Future of Los Angeles: Are you worried? (San Jose, San Francisco: crime, unemployment)

[majoun]

Too optimistic.

Unfortunately....it seems like the possibility of Detroit being the future of L.A. gets more and more real by the day.

It still can be reversed, though, but it will take vision that's currently not there.

[hsw]

Much is relative...compare economies, taxation, daily QOL, weather/topography of LA vs its peers...NYC, Silicon Valley, Chic, Dall, Hou; I'd argue NYC faces a hell of a lot worse issues than LA

Much is dynamic as markets/economies periodically readjust....as taxes/costs elevate, companies move lower wage jobs to cheaper locales; welfare crowd migrates to wherever are best pmts; illegal immigrants go elsewhere, etc etc...and taxes/costs/QOL re-equilibrate; CA is a more dynamic, innovative society and economy than anywhere in world

But any major urban region has millions of underachieving people who don't pay taxes and chronically depend upon welfare; top 1% of taxpayers pay ~50% of all taxes; IIRC, bottom 30-40% of society pays no taxes and lives off taxpayers

LA, SV and NYC (and any older, big urban region) face many of same problems of a small % of high-achievers subsidizing millions of welfare recipients and a rapidly growing class of $100K++/yr government "workers" who can't be fired no matter how inept (much like Detroit's UAW of '60s-'90s); Dall/Hou are perhaps a decade or so behind LA/SV/NYC in facing same chronic issues of onerous taxation; overpaid gvt workers; and migration of low-wage jobs away to next cheaper place

[subPrimeTime]

I work in the transportation planning/engineering industry, and I'm fairly optimistic about the future of the Los Angeles area. Slowly but surely, efficient public transit is coming along. The Exposition Light Rail Phase 1 (Downtown to Culver City) should be complete by Summer/Fall 2010 and Phase 2 (Culver City to Santa Monica) is in planning stages, hopefully to be completed in 4-5 years.

Then, there's the controversial "Subway to the Sea" project which would extend the Purple Line from where it currently ends in K-town at Wilshire/Western, along (underneath) Wilshire Blvd to the beach in Santa Monica. The joke in the industry over the last year or so, though, is that is may need to be renamed from "Subway to the Sea" to "Subway to the UC", as in UCLA, as in it might only go that far if the City of Santa Monica doesn't play ball. I'm not sure where that fight stands at the moment.

But I'm optomistic about how public transit in the city can really spur the economy/tourism.

[majoun]

Originally Posted by subPrimeTime

I work in the transportation planning/engineering industry, and I'm fairly optimistic about the future of the Los Angeles area. Slowly but surely, efficient public transit is coming along. The Exposition Light Rail Phase 1 (Downtown to Culver City) should be complete by Summer/Fall 2010 and Phase 2 (Culver City to Santa Monica) is in planning stages, hopefully to be completed in 4-5 years.

Then, there's the controversial "Subway to the Sea" project which would extend the Purple Line from where it currently ends in K-town at Wilshire/Western, along (underneath) Wilshire Blvd to the beach in Santa Monica. The joke in the industry over the last year or so, though, is that is may need to be renamed from "Subway to the Sea" to "Subway to the UC", as in UCLA, as in it might only go that far if the City of Santa Monica doesn't play ball. I'm not sure where that fight stands at the moment.

But I'm optomistic about how public transit in the city can really spur the economy/tourism.

A functional public transit system is a necessity to save Los Angeles.

Unfortunately, all of this should have been done for the Olympics rather than now. If that had been the case - if LA's Olympics budget had been more "George Lucas" than "Roger Corman" - then L.A. would be in FAR better shape now and this conversation probably wouldn't even be on the board. But better late than never.

Just knowing how long it takes to get anything done in L.A. (true in the "Golden Age" past as well as today), though, I'm not overtly optimistic about Phase 2 of the Expo Line or the Wilshire Subway being finished in my lifetime. The only city that took as long as L.A. did to build a Metro system was Warsaw and they had the excuse of WW2 followed by 45 years of communism.

[Des-Lab]

So how about that Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension and the debacle THAT was? Any idea on what decade THAT might be completed in?

In my opinion, that project (including the original LA-Pasadena section) was a huge mistake which was the epitome of bureaucratic ineptitude at its finest.

In order to build the Gold Line, a perfectly usable and in place rail line (the Santa Fe Railroad Pasadena Subdivision or LA Second District if you really want to go back) was completely torn out. The right of way sat vacant for almost 9 years before getting rebuilt. And now a prime right of way (the remainder of the route from Arcadia to Claremont) is langushing almost unused, being maintained in barely operable condition for a 4 or 5 car freight train to run once a day.

It's too bad that happened. Amtrak ran its final Southwest Chief train through Pasadena on January 15, 1994 and the Santa Fe railroad ran the last train period a couple of weeks later before the line was closed. Had it been kept in place, Metrolink service could've been started on it the very next day. Where it could remain in operation today.

It would've been cheaper, better, faster, and at a minimum of cost. Now all we have is a trolley line that just dead ends in the median of the 210 freeway (not unlike the Green Line which misses LAX by a mile).

The Gold Line SHOULD have been Metrolink. Metrolink SHOULD have a "Pasadena Line" in its timetable (San Bernadino to LA via San Dimas, Azusa, Arcadia, and Pasadena) today.

But guess what? It was decided that Metrolink was not as "sexy" and "sleek" as those Gold Line cars. And we all know that the aesthetics and images of "green" power (as opposed to diesel locomotives) were the trump card over timeliness and cost.

So rather than have a practical, working transit system in place for 15 years now, we have a 13 mile albatross that has squandered a historic and highly valuable corridor that serves little purpose and has little to no chance of being completed.

What a waste.

[impala666]

Originally Posted by Quatermass

Have loved this film for more years than I care to disclose......"time to die"......

[impala666]

Originally Posted by Mr. Mysterious

I've seen L.A. rise and fall from time to time.

MAG DATE LOCAL-TIME LAT LON DEPTH LOCATION
y/m/d h:m:s deg deg km
MAP 3.7 2009/08/01 05:55:54 34.269N 117.378W 0.8 6 km ( 4 mi) NNE of Devore, CA
MAP 3.1 2009/07/31 04:55:32 32.101N 115.347W 12.3 31 km (19 mi) SW of Guadalupe Victoria, Baja California, Mexico
MAP 3.5 2009/07/25 21:54:03 33.633N 116.719W 14.0 10 km ( 6 mi) NNW of Anza, CA

[John23]

I dont think LA will ever turn into detroit.

365 days of sunshine, beaches, mountains, diverse industries, there are too many positives that would draw people here who wouldnt go to a city like detroit or buffalo.

There are too many smart immigrants here...whether persian, armenian, korean, indian, etc.

There's still too much money and smarts for the whole city to collapse. Look at the reinvention of downtown, hollywood.

-The issue of schools. Maybe fenced in schools for the illegal immigrant kids. It might come to that.

Honestly, I'm suprised there hasnt been a riot by now. The city is a shambles compared to 1992 (when the rodney king riot happened). You'd think with $4 gas, soaring housing, tremendous congestion, a state that's bankrupt, millions of poor next to small enclaves of millionaires, that'd be the recipe for a riot.

-The environment and water, I dont know.

There have been a lot of doomsdayers about water or electricty. But funny, the system continues to function.

[majoun]

Originally Posted by John23

I dont think LA will ever turn into detroit.

You don't sound too sure of that below.

365 days of sunshine, beaches, mountains, diverse industries, there are too many positives that would draw people here who wouldnt go to a city like detroit or buffalo.

There are too many smart immigrants here...whether persian, armenian, korean, indian, etc.

Detroit doesnt have immigrants from the Middle East?

There's still too much money and smarts for the whole city to collapse. Look at the reinvention of downtown, hollywood.

-The issue of schools. Maybe fenced in schools for the illegal immigrant kids. It might come to that.

Honestly, I'm suprised there hasnt been a riot by now. The city is a shambles compared to 1992 (when the rodney king riot happened).

This contradicts what you said above.

Do you remember what L.A. was like in the early '90s? It was worse than now (although it is headed in a bad direction).I beg to differ about the city being in shambles compared to then. In fact you even admitted downtown and Hollywood are unquestionably in much better shape now than in the early '90s (Hollywood then resembled Koreatown now more than it resembled Hollywood now). Venice and Silver Lake are also definitely better off than the early '90s. And even though violent crime is increasing again it would take a pretty massive increase for it to get to the levels of the '90s (although this is quite possible)

Only if you're talking about the Valley would you think L.A. is a shambles compared to '92. The Valley's definitely worse off. Also, LAUSD is worse off although that was well on its way down by '92.

You'd think with $4 gas, soaring housing, tremendous congestion, a state that's bankrupt, millions of poor next to small enclaves of millionaires

Those "small enclaves" are larger now than in '92, and those "millions of poor" existed then.

You are the only person on the boards who's claimed that the present is worse than the early '90s rather than worrying about the early '90s coming back. What do you base that on?

that'd be the recipe for a riot.

As it is now, what you describe is no different than what exists elsewhere in the US and world. That could describe the Bay Area also, but the Bay Area seems immune to riots except for Oakland.

And remember the state had a similar budget crisis complete with IOUs in '92 as well under Wilson.

True "recipes for riots" would be perhaps the planned release of 30K prisoners who'd become homeless, and/or a Katrina type disaster.

The environment and water, I dont know.

There have been a lot of doomsdayers about water or electricty. But funny, the system continues to function.

Eventually it won't. The chances of water running out are EXTREMELY high. I'm more pessimistic about continuing access to water than anything else. And considering that L.A. never really did totally recover from April '92, if there is a comparable riot again than L.A. will be totally through.

[impala666]

What about solar powered desalination plants?,there's plenty of water very close to California its called The Pacific Ocean.