Greater Cleveland's population went up from 1960 - 2012! (Eaton: real estate, live)

[lvoc]

Originally Posted by mbowes80

You seem to be arguing under the assumption that continuing population loss is inevitable... I wouldn't agree.

It is not inevitable. But if you have been consistently losing population for 30 years and if you lost population over the last two at a high rate what would you project for the immediate future?

[Cleverfield]

You're not going to turn around Hough, Glenville, Fairfax, or St. Clair Superior overnight. Those neighborhoods have deeply entrenched problems, and are not going to get significantly better anytime soon, save for in small sections nearest to the medical and education institutions. The city does work to tear them down as fast as they can, but it costs money, and there are far too many abandoned houses for them to get all of them (plus then there would be none for people like me to rehab ). But the river does act as a divider, with the West Side having very different dynamics than the East Side, almost to the point that it feels like a different city. The problems on the West Side were less to begin with and are getting even smaller thanks to the gentrification happening in the formerly blighted inner neighborhoods. The East Side has some seeds that have been planted as well (asia town, parts of Glenville and Hough, North Collinwood), but on the whole the large number of vacant industrial buildings, deteriorating housing stock, severe poverty, and lack of diversity will make those areas much more challenging to revitalize. It can be done, and work is being done, but don't expect to see those neighborhoods to start growing in population on the next census or beyond.

[maxmodder]

Originally Posted by lvoc

It is not inevitable. But if you have been consistently losing population for 30 years and if you lost population over the last two at a high rate what would you project for the immediate future?

Based on the fact that history tends to repeat itself, the answer to me is clear. I'd like to see the city of Cleveland turn around, but I don't see it happening anytime soon and I will not condone living there when there are, in my opinion, better options depending on a individual's personal needs and wants. The key is identifying those needs and wants, and then offering the proper suggestion as opposed to "come to my city....it's going to turn around for the better." type of future promise.

[mbowes80]

Originally Posted by lvoc

It is not inevitable. But if you have been consistently losing population for 30 years and if you lost population over the last two at a high rate what would you project for the immediate future?

I think there are cultural factors at play, especially with regards to race, that are likely to reverse and/or already be reversing. The idea that the city is a gross and dangerous place to live has started to dissipate among those of us in younger generations (who grew up in suburbs and saw all of their warts), and eventually will be counterbalanced by the obvious fact that there are lots of things available in cities that simply aren't available outside of them. At least that's how I see it. Maybe it's just blind optimism, but there's a lot of positive energy in Cleveland these days... so if we're all delusional, at least we're delusional together.

[Cleverfield]

The people who can think into the future, and see what it will bring are the most successful among us. Do you think that successful investors buy high and sell low, in other words, follow the crowd? No, of course not, they look beyond the popular opinion to the intricacies of the issue at hand, and know how to discern positive prospects from negative. Truth cannot be discovered from groupthink, from following the crowd. Truth must be discovered through an individual's exploration of the facts at hand.

[lvoc]

Originally Posted by Cleverfield

The people who can think into the future, and see what it will bring are the most successful among us. Do you think that successful investors buy high and sell low, in other words, follow the crowd? No, of course not, they look beyond the popular opinion to the intricacies of the issue at hand, and know how to discern positive prospects from negative. Truth cannot be discovered from groupthink, from following the crowd. Truth must be discovered through an individual's exploration of the facts at hand.

Well I am certainly rooting for you guys. I did not every live in Cleveland though I did spend a good bit of time there years ago. Had an Aunt in Parma and was a regular at GE Nela Park. I am however very familiar with the climate as I did 18 years in Rochester.

The rub though is your numbers are too much like Detroit. Oh they are better but not bu a lot...34% poverty level. $16K per capita income. Those numbers are deadly. And I suspect, as is the case in Detroit, that the city simply continues to deteriorate without outside assistance.

I push this point simply because I think the local have to accept that they have to have help. As long as the local do the we will dig out bit the help will not come.

And I would also point out that the highest casualties in WWII were infantry scouts who led the way...

[Cleverfield]

Originally Posted by lvoc

Well I am certainly rooting for you guys. I did not every live in Cleveland though I did spend a good bit of time there years ago. Had an Aunt in Parma and was a regular at GE Nela Park. I am however very familiar with the climate as I did 18 years in Rochester.

The rub though is your numbers are too much like Detroit. Oh they are better but not bu a lot...34% poverty level. $16K per capita income. Those numbers are deadly. And I suspect, as is the case in Detroit, that the city simply continues to deteriorate without outside assistance.

I push this point simply because I think the local have to accept that they have to have help. As long as the local do the we will dig out bit the help will not come.

And I would also point out that the highest casualties in WWII were infantry scouts who led the way...

Your analogy is not fitting as we're not going up against hostile enemies here; our only enemy is ourselves. And to suggest that we're not getting help is naive. The government provides Cleveland with a great deal of money to deal with deteriorating infrastructure, abandoned houses, crime, etc. But it's a large, difficult task. These neighborhoods have deeply entrenched poverty, and poor education. Low skilled jobs are not coming back in enough numbers to employ all of them. Cleveland is currently working on a school transformation plan that I'm hopeful will bring about meaningful change. It is creating more collaboration between public and charter schools, giving students more of the basic wellness assistance they need, and adding more "schools of choice" for students with different interests and abilities. All of these strategies have proven track records elsewhere. If our urban education meaningfully improves, only then may we start to see transformation of these impoverished neighborhoods. I am hopeful, and I'm going to do what I can to help that happen.

[lvoc]

The problem is and remains that a high poverty low income population cannot afford to maintain a large city. Simple as that.

I salute your efforts to fix education...but I believe all such attempts to date have failed and likely will continue to do so. I think it may be doable...but it costs twice as much as anyone is willing to spend.

The way to fix all this is to marry Cleveland to 1.5 million suburbanites. At that point things become much more doable. You tear down houses when they don't pay the tax. And you redevelop neighborhoods by assembling the parcels into large sites and getting the development going.

But fighting it through on the present line? You will likely give up when the population finally reaches 200K.

[Tarheel8406]

Originally Posted by TheMahValley

Instead of just looking for quick numbers to prove your point; maybe some people should look into why numbers are they way they are. If you hate Cleveland so bad, please leave and find the means to do so, you're negativity gets old. And if you have already left, more power to ya.

I don't actually live in Cleveland, and believe it or not, I don't hate the city. I'm originally from the south but I recently moved to Ohio and I'm curious why so many cities here are struggling when cities have been revitalizing elsewhere in the country over the last 20 years or so. I know the short answer has to do with the loss of manufacturing jobs, but there's probably more to it than that. Some cities in the south have experienced a similar loss of manufacturing jobs, yet they're doing pretty well.

Please don't take my assessment of Cleveland or other Rust Belt cities as criticism. I'm just pointing out the fact that while the Cleveland metro grew from the 1960s to 2012, the pattern isn't that clear cut, and that other dying Rust Belt cities have also seen similar population growth in their metros. My point was that a (slowly) growing metro isn't necessarily a sign of improvement.

As for why the numbers are the way they are, I wouldn't be able to provide any insight since I don't live in the area. But that's part of why I posted those numbers: to see what the locals might have to say about it.

[SquareBetterThanAll]

Originally Posted by Cali1976

Anyone with skills and opportunities has left Cleveland. The people left are pensioners, welfare recipients, and folks in healthcare or govt jobs (and the people who serve them)

I don't get why people who appear to be trying to make somewhat reasonable points want to trash their credibility with blatantly inaccurate statements like that.

As someone in a household with more than one person with degrees/advanced degrees working in none of those fields and who could live more or less anywhere I call BS.

I'm sure those working at Sherwin-Williams or Eaton would be surprised to find they have suddenly gotten into the healthcare field (or are on welfare).