Would Cleveland/Northeast Ohio Be Better Off if it Were Its Own State? (Columbus: middle-class, universities)

[1watertiger]

the loss of munufacturing/industry/steel etc. and the good wages , was the downfall of cleveland AND our country... yes, cleveland and N.E. Ohio are re-inventing themselves and yes things are looking positive in many areas.. but as far as the "numbers" go, (good or bad) regarding population,births,deaths jobs,gdp,schools,churches,crimes,etc.etc.etc., N.E.Ohio is still number one !

[austiNati]

Originally Posted by OhAcid

Indeed. If Columbus were not home to OSU and the capital then it would have nothing other than being "nice" - which speaks for Anytown, USA in terms of significance.

Yeah, except for the fact that it DOES have OSU and The Capital, which is what makes Columbus what it is

Originally Posted by OhAcid

Same with Cincinnati actually; other than the beautiful topography I'm not really sure what the claim to fame is with this city.

With the exception of mass transit, what on Gods earth does Cleveland have, that Cincinnati doesn't???? I want some of what you're smoking

Originally Posted by OhAcid

Cleveland has the history, the lake, and the population (especially regional, as stated above and if you exclude the fact that Columbus just annexes anything touching it every few years, 216 square miles vs. the 82 that is Clelveland).

Yep, Cincinnati's history with the underground railroad, civil war, first pro baseball team, first planned suburbs and being the largest and first major inland city, are nothing compared to Cleveland's dynamic history.

Why do some of you Clevelanders talk down on the rest of the state, like you're eons better and offer a better quality of life? Cleveland honestly isn't a bad town, but this over-hyping and condescending tone towards the rest of the state is HILARIOUS. Yes, you're better off than Detroit, No, you're not any closer in quality to Chicago or Toronto, than the other 2 C's.

[TBideon]

Do all that many Clevelanders talk down to Columbus and Cincinnati? Frankly I've always felt we were envious of the other two Cs. There are certainly a lot of defeatist attitudes in Cleve and a ton of migration to Columbus, not to mention the national stigma against Cleve.

Don't take such umbrage to our boosters. We can use all the optimism we can get

[OhAcid]

Originally Posted by austiNati

Yeah, except for the fact that it DOES have OSU and The Capital, which is what makes Columbus what it is



With the exception of mass transit, what on Gods earth does Cleveland have, that Cincinnati doesn't???? I want some of what you're smoking



Yep, Cincinnati's history with the underground railroad, civil war, first pro baseball team, first planned suburbs and being the largest and first major inland city, are nothing compared to Cleveland's dynamic history.

Why do some of you Clevelanders talk down on the rest of the state, like you're eons better and offer a better quality of life? Cleveland honestly isn't a bad town, but this over-hyping and condescending tone towards the rest of the state is HILARIOUS. Yes, you're better off than Detroit, No, you're not any closer in quality to Chicago or Toronto, than the other 2 C's.

My point with regard to Columbus concerning it being the capital and having OSU is that without the two of these, the city has nothing worthwhile or interesting; unlike the other two largest cities in Ohio that more than hold their own as major cities without these two factors (that in my opinion do not equate a "good" or "major" city). In other words, Columbus is Madison, Wisconsin of Ohio - i.e. rather unimportant and uninteresting other than "it's nice" and has a university. The topography is uninteresting and unless you're attending OSU, or are a government employee then most likely you're a suburbanite living in part of Columbus's seemingly endless sprawl.

Concerning mass transit though, I'd say that's a pretty major point in Cleveland's favor; as it's the only city in Ohio to have decent public transit on par with other major US cities. It's definitely not the CTA, the NYC subway or on D.C.'s transit level; but concerning the size of Cleveland (which is much smaller) the city's public transit options are the best in Ohio. Three rail lines, one BRT line that is just as efficient as a fourth rail line, plus comprehensive bus routes that all function with a central hub at Tower City making a commute anywhere very simple or a matter of only one transfer in order to get to most places in the city. If you're going to be car free in Ohio, you're going to do it in Cleveland.

Also, note that I didn't make a reference anywhere in my quoted post to Cleveland's history being "better" than Cincinnati's. I was speaking with regard to Columbus. Though nationally and internationally, Cleveland where it is known is associated with Ohio, and vice versa. Not only that, but as has already been mentioned, almost half of the population of Ohio lives in or around Greater Cleveland/N.E. Ohio and the number is even higher counting people immediately surrounding that region as well. Cleveland is Ohio, whereas Cincinnati is just in Ohio - if you catch my distinction. Other than that, there are very few things "Ohio" I would describe as being best represented by Cincinnati.

Cleveland has the lake, the only national park in Ohio, Metroparks, is a transportation crossroads, and is close in proximity to other major US cities and Canadian cities as well. Not only that but Cleveland is also the de facto entertainment capital of Ohio as well. Cincinnati and Columbus get their share of entertainment that tours; but nothing on the same level that Cleveland brings in. If you want a truly urban, big city experience in Ohio, especially on a budget - Cleveland is the only place to get that experience. Cincinnati is big, but lacks many amenities (such as extensive public transit transit) that I would factor into a truly urban environment.

Cleveland has its problems, but for the first time since the term "comeback" has been used to refer to re-building in Cleveland, actual results are being seen. The demand for living space downtown, entertainment options, the revitalization of the lakefront, and work being done to address crime infested, impoverished areas are all happening in sync and yielding results. Not only that, but most of the states GDP comes from NE Ohio. Besides that, most of the argument of museums/food/sports in a sense of Cleveland vs. Cincinnati are subjective to personal taste; it's a matter of who you are and what you like. Personally, I'm a lake with a liberal vibe. I'm not a conservative river lover, if that makes sense.

Now going back to the original topic at hand, if NE Ohio were to break off and become its own state as being theorized; it would hold its own much better than any other region of Ohio breaking off to do the same thing. In fact, I don't think any other region would be capable of doing that very thing; even in theory.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by Clevelander17

Yes, all of the high-paid employees that live in (or spend significant time in) Columbus are a net gain for Central Ohio and net loss for every other area of the state. Northeast Ohio would be better off--financially and overall--if those people were based here and able to be more in touch with and focused on our problems.

So it's Columbus' fault that they were able to attract high-paying businesses (most of which have zero to do with state government)? Again, it's a little strange to be holding a city in a negative view simply because it was able to build on its own strengths. Why couldn't Cleveland do the same? Does the city hold zero responsibility for its own future?

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by Clevelander17

It would have been a lot easier to weather the storm (like Columbus has) were it the state capital.

This is such whiny hyperbole. If the city of Cleveland and its residents claim that they have no prominent role in the decline, then I'm a Nigerian prince who just needs $1,000 dollars.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by 1watertiger

the loss of munufacturing/industry/steel etc. and the good wages , was the downfall of cleveland AND our country... yes, cleveland and N.E. Ohio are re-inventing themselves and yes things are looking positive in many areas.. but as far as the "numbers" go, (good or bad) regarding population,births,deaths jobs,gdp,schools,churches,crimes,etc.etc.etc., N.E.Ohio is still number one !

So Cleveland is number 1, yet it's Columbus' fault that it's not the best?

[1watertiger]

jbcmh81, i never said its columbus fault. (?)

[The Cactus Leaguer]

As a resident of the fictional state of "Cascadia", I find this discussion to be fascinating. I see two angles to look at it from:

1. Changing state borders based on shared identity - could be geography, economic interest, culture, etc... this is the essence of "Cascadia" which stretches from Vancouver B.C. to Eugene and from the Pacific Ocean to the Cascade Mountains. I could see this applying to northeast Ohio (and perhaps western PA) as well. The logic behind this is it's easier to govern (and allocate resources) when goals and interests are aligned.

2. The "too many dollars are going to the capital" argument. Anyone who has seen their home value decline over the past 3-5 years while housing values continue to be strong in Washington D.C. metro can understand this argument. When the operations of government (and the lobbyists) become the primary engine of industry, resentment follows.

I personally don't care to debate either of these seriously... it's a fun intellectual exercise, but changing state borders would be a nightmare to pull off for something that would produce, at best, a marginal benefit.

[Cleveland_Collector]

Originally Posted by jbcmh81

So it's Columbus' fault that they were able to attract high-paying businesses (most of which have zero to do with state government)? Again, it's a little strange to be holding a city in a negative view simply because it was able to build on its own strengths. Why couldn't Cleveland do the same? Does the city hold zero responsibility for its own future?

Well, Cleveland has done the same. Only, it did it while Columbus was still knee deep in cow****.

Contrary to what appears to be your belief, people in Cleveland don't have much in the way of animosity towards Columbus (I know I certainly don't -- Cincy either, really). However, it is a little naive of a lot of it's residents/transplants to use statements like it being able "to build on it's own strengths" without acknowledging that one of its major core "strengths" is the boatload of revenue it retains from places like NEO every single year. Columbus' two largest economic contributors (read: employers) are both heavily or ENTIRELY funded by state revenue. And, while Cleveland and its surrounding area most certainly do hold the lion's share of the responsibility for their own future, those in Columbus must at least acknowledge that the inflow of the rest of Ohio's revenue is indeed a major advantage for them and an advantage that no other municipality really enjoys.