why is detroit so dangerous and then all the sudden you go a street over to grosse pointe, and its safe and sound safe? (Republic: insurance, crime)

[tranquildreamer95]

literally, you go in the grosse pointe park area and be in mansion wonderland full of huge cottage looking houses, then you go over one block into the city and boom, abandoned houses and graffiti. what keeps out the criminals from burning down the houses in grosse pointe park on devils night? what keeps out the crime and violence when it just a little road over? how does this work and happen?

[green_mariner]

My theory is the police. I suspect that the GPPD are really "vigilant" over there.

[craig11152]

Originally Posted by tranquildreamer95

what keeps out the criminals from burning down the houses in grosse pointe park on devils night?

To toss a bone to the arsonists they mostly (only?) burned down abandoned houses. No shortage of those in Detroit in the recent past. Not sure you could find an abandon house in the Pointe's. Certainly it wouldn't be easy.

[mjlo]

Because Detroit's decline was more political than economic. One of the biggest myths about Detroit's decline is how it has to do with the decline of the auto industry. Don't get me wrong, the Detroit region as a whole has risen and fallen with the automotive cycles. The city itself is a victim of political divide. People totally miss the political warfare between the city and the suburbs during the 70's - 80's where the suburbs politically walled the city off and sucked the economy and tax base out of it. It created a systemic collapse in a vacuum that affected 144 square miles by a stunning disproportion. I don't think there's another place in the country with such a stark contrast between city and suburb, where you literally cross the street and get a diametric opposite vibe.

[Fubarbundy]

Originally Posted by mjlo

Because Detroit's decline was more political than economic. One of the biggest myths about Detroit's decline is how it has to do with the decline of the auto industry. Don't get me wrong, the Detroit region as a whole has risen and fallen with the automotive cycles. The city itself is a victim of political divide. People totally miss the political warfare between the city and the suburbs during the 70's - 80's where the suburbs politically walled the city off and sucked the economy and tax base out of it. It created a systemic collapse in a vacuum that affected 144 square miles by a stunning disproportion. I don't think there's another place in the country with such a stark contrast between city and suburb, where you literally cross the street and get a diametric opposite vibe.

Unfortunately, quite correct

[Indentured Servant]

Originally Posted by mjlo

Because Detroit's decline was more political than economic. One of the biggest myths about Detroit's decline is how it has to do with the decline of the auto industry. Don't get me wrong, the Detroit region as a whole has risen and fallen with the automotive cycles. The city itself is a victim of political divide. People totally miss the political warfare between the city and the suburbs during the 70's - 80's where the suburbs politically walled the city off and sucked the economy and tax base out of it. It created a systemic collapse in a vacuum that affected 144 square miles by a stunning disproportion. I don't think there's another place in the country with such a stark contrast between city and suburb, where you literally cross the street and get a diametric opposite vibe.

Yes....the politics of race...not the politics of left vs right.

[mjlo]

Originally Posted by Indentured Servant

Yes....the politics of race...not the politics of left vs right.

Understood - Was not intending to insinuate otherwise. Although I do think there were other complexities such as regional branding, the core of it was very much based in racial divisions. It had nothing to do with Republican vs. Democrat.

[Indentured Servant]

Originally Posted by mjlo

Understood - Was not intending to insinuate otherwise. Although I do think there were other complexities such as regional branding, the core of it was very much based in racial divisions. It had nothing to do with Republican vs. Democrat.

Politics is often a Trojan Horse that mask a deeper issues. Sometimes it just seems people are hell bent on not stating the obvious....when it comes to race. Politics, in this instance, is a euphemism/proxy for race.

[mjlo]

Originally Posted by Indentured Servant

Politics is often a Trojan Horse that mask a deeper issues. Sometimes it just seems people are hell bent on not stating the obvious....when it comes to race. Politics, in this instance, is a euphemism/proxy for race.

Well if you're asserting I was somehow trying to gloss over the long history of racial tensions in the Detroit area I wasn't. I'm not someone who does that. I would argue Michigan is one of the most segregated and racist states in the country. I would say the tipping for Detroit the came in 1967, which is the single most identifiable event in the fate of the city. It lead to banks not issuing mortgages for properties in the city, and insurance companies not indemnifying property. Then further incentivized people(yes overwhelmingly white) to leave.

What I was also referring to was the suburban governments also offering cheaper tax incentives for businesses to exit, while being in constant legal battles with the city, which further eroded the tax base, and caused even more business to leave. At some point the city became in direct competition with it's greater region for the tax bases needed to stay afloat and it got caught in a catch 22.

What was left was a 4 million person metro area without an identifiable core. It became one of the least attractive major metros in the country as it had almost no character, or regional cohesion. By the 00's even the suburbs started to enter a state of decline. I think this was because of a weaker overall region. It does seem that over the last 10 years or so the regional governments have started to wake up and understand that they actually do need a healthy Detroit, and simply can't continue to pretend it doesn't exist.

[Indentured Servant]

Originally Posted by mjlo

Well if you're asserting I was somehow trying to gloss over the long history of racial tensions in the Detroit area I wasn't. I'm not someone who does that. I would argue Michigan is one of the most segregated and racist states in the country. I would say the tipping for Detroit the came in 1967, which is the single most identifiable event in the fate of the city. It lead to banks not issuing mortgages for properties in the city, and insurance companies not indemnifying property. Then further incentivized people(yes overwhelmingly white) to leave.

What I was also referring to was the suburban governments also offering cheaper tax incentives for businesses to exit, while being in constant legal battles with the city, which further eroded the tax base, and caused even more business to leave. At some point the city became in direct competition with it's greater region for the tax bases needed to stay afloat and it got caught in a catch 22.

What was left was a 4 million person metro area without an identifiable core. It became one of the least attractive major metros in the country as it had almost no character, or regional cohesion. By the 00's even the suburbs started to enter a state of decline. I think this was because of a weaker overall region. It does seem that over the last 10 years or so the regional governments have started to wake up and understand that they actually do need a healthy Detroit, and simply can't continue to pretend it doesn't exist.

Sorry...I was not insinuating that of you.....I know your history of comments It was really meant for other readers.