Detroit News- Who's leaving and what does that portend? (Wayne: homeowners insurance, hotels)

[R7d61]

Some places(especially bigger cities) can and do rebound fairly easy, because they have low unemployment! A city can be in bad shape and rebound when it's productive still. In the case of Detroit, the state as a whole is in the tank.

Everytime I head South or West, I see tons of "Help Wanted" signs, job sections in papers actually have legit jobs(and lots of em usually) and not some stupid "career training" scam or high-position job that wants to pay you dirt, ect.

The government here is also garbage, which just compounds the problem.

This state will come back eventually, but probably never with as much commanding respect as it had when the auto industry was booming.

[GDK94]

Originally Posted by R7d61

Some places(especially bigger cities) can and do rebound fairly easy, because they have low unemployment! A city can be in bad shape and rebound when it's productive still. In the case of Detroit, the state as a whole is in the tank.

no, this is all wrong. nyc had one of the highest unemployment rates in the country in the 70's and 80's. so did all those other places i named. some still do. you must not understand that detroit is a big city too. 11th biggest last i checked. and what about camden? that place is far from a big city, yet still bad, it has rebounded fairly well. you say when a city is still productive it can rebound, but what about philadelphia?

[prairiestate]

Originally Posted by GDK94

i don't understand why people like to comment on my first post, yet completely ignore my second. so i'll ask again. if detroit is in such a mess as to never be repaired, how come plces that were WORSE than detroit all of a sudden start improving? what makes detroit any different from all the other places that were either just as bad or worse? what makes detroit irreparable, yet cities like nyc, philly, newark, oakland, chicago, baltimore, DC, camden, and many more can recover? although every one of the cities are still bad, is it not true that they have all greatly improved? i remember in the early 80's i would walk down in my neighborhood, bushwick, in nyc. i saw blocks and blocks of burned out buildings, stray dogs, crack heads and junkies, graffiti everywhere (i actually miss the graffiti though, lol) and i thought my city would never recover. now, even though i hate gentrification with a passion, i see expensive condo's, rich people and all that.

1. The local economy. There are no significant companies in Detroit outside the auto industry. There is no momentum to develop other sectors of the economy.

2. The city itself. There is nothing left in most of the city. You cannot rehab a vacant lot. There are a very few, halfway decent neighborhoods left, and least one very nice one, Indian Village. However, go out to the main roads in these neighborhoods. No shops, no restaurants, no services to speak of. You might have a gas station, a fast food place, and yet more vacant lots. There is just no infrastructure left.

3. City government. Detroit council meetings meetings are notorious for screaming, fighting and name calling, instead of developing solutions. In addition, Detroit needs support from it's suburbs, which are majority white. It's going to be tough to get that support when Detroit city council members are on record saying they don't want anything to do with white community.

4. City services. Street lights aren't replaced when they burn out, garbage is picked up irregularly, snow isn't plowed in the winter.

5. There are no middle class areas of any significant size, let alone upscale neighborhoods. There is nothing to help support the poorer parts of the city, because it is almost all poor.

6. Downtown may be great when there is a festival or sporting event going on. The cultural corridor along Woodward may be doing well. However, downtown is also substantially a ghost town. There are vacant skyscrapers and a dearth of people on the streets who aren't homeless. Starbucks just closed it's two street side stores downtown, one of which was the first in Michigan. In other words, there isn't even enough foot traffic from office workers or hotel guests to support a store.

So, where do you begin? There are literally no more then a few intact neighborhoods that you could even try to rehab. But why would anyone bother when there is no where to work, there is no support from the city, and there are tumbleweeds blowing across the rest of the city? New York, Philly, Baltimore, DC, and Chicago, even at their worst, had strong business districts, halfway competent government, and middle and upper class neighborhoods that could serve as a beachhead to redevelop the rest of the city. Detroit has none of those things. Baltimore may have been the closest to Detroit's predicament, and it probably still has the furthest road to travel to rehab a good portion of the city. Newark, Camden, Oakland and similar cities are all part of much larger metro areas, and they now have a lot residents who are looking for more affordable housing and commute to New York, Philly or San Francisco. Detroit is the big city in the region.

In 1980, Chicago was on the cusp of following Detroit's path. Obviously, things turned out a bit differently for the two cities. Here is a great article on how it happened for Chicago (scroll down towards the bottom):

http://www.danieldrezner.com/archives/002638.html

[Michigan Refugee]

My family and I left Michigan Aug. 5, 2007 for North Carolina. We couldn't hang on any longer, so we rented out our home and I took a teaching job in Hoke County. You can't buy a teaching job in Michigan. My husband's parents and sister still live in the metropolitan Detroit area. People aren't leaving because Detroit is so bad because of politicians or crime. Peolpe are leaving Detroit and all the rest of Michigan because there is no work. My husband and I were life long residents with both of our parents being life long residents and so on and so on. We are very upset with what is going on in Michigan...but we had to leave. If we had stayed, we would have been homeless and would be currently facing starvation. Michigan and the Detroit area will eventually rebound. All things are cyclical. Until things get better...more and more Michigan residents will have to leave to find employment elsewhere. How can it be expected that everyone stay?? There are too many Michigan residents on unemployment and welfare assistance now. Its a wonder that the entire state hasn't financially collapsed.

[GDK94]

i understand now. its really sad to see a city like detroit just let go. alot of the mid west seems like it was just put there only to be forgotten. cairo, IL, east st. louis, IL, detroit MI, gary, IN, flint, MI, and im sure hundreds of others too. thats just what i can name off the top of my head. detroit probably can be revived, but places like east st louis will most likely only get worst.

[GDK94]

another thing; look at this poll.
http://www.city-data.com/forum/gener...dwest-not.html

only 1 person said detroit. sad, but even though it might not happen anytime soon, i still see a positive future for detroit.

[Jwo85]

Originally Posted by prairiestate

4. City services. Street lights aren't replaced when they burn out, garbage is picked up irregularly, snow isn't plowed in the winter.

You can add water does not get shut off when it needs too. A lot of vacant homes still have water running.

[ErikU19]

+1 well said!

Originally Posted by prairiestate

1. The local economy. There are no significant companies in Detroit outside the auto industry. There is no momentum to develop other sectors of the economy.

2. The city itself. There is nothing left in most of the city. You cannot rehab a vacant lot. There are a very few, halfway decent neighborhoods left, and least one very nice one, Indian Village. However, go out to the main roads in these neighborhoods. No shops, no restaurants, no services to speak of. You might have a gas station, a fast food place, and yet more vacant lots. There is just no infrastructure left.

3. City government. Detroit council meetings meetings are notorious for screaming, fighting and name calling, instead of developing solutions. In addition, Detroit needs support from it's suburbs, which are majority white. It's going to be tough to get that support when Detroit city council members are on record saying they don't want anything to do with white community.

4. City services. Street lights aren't replaced when they burn out, garbage is picked up irregularly, snow isn't plowed in the winter.

5. There are no middle class areas of any significant size, let alone upscale neighborhoods. There is nothing to help support the poorer parts of the city, because it is almost all poor.

6. Downtown may be great when there is a festival or sporting event going on. The cultural corridor along Woodward may be doing well. However, downtown is also substantially a ghost town. There are vacant skyscrapers and a dearth of people on the streets who aren't homeless. Starbucks just closed it's two street side stores downtown, one of which was the first in Michigan. In other words, there isn't even enough foot traffic from office workers or hotel guests to support a store.

So, where do you begin? There are literally no more then a few intact neighborhoods that you could even try to rehab. But why would anyone bother when there is no where to work, there is no support from the city, and there are tumbleweeds blowing across the rest of the city? New York, Philly, Baltimore, DC, and Chicago, even at their worst, had strong business districts, halfway competent government, and middle and upper class neighborhoods that could serve as a beachhead to redevelop the rest of the city. Detroit has none of those things. Baltimore may have been the closest to Detroit's predicament, and it probably still has the furthest road to travel to rehab a good portion of the city. Newark, Camden, Oakland and similar cities are all part of much larger metro areas, and they now have a lot residents who are looking for more affordable housing and commute to New York, Philly or San Francisco. Detroit is the big city in the region.

In 1980, Chicago was on the cusp of following Detroit's path. Obviously, things turned out a bit differently for the two cities. Here is a great article on how it happened for Chicago (scroll down towards the bottom):

danieldrezner.com :: Daniel W. Drezner :: The <em>Economist</em> surveys Chicago

[enigmaingr]

Originally Posted by GDK94

detroit WILL change. that is a fact. it may not change next year or the year after but eventually people will start to invest in the city. detroit is very cheap for a city. people will start to take advantage of this and start fixing it up. but if everyone has a mentality like "oh well. detroit is doomed. why should i even care when i can just move away." then im just wasting my time too then. if everyone really wants detroit to hit a new low, then keep up with that kind of thinking.

Detroit will become a more viable place to live as will Michigan. A couple of things must happen first:

1) The city government must change. The current government resembles the cast from a bad reality TV show. Every person current holding office within the city must go. Their grip over the police department must also be checked in the process.

2) Once we find a competent police chief, they need to get tough on crime. Though putting away small-time criminals is a start, the police need to go after the big boys. This may require Federal help and a few RICO investigations.

3) Detroit and its suburbs have to end their detente. The suburban governments must come together to aid Detroit in all ways possible. Suburbs must realize that they are in the same boat as Detroit; a better Detroit means better suburbs.

4) The area needs a better transportation system. This can only happen once #3 occurs. The area can no longer afford to have symbolic boundaries based on race.

5) Controlled gentrification must occur. As much as I hate to see an area lose its culture, we need to create areas where people with money want to live. The choices are to lose a few neighborhoods to gentrification or an entire city to poverty.

Many cities that faced similar problems as Detroit realized these changes. NYC made a turnaround only when the government made some initially unpopular decisions for the good of the whole city. They actively rid the subways of homeless people, allowing more people to feel comfortable using public transportation. In turn, people began circulating within the city and into areas made increasingly safe by an aggressive police presence. This was not popular by many people who wanted the results without the changes.

If and when Detroit gets on this path, I'm sure there will be a cohort of people who will scream and holler. Ironically, many of these people will be the same folks who are now screaming about people abandoning Detroit out of self-interest.

[GDK94]

i agree with everything you said 100%, except #2. while detroit may have one of the highest crime rates in america, just remember that it went from 714 murders in 1974 to 394 in 2007. almost every year since the 70's detroit has seen a drop in crime. but i agree with you, they could do a whole lot better like other cities have done.