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 never mentioned Detroit or Akron. I think that Detroit is by far the worst city in the country, there is nothing that would ever make me move there.
I mentioned Cleveland, as it is starting to recover and bring a few decent things in. Toledo is turning around fairly well, and I think that it is a matter of time before people forget that it was in the rust belt.
Pittsburgh is actually doing well (not that anyone has said to the contrary).
I wouldn't ever move to a rust belt city again, but I am saying that parts of the rust belt are improving, Buffalo hasn't even started LOOKING in the right direction, much less moving. Byron Brown seems to think that Bass Pro will solve the Buffalo again, then again, the man is a moron.
Pittsburgh is actually doing well (not that anyone has said to the contrary).
Unlike most of the rust belt, Pittsburgh (even though it has had a bit of a declining population but not quite to Buffalo's extent) has been doing well for quite awhile. I have a friend not from that area who went to Carnegie-Mellon for an MBA and stayed on afterwards for over a decade (recently moving to greener pastures in Texas). He was laid off in Pittsburgh and would've stayed except that the Texas offer came up.
Well, Texas is just booming, easily the best state to live in right now, as far as economic conditions. I would very quickly move to Texas, they have great gun laws, good social policy.
You believe the state forcing you to have a safety inspection is intrusive? Personally, I think it is a matter of public safety & have absolutely no problem with it. I'd hate to live in a state that didn't care about its residents enough to make sure that every car on the road was safe.
I've lived in states with safety inspections and in states without safety inspections. As far as I can tell, there is no safety difference - except getting the inspection done is a big pain.
If you have any numbers that support your assertion, that would be great.
I've lived in states with safety inspections and in states without safety inspections. As far as I can tell, there is no safety difference - except getting the inspection done is a big pain.
If you have any numbers that support your assertion, that would be great.
Me too.
I will say that in some states you see more abandoned cars on the road, but I think that's more part of redneck culture (which I dislike). In Florida, Oklahoma, Arkansas, etc, I see cars on the side of the road, people just take the license plates off and leave the cars there, because it's cheaper than getting them towed.
I can see the merits behind inspections, but to me it makes no sense in NY, why do you need to inspect a brand new car? I just bought a brand new Scion, and was shocked to see that they charged me for the inspection... that's absurd to me. I bet that the unions asked for that, and since it's NY, the unions decide what's best for the people, not the people of the state.
I've lived in states with safety inspections and in states without safety inspections. As far as I can tell, there is no safety difference - except getting the inspection done is a big pain.
If you have any numbers that support your assertion, that would be great.
I've never read any stats on it nor do I care that much about it to bother to look for any. My assertion is based on knowing human nature. Without safety inspections many people will undoubtedly continue to take care of their cars & make sure they are road worthy. People who are familiar with cars will most likely fix known problems & those that are not will continue to have them checked out to try to prevent more serious problems but a small % will ignore any warning signs & drive their cars into the ground. My guess is that most of these people will eventually have break downs that really wont affect anyone but themselves but even if .5% of these people decide to drive with serious brake or steering problems that could potentially put other drives at risk it is too many.
I do agree that it is pointless to inspect new cars, they should give someone who purchases a new vehicle a 5 year waiver or something similar to that.
I've lived in states with safety inspections and in states without safety inspections. As far as I can tell, there is no safety difference - except getting the inspection done is a big pain.
If you have any numbers that support your assertion, that would be great.
Having lived in both PA and Ohio, I believe firmly that the yearly inspection is nothing more than a cash cow for the government and for auto body shops. PA has some of the worst drivers out there, yet they have a very tough yearly inspection of vehicles. This inspection does nothing to improve safety. First of all, the inspection is only conducted once a year. This is not often enough to catch brake problems and force car owners to do the repairs sooner. As anyone who owns a car knows, brake problems go from non-existant to the point of no brakes in far less than a year. This is just the nature of the beast with brakes. Ditto for exhaust systems. Even tires, which take longer to deteriorate, will need to be inspected more often than once a year if safety is going to be accurately policed. As far as the body rust issue that PA likes to force, a person on a tight budget should not be forced to waste cash on bondo each year if their car is mechanically sound, but has some rust. This is stupid, and intrusive on the lives of PA residents. I far prefer the Ohio approach. Safety essential repairs, like brakes, cannot be policed by a yearly inspection. Good old common sense and a healthy fear of driving a car that is not roadworthy make the difference here, not the state treating citizens like they are too brazen and gullible to do these basic repairs before hitting the road.
I will say that in some states you see more abandoned cars on the road, but I think that's more part of redneck culture (which I dislike). In Florida, Oklahoma, Arkansas, etc, I see cars on the side of the road, people just take the license plates off and leave the cars there, because it's cheaper than getting them towed.
I can see the merits behind inspections, but to me it makes no sense in NY, why do you need to inspect a brand new car? I just bought a brand new Scion, and was shocked to see that they charged me for the inspection... that's absurd to me. I bet that the unions asked for that, and since it's NY, the unions decide what's best for the people, not the people of the state.
I'm trying to figure out how it would behoove anyone to abandon a car on the shoulder of a highway. Most salvage yards will give you something for your junk car, frequently a couple of hundred dollars. Why not take advantage of this chance to get money for your junker, contribute some good parts to those who may be able to use them, and help recycle some metals and plastics? I've always assumed that salvage yards were the traditional place to send your junk vehicle in all parts of our country.
Hello xnyer, we are living in the DC area. Please, what do you mean by life has regressed?
As opposed to progressing, I would say indicators point to the area going backwards, (higher taxes, loss of population, loss of jobs, increased blight, the usual litany of woes the area has been unable to overcome for 50 years).
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.
