So after looking at random Google streetviews of Detroit... (Warren: real estate, apartment complex)

[detroit's own]

Originally Posted by kimba01

Why would anyone need a legit excuse to move if they so felt they wanted to? Many people moved. All colors. What is the problem with those who are left in the city? Regardless of color? They are still human. They can't function? They can't keep up their homes? I don't know if your are white, black or green, but if you are not white, how can you say what white people had to fear or not? There are those who carry their grudges beyond who they were originally intended for just based on color, ethnicity, gender... If you are black, you should understand that.



...and so are many of those so called 'white flighters'.



Well said. +1



Wow, I can't quite figure out if you are bragging or complaining. Either way is ignorant. I'm pretty sure all "you Detroiters" who sell like and need the income. Let it be. Who gives a sh*&? Let all the addicts and pushers come to their own demise, regardless of color or where they come from.

To the OP: go to Detroit and take a ride around. One way to get a feel and compare it to what you see on Google. Frankly, I have only been to a couple inner cities, so I can not say what is worse or not overall. I can only say that I find even the outskirts of Detroit to be nasty in areas. Like the other poster said, it depends on what you are used to.

wow so many responding to posts that have nothing to do with you. its no lie white people move away from black people simply because they are black. It didn't just happen in Detroit. You're the ignorant one

[kimba01]

Originally Posted by detroit's own

wow so many responding to posts that have nothing to do with you. its no lie white people move away from black people simply because they are black. It didn't just happen in Detroit. You're the ignorant one

What makes you think they have nothing to do with me over anyone else? My point is who cares why someone moves? Live your life and don't worry about it and definitely get over the blame game. It's old and worn out and impedes moving forward. Comment was made to let the whole Coleman Young debacle die because he has been dead for years. I merely suggest letting the whole white flight excuse die...it's older. The question wasn't answered though; Why would it matter who moved? Can those that didn't move keep up their homes, yards, jobs....?

Look, I understand why there is blame on the "flight" (which was not only white) as to some of the demise of Detroit. Lost taxes and such, but with a good city gov't, you would think there would be people smart enough to figure out how to fill in those gaps and possibly prevent more from fleeing. Didn't happen. Shame.

The reference to your druggie comments being ignorant is just that. The comments were ignorant, not you. Way to make a personal attack though. Go figure.

[Retroit]

Originally Posted by detroit's own

its no lie white people move away from black people simply because they are black.

So, what is the lie of why black people move away from black people?

[malamute]

Originally Posted by detroit's own

wow so many responding to posts that have nothing to do with you. its no lie white people move away from black people simply because they are black. It didn't just happen in Detroit. You're the ignorant one

Then why aren't whites moving away from blacks in all other cities? They don't here where I live. In fact I have a neighbor who is black -- and extremely Republican, hard working and not one person has moved away.

Detroit's real problem is not that whites moved away but that middle class blacks also moved away and the fact that your politicians have sent the jobs out of the country. They knew when they signed that NAFTA deal that it would destroy American jobs.

[detwahDJ]

Originally Posted by malamute

Then why aren't whites moving away from blacks in all other cities? They don't here where I live. In fact I have a neighbor who is black -- and extremely Republican, hard working and not one person has moved away.

Detroit's real problem is not that whites moved away but that middle class blacks also moved away and the fact that your politicians have sent the jobs out of the country. They knew when they signed that NAFTA deal that it would destroy American jobs.

Politicians don't outsource jobs but conservative ones make it easier for corporations to do so. Industries search for dirt cheap labor and lax regulation in third world locations like Bangladesh, finding loopholes and lobbying Congress for favors.
Bangladesh factory fire kills 8; collapse toll tops 900 | Reuters

Yes, easily replaceable dirt-cheap labor with zero rights, working behind locked doors with zero safety regulations. The Dream.
You're making a connection between Detroit politicians and NAFTA - really? And since you're defending Republicans in all this, who authored NAFTA and claimed it as theirs, "stolen" by Clinton at the time of its signing - only because he signed it? Got a guess?
When you say "your politicians" I assume you mean Democrats.
GOP senators block top Obama jobs initiative - CNN.com
GOP blocks veterans jobs bill with budget vote - The Hill's Floor Action
Democratic Jobs Bill Goes Down - NationalJournal.com
Yep, don't even allow a vote on jobs legislation.

Could the fact that the "bring jobs home" act was authored by Michigan Democrat Debbie Stabenow have something to do with it, and it might succeed?
http://www.stabenow.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=804
Otherwise, why would repubs want to encourage companies to move jobs out of the country - with tax breaks yet?

So Detroit city government, as clueless as it may have been, gets the blame for loss of the region's manufacturing base?

Ala RW media, this seems like a lame attempt to connect Detroit's city government with the loss of American jobs, and thus the demise of the city' manufacturing base. Seriously?

Detroit's manufacturing base has never been confined to the Detroit city limits, the sole jurisdiction of city government - it has been regional. Ford has always been in the suburb of Dearborn for instance. Contrary to RW media claims, city government has never had control of regional manufacturing. The auto industry has always been regional, outstate, national, and international - not under the control of city government. It has been the reverse.
What I'm saying is, this one huge industry has always been in control of its own "free market" destiny and not the "handmaiden" of city govt - in fact the reverse is true.

[Tiger Beer]

Originally Posted by Retroit

The only thing I would say Detroit has more of is abandoned areas (vacant overgrown lots), but actually I don't find abandoned areas as scary as congested run down areas with people loitering around.

Latter being somewhere like Baltimore. A lot of lingering and loitering there.

[wizfourfam]

Originally Posted by detroit's own

how did I not respond to Seatown when I commented with quote of Seatown's original post?

You quoted no one on the post I responded to

[313 TUxedo]

Originally Posted by detroit's own

lmfao Detroit had ONE riot, LA had how many? what about NYC? and other cities? yea the riots where the reason white people fled smh

It has had several, going as far back as the civil war.

Notable is the 1943 riot, which saw some blacks killing innocent whites, and A LOT of whites killing innocent blacks.

[313Weather]

Originally Posted by maclock

I hate to quibble, but most people don't make a habit of going to the worst areas of other inner cities. Writ large, no other major American city I've been in looks as bad as Motown. And despite having spent a lot of time in destroyed neighborhoods in urban settings, I've yet to see anything as run-down as majority of Detroit.

Most people haven't seen urban blight anywhere that is comparable to the urban blight one finds in Detroit. It struck me that your original comment "[i]f you are used to other inner cities, Detroit probably isn't much worse (in most areas)" was, shall we say, more than a little inaccurate.

Originally Posted by MarvinStrong313

It's not inaccurate at all. Most of Detroit isn't burnt out rubble. The city is full of neighborhoods, maybe not the prettiest but full of neighborhoods where a lot of people live.

Originally Posted by maclock

According to what I've seen and experienced, it's inaccurate. I don't mean to argue, Marvin; I wish only to offer my impression.

I'm not sure what Marvin meant by "not the prettiest neighborhoods."

Let's face it, even if said neighborhoods may very well be fully occupied and not "burnt out rubble" per say, many people simply don't want to live in a neighborhood where...

*There's several vacant homes
*Limited retail beyond liquor stores/dollar stores/beauty supply stores
*Drug dealers/squatters may occupy the homes,
*Where a ghetto-type of culture reigns (I.E. blasting music loudly with those massive speakers in the back of the car, getting shot/killed because you looked at someone wrong or asked your neighborhood to quiet down, having to always take extra precautions to protect personal property such as putting clubs on the cars or bars on the windows, etc.).

^^^To be fair, the same things exist in places such as Warrentucky (especially the southern portion) and Taylortucky, where majority of the population is white.

And it's really not about race. That's why even middle class blacks have left for places such as Southfield and Oak Park, where none of this (for now) exists.

[Sharks With Lasers]

Okay, so I decided to "travel" down Seven Mile Road from West to East. I've made it to the Lodge Freeway (10) by now. Here are some observations:

1. There is hardly any rubble or ruins. Most areas had businesses. A few of them were empty but a lot of them were filled. In fact, I think that if I posted pictures along this stretch, most people would not believe that they're in Detroit.

2. The quality of the businesses were mixed. Yes, there were a lot of liquor stores, check cashing shops, "beauty" places, and stores that buy gold. There were a lot of fast food places. There were also clothing stores, small grocery stores, independent restaurants, pharmacies, and occasional shopping plazas with more variety. It seems that in terms of finding cuisine, it was about average.

3. Speaking of businesses, some of them looked like they were in old, run-down buildings. Others looked modern, like they were constructed in the past ten years. One area (between Lahser and Evergreen) had nice-looking businesses that all had bars on them, but most areas seemed to be bar free.

4. The closer you got to a major intersection, the better things looked.

5. Most of the houses looked well-maintained from the times I ventured off from the main road. Possibly people are taking care of the abandoned houses' lawns or something.

6. There aren't a lot of apartment complexes, but there are some. They also generally looked well-maintained. A few of them were high-rise structures that stood out majorly from the mostly one and two story buildings surrounding them.

7. They really need to redo the road. Although there were some areas where road construction was occurring.

8. There aren't really many parks. Most of the green spaces seemed to be where buildings once stood.

9. MY GOODNESS WILL IT NEVER END? I swear it goes on forever, and it really doesn't change much. It wanted to make my head spin. When I drove through Chicago, it seemed like there was variety. It doesn't seem like there was much variety along Seven Mile, although I can't extrapolate whether this is true for all of Detroit. Most of it looked like a boring suburb that, while livable, didn't really offer anything interesting.

10. From my observations, I think Detroit would be served well to have strong neighborhood groups or watches. The city seems to be too large and decentralized to take care of it all themselves.

11. Since these pictures were taken during the day, I have no idea which streetlights weren't working. At least they had them.

That's it for now. I'll report back more as I find them.