It cracks me up how people think Philly is its own state.. (home equity, neighborhoods)

[ElijahAstin]

Originally Posted by MikeNigh

This I agree with this... New Jersey, PA, and New York are living off these two cities and it's pathetic.

Pittsburgh's economy is pretty significant.

[BTA88]

Originally Posted by HeavenWood

Pittsburgh's economy is pretty significant.

True as that may be, Philadelphia's GDP is higher than the rest of the state combined.

[ElijahAstin]

Originally Posted by BTA88

True as that may be, Philadelphia's GDP is higher than the rest of the state combined.

$99 billion of that coming from Pittsburgh. Point being, Pennsylvania is far and away from living off one city alone, especially when you only compare the PA parts of the metro.

[BTA88]

Originally Posted by HeavenWood

$99 billion of that coming from Pittsburgh. Point being, Pennsylvania is far and away from living off one city alone, especially when you only compare the PA parts of the metro.

How does that change what I said? I'm in no way saying Pittsburgh's GDP is insignificant, I'm just saying Philadelphia's is (not surprisingly) much larger.

[ElijahAstin]

Originally Posted by BTA88

How does that change what I said? I'm in no way saying Pittsburgh's GDP is insignificant, I'm just saying Philadelphia's is (not surprisingly) much larger.

The context implied it, but I won't doubt you if you're saying that isn't the case.

[BTA88]

Originally Posted by HeavenWood

The context implied it, but I won't doubt you if you're saying that isn't the case.

You said Pittsburgh's economy is significant. I said that is true. You're trying to infer things that were never implied, friend.

You know what would settle this argument? A New Philayorkia cities-state.

[pman]

Originally Posted by BTA88

You said Pittsburgh's economy is significant. I said that is true. You're trying to infer things that were never implied, friend.

You know what would settle this argument? A New Philayorkia cities-state.

what argument? and what would that settle? all that would do is make Philadelphia NY's ***** the same way NY made the rest of NYS their *****. the "argument" is silly. Pittsburgh is a large economic contributor to the state of PA and they are in no way inhibiting Philadelphia. unless the city state would be independent of DC, it would matter little. the reason there are but a few healthy cities in this country are the policies in DC that have annihilated production in this country. places like Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Buffalo, places that produced things, have been struggling for decades and the sunbelt growth can't make up for that loss.

[Road_Warrior]

Going to the Northern Delaware comment... that IS Philadelphia MSA. Technically if you live in the Northern County of Delaware, you are a Metro Philadelphian.

[rotodome]

Originally Posted by pman

the reason there are but a few healthy cities in this country are the policies in DC that have annihilated production in this country. places like Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Buffalo, places that produced things, have been struggling for decades and the sunbelt growth can't make up for that loss.

I definitely agree with you for the most part, but this just got me thinking, regarding "healthy cities" of a different sort. Not that I think this part was ever a governmental policy goal, but one bright side about the loss of manufacturing from american cities is that by and large, those cities have become MUCH more pleasant and healthy places to be in a lot of ways. And I think that's one reason many people are moving back to cities lately.

For example, while the establishment of the EPA certainly helped, I think the main reason the Schuylkill doesn't flat out stink the way it did when I was a kid is because most of the industry that was located along its banks and dumped stuff into it is now gone. And the pollution and factory soot that made the top of city hall black, and its clock glass yellow is now a thing of the past (athough ironically when they did the big city hall renovation they actually replaced the dirty yellowed white glass with actual yellow glass, because the color had become so iconic).

Same thing with Pittsburgh's air quality being so much better now, and the picturesque hilly skyline is now so visible, is that the steel mills are largely gone.

In a lot of ways it's really best if heavy industry is located far away from dense population centers...just maybe not 'other-side-of-the-planet' far away!

[drive carephilly]

Originally Posted by rotodome

I definitely agree with you for the most part, but this just got me thinking, regarding "healthy cities" of a different sort. Not that I think this part was ever a governmental policy goal, but one bright side about the loss of manufacturing from american cities is that by and large, those cities have become MUCH more pleasant and healthy places to be in a lot of ways. And I think that's one reason many people are moving back to cities lately.

I agree that the lack of environmental regs and decades of bad economic policy in DC were both big factors in the decline in of cities but american culture and government specifically has been fairly anti-urban from the get-go.

The 1950s up to the Clinton administration was a particularly anti-urban period and the damage is still being undone. It was just a few weeks ago that the FHA eased restrictions on the commercial/residential ratio that basically made traditional financing for mixed use buildings impossible.

The FHWA went on a 40 year orgy of highway building (obliterating a lot of urban neighborhoods along the way) without any corresponding investment in the country's transit/passenger rail network. Low and no interest loans were available from the feds for new water/sewer infrastructure and school building in the suburbs.

On the finance side the FHA and VA were basically paying people to move to the suburbs by limiting a lot of loans to new construction and not offering home equity loans to repair existing housing - this was understandable post WWII where the Depression had rendered an acute shortage of housing but it should've been fixed by the late 50s or early 60s. Then there were other lending rules (which weren't outlawed until 1972) that prohibited whites from getting FHA loans in black neighborhoods and vice versa which made loans in any diverse neighborhood next to impossible. (There's been a really powerful narrative built around "white flight" but it's largely BS - the correct term should be "capital flight").

Combine this with the large families of the baby boom, cheap land, cheap gas, virtually free financing, the hollowing out of American industry and an abundance of urban superfund sites and it shouldn't surprise anyone that people who had a choice left the city.

For example, while the establishment of the EPA certainly helped, I think the main reason the Schuylkill doesn't flat out stink the way it did when I was a kid is because most of the industry that was located along its banks and dumped stuff into it is now gone.

No doubt - although a lot of that "industry" was the byproduct of household bathroom "business" from towns upstream. The Clean Water Act cleared most of that up although most cities are still in violation every time we get a heavy rain.