[mjlo]

Originally Posted by MS313

Oh trust me when I move to the city, let's just say that I'm glad my parents will be staying in Kalamazoo for another few years . I sort of agree about Mayor Bing as well... I think if a Mayor like Mike Duggan had been in office during count year, Detroit probably would of came in around 750,000 at least. Bing was cool, but I honestly don't see what the hell he was doing during his term besides talking about what he planned on doing. I guess you can say the greater downtown area Renaissance started during his term.

Honestly I credit Dennis Archer for that, the bones for what's happening now really started in the 90's with Compuware moving downtown and such. I don't blame Dave Bing for too much, he walked into an almost impossible situation after Kwame used the city treasury for drugs, whores, and hit lists. I'm not sure it could have gone much better for him. It'll be interesting to see what happens in Detroit post-B.

[MS313]

Originally Posted by mjlo

Honestly I credit Dennis Archer for that, the bones for what's happening now really started in the 90's with Compuware moving downtown and such. I don't blame Dave Bing for too much, he walked into an almost impossible situation after Kwame used the city treasury for drugs, whores, and hit lists. I'm not sure it could have gone much better for him. It'll be interesting to see what happens in Detroit post-B.

I agree. The city was out of control by the time Bing took office, I kind of felt sorry for him because I knew he meant well, but he has to be the mayor that led Detroit into bankruptcy.

[Indentured Servant]

Originally Posted by MS313

I agree. The city was out of control by the time Bing took office, I kind of felt sorry for him because I knew he meant well, but he has to be the mayor that led Detroit into bankruptcy.

Coleman Young started the rallying for census count back in 1990 out of fear that the city would drop below 1 million and not get funds specified for cities over 1 million. Also, for every person counted, a city gets a certain amount of state and or federal dollars. So 1990 and 2000 saw massive efforts by the city of Detroit to count as many people as possible. Regardless of Kwame and his legacy, Bing FAILED to continue the effort and as a result I definitely feel that Detroit was under counted in 2010, unless it was over counted in 1990 and 2000. There is no way in hell that I believe that Detroit lost a quarter of a million people in 10 years. That number might be true NOW, but not in 2010.

I think today, if you replicate the efforts of Coleman Young and then have the final count adjusted by the percent it was adjusted up in 2000, for minority under counting, Detroit, TODAY, would be about 750,000 people.....TODAY. It amazes me that no one was incredulous about the numbers. The press just took the numbers and ran with it because it sounded "news sexy" to report a quarter of a million people left Detroit. The reputation and image of the city, bad already, then took another huge blow.

[VM1138]

Originally Posted by mjlo

Well if something does make you leave Michigan it shouldn't be the job situation, employers can't find people fast enough right now.

What?

[MS313]

Originally Posted by Indentured Servant

Coleman Young started the rallying for census count back in 1990 out of fear that the city would drop below 1 million and not get funds specified for cities over 1 million. Also, for every person counted, a city gets a certain amount of state and or federal dollars. So 1990 and 2000 saw massive efforts by the city of Detroit to count as many people as possible. Regardless of Kwame and his legacy, Bing FAILED to continue the effort and as a result I definitely feel that Detroit was under counted in 2010, unless it was over counted in 1990 and 2000. There is no way in hell that I believe that Detroit lost a quarter of a million people in 10 years. That number might be true NOW, but not in 2010.

I think today, if you replicate the efforts of Coleman Young and then have the final count adjusted by the percent it was adjusted up in 2000, for minority under counting, Detroit, TODAY, would be about 750,000 people.....TODAY. It amazes me that no one was incredulous about the numbers. The press just took the numbers and ran with it because it sounded "news sexy" to report a quarter of a million people left Detroit. The reputation and image of the city, bad already, then took another huge blow.

I heard there's also a fund for cities over 750,000, no way in hell I would have accepted any less than 750,000. And if Detroit did infact over count, it damn sure isn't the only major city to inflate numbers to make themselves look nice and big on the census and reap the benefits in the process. It still would never be able to compete to the mega suburbs that have a low population density with plenty of room to build up but still decide to annex every suburb possible anyway, but it will help a bit.

I know alot of people would be pissed but they should have a Detroit-Wayne County merger. That would probably be the easiest way to increase Detroit's tax base, promote regional transit, and it would instantly look better on paper.

[Indentured Servant]

Originally Posted by MS313

I heard there's also a fund for cities over 750,000, no way in hell I would have accepted any less than 750,000. And if Detroit did infact over count, it damn sure isn't the only major city to inflate numbers to make themselves look nice and big on the census and reap the benefits in the process. It still would never be able to compete to the mega suburbs that have a low population density with plenty of room to build up but still decide to annex every suburb possible anyway, but it will help a bit.

I know alot of people would be pissed but they should have a Detroit-Wayne County merger. That would probably be the easiest way to increase Detroit's tax base, promote regional transit, and it would instantly look better on paper.

I agree. I think when you have an annexation policy you are less likely to "run away" from problems/issues rather than staying and trying to improve the situation of where you are, in regards to cities. When things were not going the way people wanted them to go in the city of Detroit.....they just left to some suburb where they could avoid the issue. However, in a climate where "the city" can fallow you eventually....you might as well stay in "the city" and try to make it a better place. The resistance to annexation is that people do not want to lose political power and control.

[jackmichigan]

Originally Posted by Indentured Servant

I agree. I think when you have an annexation policy you are less likely to "run away" from problems/issues rather than staying and trying to improve the situation of where you are, in regards to cities. When things were not going the way people wanted them to go in the city of Detroit.....they just left to some suburb where they could avoid the issue. However, in a climate where "the city" can fallow you eventually....you might as well stay in "the city" and try to make it a better place. The resistance to annexation is that people do not want to lose political power and control.

Yeah...when people move from the city to "where it's green", they end up destroying both places in the process.

[Indentured Servant]

Originally Posted by jackmichigan

Yeah...when people move from the city to "where it's green", they end up destroying both places in the process.

Exactly!!!