the poor into the suburbs. As Buckeyes440 mentioned, the poor are basically the majority on the East side. There's no shortage of neighborhoods for them to move to(Hough, Kinsman, Glenville, etc) within city limits.
Perhaps. But it's more likely that Cleveland is just an easy target. The article basically summarizes the Forbes article. There's nothing original about this.
And forget about the citizens of Cleveland saving the city at the ballot box. Most American cities have very few educated inhabitants under the age of 30 who aren't gay. When most American families moved to the suburbs in the mid 20th century only the larger and more forward thinking cities experienced population growth. When these suburbanites left they took their family values and tax dollars with them.
So yes, political corruption(or at the very least, inaction) hurt Cleveland. In the 1970's. But that damage has long been done. The current corruption is only a continuation of the same old, same old.
The bottom line is that it's going to take a momentous comeback for Cleveland to turn it around. The solution to Cleveland's problem is simple. Beat. Back. the. Ghetto. Gentrification is the key. Cleveland has the architecture. Of that there's no doubt. What we don't have enough of is people.
I pretty much agree with this, but your statement that "Most American cities have very few educated inhabitants under the age of 30 who aren't gay" is way off. Yes, cities attract gay people, but more so they generally attract people with no kids in general. Most educated people of means who live in Chicago (where I live) are definatly straght, white-collar professionals who don't yet have school age kids. There are also a good amount of empty nesters who have returned to the city, and yes some gays also.
The problem with Cleveland is that it has not yet been able to attract enough of the educated childless people demographic. In successful cities (by American standards) people move to the suburbs to raise their kids because they have to, not because they want to. In Cleveland even most single people without kids are not especially compelled to live in the city, and that needs to change. I understand that Lakewood and Cleveland Heights serve as places for urban living in Cleveland, but more of this is needed in city neighborhoods closer to downtown. Tremont, Ohio City, and Gordan Square are good areas to build off.
I remember being at a party in Chicago with one of of my friends from Cleveland who was in town visiting. At the party there were a bunch of people having a conversation about how they dreaded moving to the suburbs. My friend said "this is a conversation you would never hear in Cleveland." Very telling of the attitudes in Cleveland and how they view city vs. suburban life. Hopefully as Cleveland improves this attitude fades away.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksu sucks
Oh, I agree 100%. Is there another(sustainable) way to build a city?
Even if Cleveland attracts business it also has to get the new blood that comes with them to move into the city. If Cleveland attracts 20k more jobs downtown and all those workers move to Solon and Avon what good does that do the for city neighborhoods?
Cleveland has to also make sure it uses new money to make improvements that will attract developers to the city. Good planning has historically been a big weakness for Cleveland. Things like building around transit stops or parks need to happen. This will lead to organic neighborhood improvements that will positively impact the city in a holistic manner. Cleveland is actually doing some of this now, but not as fast as it should. It comes down to being pro-business and encouraging neighborhood development. Cleveland actually has a lot of amenities and it's cheap, so it has that going for it.
^^ You also have to consider Cleveland suburbs like Lakewood or Coventry area of Cleveland Hts are mere minutes from all the downtown amenities. In Chicago, it may take 45-1hr to get to the heart of it all from most suburbs.
Half of that ranking is kinda dumb IMO - specifically the workplace fatality rates and the natural disaster risk. People don't give a damn about workplace fatality rates and last I checked the natural disaster risk hasn't stopped anyone from moving to California, Florida, etc. To be fair, the area fares pretty well in the other two categories. While most of the suburbs here are excellent, the state of the city is a huge huge negative for the area. To put NE Ohio back on the right path, addressing the problems in Cleveland is key.
I wouldn't say all the crime is located in a couple neighborhoods. Most of the Eastside is pretty crappy, basically all the way out to the burbs like Shaker Heights, University Heights, Beachwood, etc. The Westside is better, but on the decline as well IMO. Obviously every major city has its share of crime, but in Cleveland it's still a bit too widespread. Condensing it even further would be great for the city. To do that, though, we need to attract more people from the middle and upper classes. Their extra tax money will also facilitate an increased police presence that would force the condensation of crime into certain areas and prevent it from spreading into the burbs.
1. Half of the list is dumb, but for violent crime Cleveland metro is 15th out of 40 listed.
2. Yes it is, atleast compared to MOST US cities.
3. The so-called crappy east side suburbs are JOKES compared to the likes of West Palm Beach or North Las Vegas, etc..those are just examples. But You guys still don't understand crime is pretty concentrated here. See below.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksu sucks
^That. Cleveland's crime is much more widespread than many other American cities. Not that all of our suburbs are prospering(have you seen Euclid lately?) but I'm not all that worried about gentrification pushing the poor into the suburbs. As Buckeyes440 mentioned, the poor are basically the majority on the East side. There's no shortage of neighborhoods for them to move to(Hough, Kinsman, Glenville, etc) within city limits.
Wrong. Cleveland's crime is NOT widespread. Have you lived outside of Cleveland, ever? Cleveland's crime is very concentrated compared to other cities. You want widespread? Just move south. I lived in Florida, and crime was rampant everywhere. You want sprawling crime? Considering living in Las
Vegas.
As someone who just moved to Cleveland a few years ago, I can't believe you think the crime here is widespread. Euclid is chump change compared to any really crime ridden city. There were some 18 homicides in 800,000 people in the suburban communities in Cuyahoga County. In a LOT of southern cities, there is MORE crime in the outside areas. Take Miami for instance, many of the communities outside have more crime -- heck Miami Dade county had more homicides than the city proper.
If you guys think that crime is spread out in Cleveland, then you should never leave the area, because you will be in a culture shock. What I just said isn't opinion, it's fact.
^^ You also have to consider Cleveland suburbs like Lakewood or Coventry area of Cleveland Hts are mere minutes from all the downtown amenities. In Chicago, it may take 45-1hr to get to the heart of it all from most suburbs.
I understand this, and those are indeed nice areas. However, the city needs more upscale areas in the city closer to downtown. The main reasons are:
1. It looks better to outsiders to have nice areas next to downtown and this would improve the city's image. Lakewood and Coventry are too far removed for most visitors to see.
2. Nice areas in the city mean more tax dollars, which in turn can be used for city improvements.
3. Upscale areas push out crime.
Having cool suburbs should not be an excuse for the lack of upscale areas in the city.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WeSoHood
Wrong. Cleveland's crime is NOT widespread. Have you lived outside of Cleveland, ever? Cleveland's crime is very concentrated compared to other cities. You want widespread? Just move south. I lived in Florida, and crime was rampant everywhere. You want sprawling crime? Considering living in Las
Vegas.
If you guys think that crime is spread out in Cleveland, then you should never leave the area, because you will be in a culture shock. What I just said isn't opinion, it's fact.
I agree and disagree. Taking the area as a whole it is safe. Once you get out of the city and a couple rough suburbs crime is rare. At the same time there are not enough areas in the inner-city that feel isolated from crime. West Park, Edgewater, Old Brooklyn, and Little Italy are, but they are not geographically close to downtown. In trendier neighborhoods like Tremont or Ohio City you still get the feeling that crime is around the corner. There are no Georgetown or Lincoln Park type neighborhoods in the Cleveland city limits, which I view as a problem with Cleveland for my reasons listed above.
I'm not disagreeing with any of that.. but Clevelanders tend to view Ohio City and Tremont much more dangerous than it actually is.. heck, South Beach is within walking distance from some very dangerous areas.
For instance here were the first 3 months this year in South Beach
A gun shootout in the 16th/Collins garage, 1 dead, 2 shot
A stabbing on Collins near the W Hotel, 1 dead
A gun shootout between 2 cars on the MacArthur Bridge, 1 dead, 1 shot
A crazy man shooting wildly into the air near Tantra, 1 shot by police
A man shot to death on Ocean Drive at 14th St, 1 dead
A huge knife fight on 15th near Collins, 3 stabbed
A man stabbed to death on Washington Ave near 11th St, 1 dead
Yet, South Beach gets positive press because it's citizens don't always speak negatively about it. Crime is going to happen in the city..
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.
