PBS Frontline: Dayton examined on "Left Behind America" (Kettering: sale, 2013)

[ilovemycomputer90]

Stumbled upon this episode of Frontline tonight. Very sad. Hope better days will come for the city.

[Srszee]

Originally Posted by Ohiogirl81

I did like the focus on the immigrant communities and what they've done in the city. So much of the show broke my heart, though.

Yes, I was glad to see a positive light on the immigrant communities. There is such a stigma attached to them and some of them are doing a lot of good for the Dayton community.

[Srszee]

Did anyone else notice, or was bothered by, the one family they highlighted as barely making it (I believe they had 3 kids), sometimes the parents ate at the food shelter so they could provide meals for kids at home, and they were getting free good at the big warehouse-type place, etc., .... and yet, she had a Michael Kors handbag (I can't afford one!!) and they had a huge big screen TV with cable? I mean, if I'm choosing between feeding myself or my children, I'm not going to be paying for cable TV or carrying designer handbags. I'm not trying to sound mean, but it just didn't sit right with me.

[cobolt]

Originally Posted by Srszee

Did anyone else notice, or was bothered by, the one family they highlighted as barely making it (I believe they had 3 kids), sometimes the parents ate at the food shelter so they could provide meals for kids at home, and they were getting free good at the big warehouse-type place, etc., .... and yet, she had a Michael Kors handbag (I can't afford one!!) and they had a huge big screen TV with cable? I mean, if I'm choosing between feeding myself or my children, I'm not going to be paying for cable TV or carrying designer handbags. I'm not trying to sound mean, but it just didn't sit right with me.

I noticed that as well.

I was surprised there was no mention of the things that are going right in Dayton. I mean there is new development and such, even if the longevity or return on investment is unknown.

I read a report or study that suggested that Dayton follow a model of physically shrinking the geography of the city (razing condemned buildings, dealing with green space etc) and allow the city to shrink square mileage wise to its right size (thus focusing public services and resources to a smaller physical area) and then letting the city develop organically instead of force-fed developmen in trying to replicate the past by filling old buildings and spaces and continuing the round robin of business openings and closures (small businesses). Much the model they’ve used in Detroit but on a smaller scale. I’m not sure of the approach or how that would even work. Do you end up moving people from a devalued neighborhood to raze the rest of it and concentrate those folks somewhere services can be better provided? It’s an interesting concept, but I think the complexities and planning and perhaps costs are way outside the city’s abilities.

[Srszee]

Originally Posted by cobolt

I noticed that as well.

I was surprised there was no mention of the things that are going right in Dayton. I mean there is new development and such, even if the longevity or return on investment is unknown.

I read a report or study that suggested that Dayton follow a model of physically shrinking the geography of the city (razing condemned buildings, dealing with green space etc) and allow the city to shrink square mileage wise to its right size (thus focusing public services and resources to a smaller physical area) and then letting the city develop organically instead of force-fed developmen in trying to replicate the past by filling old buildings and spaces and continuing the round robin of business openings and closures (small businesses). Much the model they’ve used in Detroit but on a smaller scale. I’m not sure of the approach or how that would even work. Do you end up moving people from a devalued neighborhood to raze the rest of it and concentrate those folks somewhere services can be better provided? It’s an interesting concept, but I think the complexities and planning and perhaps costs are way outside the city’s abilities.

I agree. Why not turn those green areas into parks or neighborhood gardens? Can you imagine if a lot of those neighborhoods grew their own veggies? It would serve to give many people a purpose, give them pride in their community, and feed many people as well. My cousin has a decent size garden and in just 4 rows of beans, she canned 26 quarts which gets her family through next spring. So do something like this on a neighborhood scale and think what could be accomplished!

[IDtheftV]

Originally Posted by randomparent

That's why Dayton has been seeking to increase its tax base by tapping the rest of Montgomery county for funding to prop up city development. Of course, we all know that's going nowhere.

Good.

There has been discussions here on what a "shame" it was that Oakwood ( and possibly Kettering .... ) incorporated so Dayton couldn't "tap into all that money."

Had Dayton done so, it would be just as bad in Dayton, but Oakwood would just be another area where houses were getting boarded-up and later torn down. Oakwood, Kettering do OK because of their residents. They vote with their feet, so-to-speak and would just move out - like the former residents of Dayton moved out. Eventually, people move out of the whole state.

Is this already happening now?
Ohio continues anemic population growth
I'd say yes - to some extent. There's a jillion immigrants coming to the US every year - around 1 million per year. Ohio "should" be getting about 3% of those ( based on population ). 30k new arrivals? I don't think so.

The problem is not that Dayton ( and other similar cities ) didn't have enough money, the problem is how the cities were run.

Tapping the rest of the county ( Why stop there? Tax Eaton, Lebanon, Beavercreek, et al. ) sounds a lot like petty criminals who say ( when caught ) they have it, I want it, I'm taking it. The idea that the city of Dayton proper has ANYTHING to do with the success of ANY of the suburbs we all know that's going nowhere.

[ohio_peasant]

Originally Posted by Srszee

Yes, I was glad to see a positive light on the immigrant communities. There is such a stigma attached to them and some of them are doing a lot of good for the Dayton community.

Very true! And thus, it's especially unfortunate how America's emerging narrative has turned so biliously anti-immigrant. Maybe the coasts and the major cities are indeed overcrowded. Not Dayton! We could use 10K or 20K or whatnot folks from Syria, or Honduras. We could use new people to populate neighborhoods, to rebuild them.

Originally Posted by IDtheftV

...There's a jillion immigrants coming to the US every year - around 1 million per year. Ohio "should" be getting about 3% of those ( based on population ). 30k new arrivals? I don't think so.

The problem is not that Dayton ( and other similar cities ) didn't have enough money, the problem is how the cities were run....

While I have no desire to defend Dayton's current government, by my reckoning, the underlying problem isn't foolish/corrupt/rapacious government, but the simple fact, that that part of the country just isn't a very compelling place to live. Even if the local government were clever, enterprising and enlightened, what could they possibly do, that would be so substantially different? They can't change the weather. They can't bring the oceans here, or the mountains. They can't build a world-caliber university here. They can't entice corporate headquarters to leave Manhattan or Palo Alto or Chicago, and relocate to Dayton (or to Beavercreek, or Springboro, or whatever else). Sure, more could be done, to improve efficiency etc. But how much more?

Dayton exists because it was a regional market-town for agricultural products, and later, manufacturing. Neither activity is all that compelling now. Even if productivity in agriculture or manufacturing were burgeoning (and to some extent it is!), how much manpower - and brainpower - is required to keep it going?

[woxyroxme]

Originally Posted by Srszee

the one family they highlighted as barely making it (I believe they had 3 kids), sometimes the parents ate at the food shelter so they could provide meals for kids at home, and they were getting free good at the big warehouse-type place, etc., .... and yet, she had a Michael Kors handbag (I can't afford one!!) and they had a huge big screen TV with cable?

Being or not being poor has less to do with income and everything to do with poor life choices, they probably drive a gas guzzler and buy a lot of scratch off lottery tickets too.

I know people who live in McMansion homes and drive big luxury SUVs that root through the couch cushions for spare change so their kids have lunch money at school.

People tend to buy what they want and beg for what they need.

[RocketSci]

Originally Posted by Srszee

Did anyone else notice, or was bothered by, the one family they highlighted as barely making it (I believe they had 3 kids), sometimes the parents ate at the food shelter so they could provide meals for kids at home, and they were getting free good at the big warehouse-type place, etc., .... and yet, she had a Michael Kors handbag (I can't afford one!!) and they had a huge big screen TV with cable? I mean, if I'm choosing between feeding myself or my children, I'm not going to be paying for cable TV or carrying designer handbags. I'm not trying to sound mean, but it just didn't sit right with me.

When we were first starting out we kept a jar in the kitchen that we put spare change in as our "TV money" that we saved for a couple of years in order to buy a new TV, which we eventually bought. My wife also had some very dressy business clothes that she used to wear to work until she got pregnant and was laid off. We also later got a small free TV from the father-in-law when he re-married and they were combining households. I had a friend who worked for the cable company, and he gave us his "free employee" cable as he lived in an apartment that had its own free cable.

You can't judge people by the things they own today, as you don't know their circumstances when the got those things. In all likelihood, they were probably doing relatively well when they got those things, even assuming that the bag was not a knock-off anyway.

[ohio_peasant]

Such attitudes and habits are more a matter of culture, than of pecuniary wherewithal, or traditional notions of “class”. Consider for example a family which raises its children to speak French, German and Latin, in addition of course to English… not to look clever in cocktail parties, or to train the little darlings for the Foreign Service, but because an educated person is just supposed to be fluent in multiple languages. How common is such a family in Dayton or its environs? Maybe in a few pockets of Oakwood, or Centerville. But such a family is unlikely to organically evolve in Dayton, or to be lured from elsewhere to relocate to Dayton. Simply put, Dayton is a Blue Collar town, and even its paragons of educational attainment are rather close to agrarian/factory roots. Even at the Air Force Research Lab, at Wright-Patterson, it is amazing how many of the engineers and scientists self-report that they’re the first in their family to go to college.

While the prevailing American narrative is that of the self-made man (or woman), it takes multiple generations to inculcate particular tastes, values and culture. The sort of multi-generational family chains who manage to do this, anchor the community. They’re not only the preening notables flashing their tuxes and dresses at high-profile galas and ribbon-cutting ceremonies, but more importantly, they’re the intellectual fiber that secures the matrix of cultural life, which makes a place appealing for say corporate HQ relocations, for the establishment of research-institutes and the like. Dayton’s success-stories are hardscrabble garage-heroes of 1900, who came from nowhere, built something clever, made their money, perhaps (to their credit) donated some of it, and then moved on… or at least their families moved on. Witness the long-running thread on this subforum, about Dayton’s notable families. Where are they now? Not in Dayton.

It’s a blue-collar town. Even if some enormously successful flash of investment – public or private – were to erupt here, it would still remain a blue-collar town.