Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don’t even understand where the “controversy” is in this story or where you guys disagree and I don’t feel like reading through the other comments so...
From my 10,000ft view, Philadelphians should be happy that the government picked people from our area to run the whole thing.
I posted this a while back in a different thread. The city has put in bids for most of the major sports events for 2026.
The 2026 World Cup bid is going to be decided in the next week or so. It’s down to the US and Morocco. If picked, Philadelphia will be one of the host cities.
I love the idea of a party here, but my initial point was that Philadelphia needs to do it huuuuge if they want to capture the spotlight from NYC and DC. Personally if NYC and DC capture the spotlight, then I think its a waste for the city to spend a lot of money resources on the event when it will largely go unnoticed and be the same as every other year.
Not saying that will happen, but Philly needs to come up with something memorable to steal the spotlight, like having the President come, or whoever the superstar of that generation is do a concert on the Parkway, etc.. Thats just how I view it, since 2026 seems to be a big deal.
No I don't think Pine is trying to silence anyone but the tone is really getting "nasty" for such a non serious topic.
I routinely check out and post on the Savannah Ga board. I love the city and hope to retire there so I hang out there some times to garner information.
Telling some one to "butt" out because they are or are not from a region is rude and unnecessary. I didn't think anyone had a "monopoly" on being from Philly.
Obviously I take many things said in some threads personally because I still believe natives don't get very much credit for starting the turn around in the city for instance. So, I won't say anything else on this thread.
I think he is saying everyone's opinion is valuable. Regardless of whether they were born and raised in Philly, or they relocated here. One's origins should not be used against them.
I would go further and add that city residents don't have a monopoly over the city. Philly belongs just as much to those who choose to live in the suburb. The success of the city is also of importance to suburbians.
Are you sitting down?
I agree with your second paragraph above. The first IMO should go without saying.
But it's time for a history lesson: Historically, this city's suburbs have often viewed the core city as an enemy rather than the beating heart of the region. Regionalism has had a very long and hard slog even getting to the point where it is now; in the 1960s, for instance, I think it wouldn't be inaccurate to say that a large number of suburbanites here held the opinion that if a bomb were to be dropped onto Broad and Market the next day, life in the 'burbs would go on as usual, without much disturbance.
The denizens of the city, for what it's worth, returned the favor.
I'd actually put the pivot point for the change in attitude on regionalism to Mayor Frank Rizzo's decision to pursue construction of the Commuter Tunnel over the Roosevelt Boulevard subway (which from a transportation bang-for-the-buck standpoint was the more deserving project). That decision sent a pretty strong message to the folks in the collar counties, namely, "This is one region. The city is at its heart but its suburbs matter too. We need to pull together if we are all to advance."
That message seems to me to have soaked into the regional consciousness in the years since the tunnel opened for business the year after I moved here. There's less of the rearranging-the-furniture office-chasing that used to distinguish the economic-development activities of the five Southeastern Pennsylvania counties, for instance, and the various local tourism promotion agencies don't seem to stomp on the larger message the Greater Philadelphia Tourism Marketing Corporation sends out.
This doesn't mean that there are no flareups: the effort to market "Philadelphia and Its Countryside" on the part of the GPTMC changed to that of marketing "Philadelphia and the Countryside" because some folks in the 'burbs got butthurt over the suggestion that they were in some way subordinate to the core city. (There's a reason they're called suburbs, okay? The emergence of King of Prussia as the No. 2 edge city on the East Coast changes that dynamic somewhat but not completely.)
But on the whole, the spirit of regionalism has advanced rather impressively since Rizzo was mayor.
I will, however, add an asterisk to what I wrote above:
By leaving the city, suburbanites may not have given up their right to comment on its affairs, and yes, the success of the city matters to them too, ergo they should give voice to their views. But if they really want to influence its course, they really should move back in. On that "exit, voice and loyalty" triad, "exit" signals a diminution of "loyalty," and IMO the latter deserves honor, especially if the loyal rode out the bad times in order to be around for the good ones. The voice of the loyal usually gets more weight than those of the disloyal...
...except when the question becomes "What would it take to regain your loyalty?"
I agree with your second paragraph above. The first IMO should go without saying.
But it's time for a history lesson: Historically, this city's suburbs have often viewed the core city as an enemy rather than the beating heart of the region. Regionalism has had a very long and hard slog even getting to the point where it is now; in the 1960s, for instance, I think it wouldn't be inaccurate to say that a large number of suburbanites here held the opinion that if a bomb were to be dropped onto Broad and Market the next day, life in the 'burbs would go on as usual, without much disturbance.
The denizens of the city, for what it's worth, returned the favor.
I'd actually put the pivot point for the change in attitude on regionalism to Mayor Frank Rizzo's decision to pursue construction of the Commuter Tunnel over the Roosevelt Boulevard subway (which from a transportation bang-for-the-buck standpoint was the more deserving project). That decision sent a pretty strong message to the folks in the collar counties, namely, "This is one region. The city is at its heart but its suburbs matter too. We need to pull together if we are all to advance."
That message seems to me to have soaked into the regional consciousness in the years since the tunnel opened for business the year after I moved here. There's less of the rearranging-the-furniture office-chasing that used to distinguish the economic-development activities of the five Southeastern Pennsylvania counties, for instance, and the various local tourism promotion agencies don't seem to stomp on the larger message the Greater Philadelphia Tourism Marketing Corporation sends out.
This doesn't mean that there are no flareups: the effort to market "Philadelphia and Its Countryside" on the part of the GPTMC changed to that of marketing "Philadelphia and the Countryside" because some folks in the 'burbs got butthurt over the suggestion that they were in some way subordinate to the core city. (There's a reason they're called suburbs, okay? The emergence of King of Prussia as the No. 2 edge city on the East Coast changes that dynamic somewhat but not completely.)
But on the whole, the spirit of regionalism has advanced rather impressively since Rizzo was mayor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarketStEl
I will, however, add an asterisk to what I wrote above:
By leaving the city, suburbanites may not have given up their right to comment on its affairs, and yes, the success of the city matters to them too, ergo they should give voice to their views. But if they really want to influence its course, they really should move back in. On that "exit, voice and loyalty" triad, "exit" signals a diminution of "loyalty," and IMO the latter deserves honor, especially if the loyal rode out the bad times in order to be around for the good ones. The voice of the loyal usually gets more weight than those of the disloyal...
...except when the question becomes "What would it take to regain your loyalty?"
Good points, The Philadelphia area is very segregated economically, and ethnically (I am sure you know that), more-so than any other major region I believe.
I also think Philadelphia is in a different position, because its suburbs hold a lot more power than most other major suburban regions. The Philadelphia suburbs could pretty much act as their own without the help of the core city. That setup naturally creates animosity toward one another.
I think the region as a whole is uniting more than in the past due to the upswing of the city and the more widespread development in the burbs (KoP included).
Regarding your second post, I don't think moving to the burbs equals being a traitor. Some people prefer the suburban lifestyle, the schools, the greenery, the houses, etc. and as we all agree, many of the Philadelphia burbs are quite different than your average cookie cutter towns found outside of Atlanta or Houston, they offer a character of their own. This is a problem that the area needs to get over. Instead of making it a battle of which is better, lets unite as a region. (I sound like Miss America)
Also I moved to NYC, I hope I am not seen as a traitor. I followed the best path for my career, and that led me to Manhattan.
Also I moved to NYC, I hope I am not seen as a traitor. I followed the best path for my career, and that led me to Manhattan.
Fair point, and I may have gone a bit overboard with that other post. After all, I do weigh in on Kansas City issues over in that city's forum, and I haven't lived within 1200 miles of it since I left it for college in 1976.
Not everyone moves out of a city because they don't love, or even like, it. And suburban environments have a powerful hold on the American imagination. (And data I've seen on land consumption relative to population growth worldwide tell me that, as cities grow in population, their residents like to spread out more.)
So noted. I guess I got heated for a moment over occasional whiffs of what I'd call "suburban triumphalism" emanating from some people (not necessarily participants on this forum).
I also think Philadelphia is in a different position, because its suburbs hold a lot more power than most other major suburban regions. The Philadelphia suburbs could pretty much act as their own without the help of the core city. That setup naturally creates animosity toward one another.
I think the region as a whole is uniting more than in the past due to the upswing of the city and the more widespread development in the burbs (KoP included).
They believe that in the counties surrounding Detroit too. And those are certainly much better off than the core city right now.
But research conducted by Dick Voith*, then of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia and now a principal at Econsult Solutions, back in the late 1990s showed that metropolitan economies are indeed intertwined: the suburbs of strong core cities have better economies overall than those of weak ones.
So back to 1ondoner's point: the city's health and success is a matter of interest to folks in the 'burbs too. They've come round to realizing that here, by and large.
*Yes, We're Acquainted. I've also met his architect wife and have hung out with them at her firm's holiday party once.
Location: The place where the road & the sky collide
23,814 posts, read 34,693,648 times
Reputation: 10256
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarketStEl
Are you sitting down?
I agree with your second paragraph above. The first IMO should go without saying.
But it's time for a history lesson: Historically, this city's suburbs have often viewed the core city as an enemy rather than the beating heart of the region. Regionalism has had a very long and hard slog even getting to the point where it is now; in the 1960s, for instance, I think it wouldn't be inaccurate to say that a large number of suburbanites here held the opinion that if a bomb were to be dropped onto Broad and Market the next day, life in the 'burbs would go on as usual, without much disturbance.
The denizens of the city, for what it's worth, returned the favor.
I'd actually put the pivot point for the change in attitude on regionalism to Mayor Frank Rizzo's decision to pursue construction of the Commuter Tunnel over the Roosevelt Boulevard subway (which from a transportation bang-for-the-buck standpoint was the more deserving project). That decision sent a pretty strong message to the folks in the collar counties, namely, "This is one region. The city is at its heart but its suburbs matter too. We need to pull together if we are all to advance."
That message seems to me to have soaked into the regional consciousness in the years since the tunnel opened for business the year after I moved here. There's less of the rearranging-the-furniture office-chasing that used to distinguish the economic-development activities of the five Southeastern Pennsylvania counties, for instance, and the various local tourism promotion agencies don't seem to stomp on the larger message the Greater Philadelphia Tourism Marketing Corporation sends out.
This doesn't mean that there are no flareups: the effort to market "Philadelphia and Its Countryside" on the part of the GPTMC changed to that of marketing "Philadelphia and the Countryside" because some folks in the 'burbs got butthurt over the suggestion that they were in some way subordinate to the core city. (There's a reason they're called suburbs, okay? The emergence of King of Prussia as the No. 2 edge city on the East Coast changes that dynamic somewhat but not completely.)
But on the whole, the spirit of regionalism has advanced rather impressively since Rizzo was mayor.
Historically, the tie has been there practically since William Penn founded the city. Keep in mind that William Penn was one of the individuals who were involved with settlement of South Jersey. Before the arrival of the English, the land that became Philadelphia, South Jersey, & Delaware was New Sweden, which was later taken over by the Dutch. (Schuylkill), before the English arrived.
In my opinion, regionalism was applied more evenly in the 60s & 70s. Overall, the attitude was that, while there was money on the Mainline, there was also money in Haddonfield & Moorestown, & there was money in the city & in Delaware. One area's money wasn't considered better than another's.
Baseball’s 2026 All-Star Game will be played in Philadelphia to mark the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, a person familiar with the planning told The Associated Press.
The Linc will most likely hold meaningful world cup soccer matches that July also.
The Linc will most likely hold meaningful world cup soccer matches that July also.
I hope Philly gets some WC games, but I wouldn't say it's likely. Definitely one of the last cities in/first cities out.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
