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, NY, August 31, 2007) - - It's a grim ranking for the queen city.
The U.S. Census Bureau says Buffalo is the second poorest big city in the country, just behind Detroit.
Buffalo's poverty rate is nearly 30 percent. Experts believe several welfare reform initiatives and a lack of universal health care are some of the reasons buffalo is so poor.
Another problem is the amount of people not graduating from high school.
Buffalo's poverty rate is nearly 30 percent. Experts believe several welfare reform initiatives and a lack of universal health care are some of the reasons buffalo is so poor.
Another problem is the amount of people not graduating from high school.
So.... these "experts" propose more government with the resulting tax increases & bureaucracy that have been direct factors in Buffalo reaching this 'lofty' goal???? And the more the government provides... the more the people do not need to provide for themselves... and the death spiral continues.
Someone here implied that Hilary Clinton is to be blamed for the sorry conditions of Buffalo's economy. I wouldn't blame Mrs. Clinton. It's not her fault that:
Buffalo has been wallowing in industrial decay and apathy for over three- and-a-half decades. (Has she been a NYS Senator since 1970?) The bulk of the blame for this appauling tragedy (of a once-great, important and proud city) goes to---surprise--everyone. Yes, all of us. You can dole out some of the blame to the politicians of the 1960's and 1970's, as well as the industry CEO's and shareholders of said decades. However, there's more, much more blame to go around. But it's not easy to assign the remainder of it. Why? The rest of this blame is much harder to dole out because, when it comes to something as gargantuan a human enterprise as economics, you need to include everyone who has a part in it. In other words: everyone! Quite simply, everyone is to blame for Buffalo's economic ills (for that matter, anywhere else's ills too, of course). I ask anyone who doubts this, and would rather blame Mrs. Clinton, to ask themselves:
Why did all of the major manufacturing industries leave Buffalo in the first place?
Where did they go?
What did the politicans of Buffalo at that time do to try to prevent them from leaving in the first place? Did they offer industry any incentive to stay in Buffalo? Did they take a pro-active stance by planning for the future for just such times when the ever-changing economics of the day dealt devasating blows as thousands upon thousands of jobs all of a sudden evaporated?
What plans did local business leaders, improvement agencies, the Buffalo Chamber of Commerce, to name but a few who held power then, do about mitigating such a disaster?
And perhaps, more telling, and hardest of all to pin-point with dead-reckoning accuracy is this question:
Can any politician or any individual citizen REALLY do anything at all about the aforementioned circumstances? Is it conceivably possible that the dynamic forces of economic change are so great and inscrutible that no one can really do anything about it?
Just rhetorical questions that we all need to think about and attempt to answer before we all play the blame game!
Someone here implied that Hilary Clinton is to be blamed for the sorry conditions of Buffalo's economy. I wouldn't blame Mrs. Clinton. It's not her fault that:
Buffalo has been wallowing in industrial decay and apathy for over three- and-a-half decades. (Has she been a NYS Senator since 1970?) The bulk of the blame for this appauling tragedy (of a once-great, important and proud city) goes to---surprise--everyone. Yes, all of us. You can dole out some of the blame to the politicians of the 1960's and 1970's, as well as the industry CEO's and shareholders of said decades. However, there's more, much more blame to go around. But it's not easy to assign the remainder of it. Why? The rest of this blame is much harder to dole out because, when it comes to something as gargantuan a human enterprise as economics, you need to include everyone who has a part in it. In other words: everyone! Quite simply, everyone is to blame for Buffalo's economic ills (for that matter, anywhere else's ills too, of course). I ask anyone who doubts this, and would rather blame Mrs. Clinton, to ask themselves:
Why did all of the major manufacturing industries leave Buffalo in the first place?
Where did they go?
What did the politicans of Buffalo at that time do to try to prevent them from leaving in the first place? Did they offer industry any incentive to stay in Buffalo? Did they take a pro-active stance by planning for the future for just such times when the ever-changing economics of the day dealt devasating blows as thousands upon thousands of jobs all of a sudden evaporated?
What plans did local business leaders, improvement agencies, the Buffalo Chamber of Commerce, to name but a few who held power then, do about mitigating such a disaster?
And perhaps, more telling, and hardest of all to pin-point with dead-reckoning accuracy is this question:
Can any politician or any individual citizen REALLY do anything at all about the aforementioned circumstances? Is it conceivably possible that the dynamic forces of economic change are so great and inscrutible that no one can really do anything about it?
Just rhetorical questions that we all need to think about and attempt to answer before we all play the blame game!
Pidgett
yeah its easy, arm up to the teeth, block all exits out of the city and dont let them leave.....
And perhaps, more telling, and hardest of all to pin-point with dead-reckoning accuracy is this question:
Can any politician or any individual citizen REALLY do anything at all about the aforementioned circumstances? Is it conceivably possible that the dynamic forces of economic change are so great and inscrutible that no one can really do anything about it?
Just rhetorical questions that we all need to think about and attempt to answer before we all play the blame game!
Pidgett
Excellent!
Economics tends to look at the long term, as opposed to the short term view of politicians, workers, voters, and (sometimes) stock holders.
Economic change is unstoppable, and structural unemployment (mismatch between workers skills & available jobs) is a direct result.
So perhaps lessons could be learned that too much government involvement (some is needed per Keynesian economics) stifles innovations and job creation as an economy evolves. And evolve it will.... no matter how much the exits are blocked.
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.
