Anyone know why they put a moratorium on Cleveland threads in city vs city?

[Minervah]

Originally Posted by kpl1228

^^^Looks like this is becoming the new Cleveland city-vs-city site.
I didn't mean that as a good thing.

Reviewing the conversations, I agree and I for one will no longer participate in this kind of discussion in this thread. It's pretty useless anyway. So I apologize to everyone for my part in prolonging it.

[bjimmy24]

Originally Posted by pufflesmcfacehair

No, everything I see is realistic. Taking a dozen posts and turning that into my worldview is ignorant.

I have cited some examples of good things about Cleveland. They are few - which is why they don't happen often. I also have to respond to propaganda and distorting information to make Cleveland seem far better than it is. I could certainly use my experiential worldview as my guide but that's not truthful. Generally, the human experience in Cleveland is poor - regardless of my subjective.

The "old Cleveland" attitude already died. The "new" one is: Breweries and coffee shops and debt-spending will save us. No good. Next recession will hit like a ton of bricks. The fake economy right now is turning up soil in the Rust Belt but it will be short-lived.

You are right about the economy being overrated, but if you think Cleveland is artificially propped up, what's the rest of the country? (Even worse! Boston also sits on top of some of the largest bubbles out there: higher ed, medicine, and housing).

[Cleveland_Collector]

Originally Posted by pufflesmcfacehair

Supply will outstrip eventually, especially when another recession or depression comes. I'd hate to be in Cle when it does.

That's what the willfully ignorant, contrarian and negative folks said prior to the last recession. In case you were still playing with Legos at the time, I'll just tell you that it was quite severe. Exactly what you're saying didn't happen. Why? Because, aside from the city's obvious warts, it was and still is on fairly solid financial footing and is old/mature enough to withstand the boom and bust cycles of newer cities which have done little other than try to create demand using fuzzy math and magic dust to create financing for the overage in supply. That mostly doesn't happen here. What happened here was a pause in new development which resumed once the situation improved.

[Cleveland_Collector]

Originally Posted by bjimmy24

You are right about the economy being overrated, but if you think Cleveland is artificially propped up, what's the rest of the country? (Even worse! Boston also sits on top of some of the largest bubbles out there: higher ed, medicine, and housing).

Agreed. Good economic conditions are both subjective and wildly susceptible to being 'overrated' by those enjoying the economic fruit. Even when the employment rate is 95% and the Dow is at 20k, there are still a significant number of people who aren't benefiting. To single out one city's economic optimism is simply stupid.

[j_ws]

Originally Posted by pufflesmcfacehair

The properties west of 75th down Detroit and Lake don't seem to be of any substantial quality to create growth like that. They're building up "Hingetown" - they have 1 mile between 25th and 60th to build and that will build way before.

Supply will outstrip eventually, especially when another recession or depression comes. I'd hate to be in Cle when it does.

I guess I don't fully understand what you mean here - do you consider the area between w29th and w60th to be primarily un-gentrified?

The housing stock in the West Eighties north of Detroit is basically the same as Edgewater Hill. Nothing about it to point to it being less suited for demand as the area shifts.

I do think some of Cleveland's development trends don't bode well for the next bubble. It's questionable how sustainable some of the exponential housing value increases have been in areas.

[j_ws]

If you're sticking to infill on Detroit then yes. However, the residential streets north and south are already pretty far along in this cycle up through W81, so I would push back on this argument.

There is also the influence of Battery Park which is now creating spillover. It's likely not sustainable, as you've noted, but it's definitely happening. Unless you're only talking in terms of new construction instead of renovation and restoration.

[bjimmy24]

Originally Posted by pufflesmcfacehair

Logical fallacy. Where did I say the rest of the country wasn't?

Boston is a fake place like Philly. Lots of history that draws tourists - otherwise fake economies. Baltimore - fake economy. NYC, fake. Miami, fake.

Fake economies are tourism economies, service economies like ones that rely on very-low margin consumerist sectors like bars and restaurants, financial economies, real estate economies.

Modern USA derives money from lazy people, dumb people, broke people, wasteful people, unhealthy people. The consumerism engine demands these traits of people grow. Ever wonder why Americans are fatter, dumber, and more in debt than ever?

Places like Cleveland need you to get sick to prop the hospital, get speeding tickets to prop the court, get drunk and fat to prop the bars.

These municipal economies rely on debt-spending. When they run out of stack to load, they take out loans, borrow from the state who borrows from the feds who borrow from a ghost of Xmas past. Towns offload PDs onto counties, cities offload schools to anyone they can, state offloads natural disasters to the feds.

All you gotta do is look at the roads, look at the blotter, and look at the factories to know how your city is doing. If those things ain't good, your museums and your "entertainment district" are sitting on sand.

Cleveland is better than it was - but better than what? A day when the city was an absolute atrocity. The fake economy now will last for a while. The next recession or depression will crush most of the superficial growth, if not all. But that is correct, it is not just Cleveland. That's the only good news.

Logical fallacy, I never said you said anything. You build so many strawmen!!!!!!!!

[bjimmy24]

Originally Posted by pufflesmcfacehair

No, I'm saying that if you are going to build - why would you build at W. 91st when you can at W 30th in one of the dozens of vacant lots dotting the landscape all the way down Detroit to Gordon Square? The stretch from the bridge to Gordon Square is presently being developed but mostly is full of empty buildings, car lots, vacant lots, low-quality housing, and a few light industry or service.

Limited demand. Development is happening closer to downtown for a reason - but it won't just keep happening in perpetuity. Eventually the demand will meet supply. The city will never make it past W 80th. Unless some magical dreamy future where China sends back tens of thousands of factories.

Umm you mean the supply will meet demand. Which is a good thing: stabilized housing prices by natural market means. Development is happening downtown for clear reasons, as the center of commerce in the city. As for why nobody wants vacant homes or lots, well, could be a plethora of reasons. Lousy foundation, buildings too far deteriorated that building new is actually cheaper. Responding to consumer preferences for newer conveniences. Location on the lake also has a draw. You're also completely leaving out any information about city regulations that might prevent it or at least make it very difficult.

I see this all over forums here. A shockingly simplistic and naive view of how an economy functions. Very little curiosity about it either, people just assume they know everything.

[Yac]

pufflesmcfacehair was a troll.
Closed.
Yac.