economist article (Phoenix, Mesa, Scottsdale: transplants, credit, lawyers)

[steve22]

I ran across this editorial in the AZ Republic:

Hit piece on Phoenix (broken link)

Essentially, the story is bemoaning the fact that anyone dared write a truthful and critical synopsis of Phoenix's considerable problems in such a well-respected publication as the Economist. So, I became curious, and read the article myself. Here's the link to it:

Phoenix | Into the ashes | Economist.com

IMO, absolutely spot on. Could not have said it better myself. I rest my case.

[artyst]

i don't like phoenix but in her defense, i don't think there are insurmountable problems here. in fact, i see exciting new developments in scottsdale, new river, downtown phoenix, and ne phoenix. i'm sure the same can be said for other growing parts of the metro area, but these are just some places that i've observed because i live in this area. true the new lightrail is a pain in the butt for everyone, but i think when it's done it will be great. asu is opening a new campus downtown with a medical school which is pretty exciting for the downtown area too. i think phoenix will blossom nicely. the thing that is worrysome is the cementing of the desert, air polution and future water issues.

[vegaspilgrim]

I'm going to have to go with the AZ Republic's take on this one! The quality of the journalism in the economist article is dirt poor. Of course certain businesses along the light rail construction route have lost business! Those particular businesses are such a miniscule percentage of the total economy, even of all the independent businesses in Phoenix, it is almost insignificant. The article makes it out like all of Phoenix is going out of business. The rest of the article, comparing Phoenix to Chicago, New York, and San Francisco is nothing but left-wing propaganda. Boo hoo, there aren't enough Indian fry bread shops around. "The property market is white-dominated too, Ms Koptiuch says, with its suburbs policed by homeowners' associations which insist on a certain uniformity of style. Latinos make up one-third of Phoenix's population, but from the outside appearance of the place you wouldn't know it." I think if you drive around Phoenix, you WOULD know that there is a huge population of "Latinos." A HUGE chunk of these "Latinos" are illegal Mexican immigrants. Whoever wrote that article has obviously never been to Phoenix.

[silverbear]

To use a term likely to appear in the Economist, the article (the original one in the Economist) was rubbish. It contains several errors:

1) Michael Zistatsis, the unhappy restaurant owner interviewed by the Economist, owns Alexi’s Grill, which is in Midtown, not Downtown.

2) Light rail will not connect Phoenix to Scottsdale. Scottsdale is not participating; only Phoenix, Tempe, and Mesa are involved at this time.

3) Light rail was not imposed by city planners. It has been approved by voters in two elections.

4) It’s nonsense to say that the metro area is overrun by chain restaurants when in fact there are interesting Vietnamese, Thai, El Salvadoran, etc. places in strip malls and standalone buildings throughout the metro area. Chain restaurants are certainly big here, but so are they everywhere else. Even Times Square in NYC is full of chain restaurants these days.

5) The Morgan Quitno rankings are highly controversial and by no means universally accepted. The Economist should have done a better job of acknowledging this.

6) The Economist interviewed academics at ASU, but apparently did not interview actual leaders of city government and law enforcement agencies. Balanced coverage would have included a wider variety of points of view.

If the Economist gets it wrong on so many small details, how can we trust it for accurate coverage about the big issues? In an interesting coincidence, my subscription to the print edition of the Economist is up for renewal this month, and I’ve been on the fence about whether to sign up for another year. This article made the decision easy.

[EugeneBKLYN]

The Economist is a very reputable source. I'd go with what they said.
Also, I've heard people say that the AR is a sorry excuse for a newspaper...

[steve22]

While the small details may not be completely accurate, the general gist of the article is that Phoenix has been poorly planned, taken over predominantly by chain developers who have traditionally built outward, neglecting the core and creating a vacuum of a downtown which is now being addressed by the mess that is the lightrail construction project.

It's ignored general concepts of smart expansion, neglecting its schools, while vital businesses and employers formerly located downtown have fled for the suburbs. Its governmental agencies, law enforcement and health care infrastructures are overwhelmed. It's the only major city in this country without any semblance of a world-class university health care and research institution within its borders. It's essentially become a decentralized, over-commercialized, polluted, identity-less and generic wasteland full of agitated transplants, alienated commuters, and criminals.

Are a few details flawed? Yes. But on those general points, I agree wholeheartedly. It's a mess.

[artyst]

lol, i never thought i'd be sticking up for phoenix! some of the problems you've mentioned steve22, are a result of the population explosion. We've only fairly recently (within the last 10 years probably) become a "major city." yes urban expansion is happening, but at the same time, a slow rebuilding, rebirth of downtown phoenix is also happening (indianschool park, sports complexes, the art scene (first friday), remodeled art museum and library, historical districts emerging, new asu campus).

is phoenix polluted? yes but no more than other major cities. the difference here is that the phoenix metro area is like a cauldron surrounded by mountains that holds the filthy brown air in.

i agree that our police force needs to be stepped up to keep up with the gang bangers and thugs that come along with becoming a large major city.

and as a teacher i can speak to the fact that several high schools (mine included) in my district are at the highly performing level. teachers at my school and myself work our butts off to get our low ses population to excell and they earn many thousands of dollars in scholarships. but also, one of the best predictors of student achievement in school is parental(guardian) involvement with the child.

is phoenix a mess? hardly. i'd say it's in the awkward growing teenager stage. have faith.

peace

[yukon]

I'd have to agree with the AZ Republic comments over what the Economist says. Why? Because Dallas went thru the same growing pains back in the 90's, even down to the complaints from merchant businesses lining the street where light rail was being contructed. And Dallas came out of it ok. As will Phoenix.

I visited Phoenix in 2001, with an eye on relocating there. And all I saw was low paying service jobs. On my last visit, this year, the growth and change was noticeable and I think, positive. Sometimes you have to leave the forest to see the trees.

[Valley Native]

There are points about the article I agree with, and some I don't. It seemed as if some of the complaints are somewhat politically motivated (from the left of center):

and the area scores embarrassingly low in national education ratings. In October the Morgan Quitno Press, a research group, credited Arizona with the worst public education in the country, thanks to overcrowded classrooms, poor test scores and low salaries for teachers. Why the decline?

Yes, this statistic is embarrassing, but the answer is to eliminate the entire public education system. Maybe I'm out of the mainstream on this issue, but the article didn't mention that Phoenix has some of the best private schools in the nation ... and anybody who has ever attended a private school, or has their children enrolled in a private school, knows that the quality of education is far superior over the public system.

Kristin Koptiuch, an associate professor of anthropology at Arizona State University (ASU), thinks one problem is that minorities are being locked out of government and city planning, which then saps the area of the ethnic neighbourhoods that give structure to Chicago, New York and San Francisco. Phoenix's Native-American art shops and taco restaurants offer pockets of variety, but generic food chains such as International House of Pancakes and Pizza Hut still dominate. The property market is white-dominated too, Ms Koptiuch says, with its suburbs policed by homeowners' associations which insist on a certain uniformity of style. Latinos make up one-third of Phoenix's population, but from the outside appearance of the place you wouldn't know it.

So now they're playing the race card, huh? Does anybody really care if a certain ethnic group is more dominant than others? Why can't we all just get along?!

Scott Decker, director of the School of Criminology and Criminal Justice at ASU, cites methamphetamines smuggled in from Mexico as a prime cause of rising crime. But the larger problem is that rapid urban growth has overwhelmed existing prisons, courts, defence lawyers and police. Phoenix's newcomers are largely “snowbirds” (people avoiding the cold weather up north), sports fans and Californians; their frequent absences and lack of knowledge of their own area make their properties easy prey. “Policing Phoenix has become very hard,” Mr Decker notes.

I tend to agree with this. Phoenix has a high transient population ... mostly dominated by people who move here for the sunshine (and little else). Many of them live here for several months out of the year, and vacate when the weather turns hot. Aside from that, the mere fact that we're so big and continuing to grow rapidly has put a strain on public services such as law enforcement. More police officers are being hired, but it's not enough to keep up with the demand.

[KidA]

Originally Posted by silverbear

Even Times Square in NYC is full of chain restaurants these days.

dude, times square is riciduled as a tourist wasteland by every new yorker - comparing phoenix to it is not helping your cause.