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.
One of the reasons there are so many poor in America's cities is because there are more welfare services in the cities to attract and retain the poor.
The poor can afford to live in Buffalo.
I used to work for a company that provided transportation and day treatment for disabled in the Buffalo/Niagara Falls area.
The company openly promoted the relocation of the physically and mentally handicapped from major east coast cities to the Buffalo/Niagara Falls area in exchange for subsidized housing and day treatment/education services for these people which the government was happy to finance.
So yes the poor can afford to live in Western New York and subsidies are there for them to do so.
My husband and I just relocated here in January, from the Detroit area. I am surprised that so many of the posters here are so negative about Buffalo. Believe me, this city has SO much more going for it than Detroit and it's surrounding areas. While the downtown looks empty it isn't the festering sore Detroit's downtown is. And we are amazed at the amount of people that seem to fill the Malls and stores arround here! Listening to the local nightly news is a pleasure compared to listening to Detroit news casts.
As far as the decline in manufacturing.... that seems to be something that you have to go a long way back to lay the blame at someone's feet. Michigan is suffering from the same disease. I believe much of it is the cause of American companies moving from their traditional bases to out of country sites. (no unions, low payroll, low overhead etc.) All this is something that the politicians and business owners knew was going to happen years ago, and just as bad parents do, it was easy to ignore the problem than to address it.
And although Hilary Clinton can't be blamed directly for the current state of this area's economy, I agree that electing her to the Presidency would result in just more of the same. While NAFTA was a the brain child of the Bush 1 administration, Bill Clinton made it one of his priorities in getting it ratified. He made no changes to the orginal agreement, except for clauses that concern eviromental concerns and something to deal with labor problems, (nothing that directly effects the individual laborer). Let's face it the Clinton administration was NOT a one man show, there were two Clinton's in the Whitehouse. Electing Hilary is going to be "Deva ju, all over again."
NAFTA destroyed our manufacturing base, and in areas like Buffalo, Detroit, and cities in other "rust belt" states, that relied heavily on manufacturing a decline is certain to happen until these cities find something to help reinvent themselves.
While Rust Belt cities and states like to blame NAFTA and big bad companies moving manufacturing jobs overseas, the truth is there has been a far greater domestic shift in manufacturing from the north to the south than there has been a shift in manufacturing jobs overseas. It's a lot easier to whine about NAFTA -- as if the Rust Belt hadn't already turned to rust over a decade before NAFTA was ever ratified -- than to acknowledge that your own tax and regulatory environment is so hostile to business that it got the hell out.
Furthermore, the manufacturing job sector has been in secular decline worldwide, not just in the U.S., since the 1970s. How? Mechanization, that's how. The same reason why the percentage of the U.S. workforce tied directly to agriculture dropped from 70% at the beginning of the 20th Century to 2% by the end of the century. Yet you didn't hear about how overseas farmers were destroying American farm jobs. Instead our labor resources found other productive outlets. The sooner Rust Belt cities stop crying about NAFTA and foreign competition and acknowledge that those jobs are never coming back, the sooner they can begin reversing their economic fortunes.
My husband and I just relocated here in January, from the Detroit area. I am surprised that so many of the posters here are so negative about Buffalo. Believe me, this city has SO much more going for it than Detroit and it's surrounding areas. While the downtown looks empty it isn't the festering sore Detroit's downtown is. And we are amazed at the amount of people that seem to fill the Malls and stores arround here! Listening to the local nightly news is a pleasure compared to listening to Detroit news casts.
As far as the decline in manufacturing.... that seems to be something that you have to go a long way back to lay the blame at someone's feet. Michigan is suffering from the same disease. I believe much of it is the cause of American companies moving from their traditional bases to out of country sites. (no unions, low payroll, low overhead etc.) All this is something that the politicians and business owners knew was going to happen years ago, and just as bad parents do, it was easy to ignore the problem than to address it.
And although Hilary Clinton can't be blamed directly for the current state of this area's economy, I agree that electing her to the Presidency would result in just more of the same. While NAFTA was a the brain child of the Bush 1 administration, Bill Clinton made it one of his priorities in getting it ratified. He made no changes to the orginal agreement, except for clauses that concern eviromental concerns and something to deal with labor problems, (nothing that directly effects the individual laborer). Let's face it the Clinton administration was NOT a one man show, there were two Clinton's in the Whitehouse. Electing Hilary is going to be "Deva ju, all over again."
NAFTA destroyed our manufacturing base, and in areas like Buffalo, Detroit, and cities in other "rust belt" states, that relied heavily on manufacturing a decline is certain to happen until these cities find something to help reinvent themselves.
I lived in the area for most of life, Buffalo get's beat up because the area loses jobs to the south or other regions. It has been nothing about job loss and nothing positive.
The politicians continue do nothing or can't do anything to help the region. The Inner Harbor project is an indication of what progress in Buffalo is about. Folks are waiting for more positive results there besides more taxes and more loss of good jobs.
While Rust Belt cities and states like to blame NAFTA and big bad companies moving manufacturing jobs overseas, the truth is there has been a far greater domestic shift in manufacturing from the north to the south than there has been a shift in manufacturing jobs overseas. It's a lot easier to whine about NAFTA -- as if the Rust Belt hadn't already turned to rust over a decade before NAFTA was ever ratified -- than to acknowledge that your own tax and regulatory environment is so hostile to business that it got the hell out.
Furthermore, the manufacturing job sector has been in secular decline worldwide, not just in the U.S., since the 1970s. How? Mechanization, that's how. The same reason why the percentage of the U.S. workforce tied directly to agriculture dropped from 70% at the beginning of the 20th Century to 2% by the end of the century. Yet you didn't hear about how overseas farmers were destroying American farm jobs. Instead our labor resources found other productive outlets. The sooner Rust Belt cities stop crying about NAFTA and foreign competition and acknowledge that those jobs are never coming back, the sooner they can begin reversing their economic fortunes.
You make some very good points. Especially concerning mechanization.
My father was a steel worker and believe me, things started to go downhill way before NAFTA. What happened was the world changed, it progressed. Perhaps not to the benefit of everyone, but those who were willing to adapt, did fine, and those who just could not (or would not) even think about doing something other than work in a factory with a guaranteed income after retirement, did not fare as well. (And we know what happened to some of those retirement funds.)
Change happens, and with it, one must adapt. Buffalo did no such thing and STILL won't. It has no plans for the future. Building a Bass Pro shop or whatever near the waterfront will not revive the city. Buffalo would do well if it looked toward other cities and tried to emulate what is successful in other parts of the country. Take Pittsburgh, they are not thriving, but they are beginning to see people move to their city! They have developed entire industries around IT and medical research. It's like Silicon Valley East.
It's sad what is still happening to Buffalo, I loved living there and miss it dearly. However, to me, Buffalo is a place of two different worlds. I have family that live in Williamsville and Lancaster and they have a very comfortable lifestyle. All are educated, and their children are in college for careers the hope will keep them close to home. Buffalo is very much a city of haves and have-nots. It seems to me that either you have a great job with enough money to have a fulfilling life or you are on welfare. (Okay, that's an obvious exaggeration.)
I admire Pittsburgh's efforts to reverse its fortunes. It hasn't quite taken off as a tech market like they've been trying to make happen, but it's clearly one of the best medical research cities around. But ask anyone who thought about setting up shop in Pittsburgh but set up in Austin or Atlanta or Charlotte instead why they did so, and about 9 times out of 8 the answer is that the tax and regulatory climate in Pittsburgh is so hostile to business that they'd rather set up shop where they feel more welcome.
But I also think a lot of Rust Belt cities that took the brunt of the decline of the steel and related heavy industries, like Buffalo and Pittsburgh, have a lot of inertia to overcome. And that inertia is the result of the self-selection process that took place when things really went downhill: namely, those that had the ambition, initiative and drive to see themselves through the hard times picked up and left. They followed the jobs out of town. So who did that leave? Lots of people who sat around instead and waited for those jobs to come back. Well, those jobs never came back, yet those people are still waiting. And what's worse, they're eating up the lies of cynical politicians who promise those jobs will come back if only we erect trade barriers against China and Mexico. Meanwhile, those who would have been in the best position to help these cities transition out of their economic difficulties are long gone and never looking back.
I admire Pittsburgh's efforts to reverse its fortunes. It hasn't quite taken off as a tech market like they've been trying to make happen, but it's clearly one of the best medical research cities around. But ask anyone who thought about setting up shop in Pittsburgh but set up in Austin or Atlanta or Charlotte instead why they did so, and about 9 times out of 8 the answer is that the tax and regulatory climate in Pittsburgh is so hostile to business that they'd rather set up shop where they feel more welcome.
But I also think a lot of Rust Belt cities that took the brunt of the decline of the steel and related heavy industries, like Buffalo and Pittsburgh, have a lot of inertia to overcome. And that inertia is the result of the self-selection process that took place when things really went downhill: namely, those that had the ambition, initiative and drive to see themselves through the hard times picked up and left. They followed the jobs out of town. So who did that leave? Lots of people who sat around instead and waited for those jobs to come back. Well, those jobs never came back, yet those people are still waiting. And what's worse, they're eating up the lies of cynical politicians who promise those jobs will come back if only we erect trade barriers against China and Mexico. Meanwhile, those who would have been in the best position to help these cities transition out of their economic difficulties are long gone and never looking back.
Once again, you make some very valid points. Don't get me wrong, I definately do NOT like Pittsburgh. It's a grungy, dirty, run-down place with the craziest mix of people ever. It appears to me that the general population consists of either gun toting hicks or very educated professionals who vacation away from the Burgh every chance they get. We fall into the latter part, however, we will be relocating shortly and it cannot happen fast enough for me. Although Sh*tsburgh (sorry, just can't hold back) seems to be doing better economically than Buffalo, it's a hard place to move to if you are not born and bread locally. Plus, it doesn't really have a "good" side of town or a bad side. That bugs the daylights out of me. Because unless you know what areas to avoid, your chances of getting stuck in a crappy neighborhood is very high. And the suburbs (or at least what they consider to be suburban) are a joke. It's hicksville to the max. To get to a grocery store can take 20 minutes! In the suburbs! There are no sidewalks, and it's well, it's just dirty. I find no appeal to the place whatsoever.
Buffalo on the other hand, has the lake - BIG plus! And it has areas that are distinctive and the suburbs are normal! I've lived all over the wrold and the United States, and I have to say, Pittsburgh is beautiful - AT NIGHT.
Well you and I will part company with regards to affection for Pittsburgh. I have a fondness and a soft spot for it in my heart. And I have never in my life seen a city so saturated with untapped potential. It has incredible natural resources; a world-class cultural arts scene and well-heeled patrons willing to maintain it (though it appears that patronage base is dwindling, unfortunately); compact, walkable, self-contained neighborhoods; wonderful urban residential architecture scattered throughout; and a spectacular combination of livability yet urban vibe. With the right leadership, exposure and marketing, Pittsburgh could become an absolute gem of a city and the envy of the Eastern Seaboard. But the culture of pessimism, risk-aversion and near-disdain for people who try to get ahead and "become too big for their britches" is positively stifling. For all of its potential and unpolished charm, I've never been in a city where so much of its population seems to be rooting for its failure. It's heartbreaking -- almost infuriating -- and it's a fair part of why my ex and I got out.
What all this has to do with Buffalo, I don't know. My apologies for steering this thread off topic.
Buffalo Attracts many poor because the Median cost of a home is less than the Median price of a house in the East or West coast areas! This is not a situation unique to Buffalo. Most cities and towns North and West of Duchess County have suffered an influx of Poor people looking for an affordable place to live. However once they move to these low cost of living places they realize that they cannot find Work. And or the price to fix or maintanin the home is greater than what they will be able to resell it for. As a result mass abandonment. Buffalo will look like Detroit very soon.
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.
Buffalo's decline started decades ago
Sh*tsburgh
