 
Diehard
Member
Username: Diehard
Post Number: 111
Registered: 03-2005
| | Posted on Friday, August 24, 2007 - 7:11 pm: |    |
Those comments reminded me of my grandpa grumbling about "that newfangled rock-n-roll racket." Bah!
ConcernedParent would be just sad and kinda funny if he/she wasn't a parent. I bet the kids have been told, "I don't want you EVER to go into Detroit! There are murderers lined up waiting for you at the border!!!" |
Miketoronto
Member
Username: Miketoronto
Post Number: 635
Registered: 07-2004
| | Posted on Friday, August 24, 2007 - 7:14 pm: | |
These folks are the reason Detroit is in the shape it is, and they should not feel bitter. No one told them to leave the city, because black people moved next door.
I really can't stand attitudes like that. I would expect better from people who actually grew up in the city and had a connection with it. |
Sstashmoo
Member
Username: Sstashmoo
Post Number: 307
Registered: 02-2007
| | Posted on Friday, August 24, 2007 - 7:46 pm: | |
Quote: "These folks are the reason Detroit is in the shape it is, and they should not feel bitter."
There are many here that would have people in other towns believe that Detroit is just another Santa Barbara. The fact is Detroit is getting better, it's still a very dangerous place in certain areas.
Quote: "No one told them to leave the city,"
Not so, many were told to leave by family and friends. And even some unlikely sources were advising people to get out. Conditions dictated the exodus. People got tired of being broken into, cars stolen, mugged, shot at, etc etc etc. Thats why people left. Ever hear of the 67 riots? Whites and Blacks left the city after 1967. It was not a place for peaceful habitation. I worked downtown and all over the city between 77 and 82. Not understanding why people left, is to not understand Detroit's history at all.
No offense, but what you're saying is ridiculous. |
Oakmangirl
Member
Username: Oakmangirl
Post Number: 157
Registered: 08-2007
| | Posted on Friday, August 24, 2007 - 8:34 pm: | |
"...many were told to leave by family and friends."
Do your family and friends NOW tell you where to live; this is the most pathetic thing I've heard in a while.
"Ever hear of the 67 riots? Whites and Blacks left the city after 1967. It was not a place for peaceful habitation."
Really? I was born during the riots; it was happening right outside my mom's room. Weird, we lived peacefully in a racially mixed neighborhood until the mid 80's. I guess it may have depended on your neighborhood and just how many African-Americans you are willing to call neighbor.
Interestingly, I had never heard a racial slur in my life until I started attending Catholic school in the suburbs. Hmmmm...wonder where those kids picked up those mean words and thoughts?
What Miketoronto says makes perfect sense to this girl who lived in the city because it was her freakin' home, not because her aunt or grandmother told her family they had to move. That's what's ridiculous. What were these people really just lemmings? |
Sstashmoo
Member
Username: Sstashmoo
Post Number: 308
Registered: 02-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 1:02 am: | |
AOL must be cleaning out their membership.
Yeah, Detroit has never had a crime problem and anyone who has moved out of there must be totally nuts and just a racist.
You started attending school in the suburbs? |
Rjk
Member
Username: Rjk
Post Number: 814
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 1:59 am: | |
Funny how a forum with 3 or 4 people who are doing most of the posting on that thread is a window into the typical city/suburb divide, but the news article in the Freep the other day entitled "The D Is a Draw" which talked about suburbanites patronizing downtown hardly garnered much attention on this message board. Not really the slightest bit surprising. |
Oakmangirl
Member
Username: Oakmangirl
Post Number: 163
Registered: 08-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 9:36 am: | |
Rjk,
If you read the heading of the thread and some of the ignorant comments in the link; of course, this will descend into a feud between the Montagues and Capulets. I think I made reference to Miketoronto who pretty much calmly sums up the nature of the divide?
Why not start a more positive vibe by posting that article you reference as a thread?  |
Oakmangirl
Member
Username: Oakmangirl
Post Number: 164
Registered: 08-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 9:58 am: | |
Sstashmoo,
AOL? Wow, I'm bewildered at the "harshness" of that one; I've never had an AOL or Hotmail account.
Catholic school in the burbs? Yes, only because my mother was unhappy with my Lutheran school in the city. Some people just believe in spiritual edification; she actually tried to send me to Friends School downtown, but the logistics didn't work in my home. Not that I should have to justify my upbringing to you.... |
Wazootyman
Member
Username: Wazootyman
Post Number: 247
Registered: 02-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 10:19 am: | |
I think you find a lot of this mentality amongst many of the older generation of Metro Detroiters. Most everyone I know in their 50's or 60's grew up in Detroit proper, but now lives in the suburbs. Some of them have stories about neighborhood decline pushing them to move (how many times can your car be broken into before 'enough is enough'?). Others were just looking for the "suburban dream".
My father worked downtown for something like 30 years, prior to his re-location to a suburban office of a "major Detroit bank". I wouldn't say he dislikes Detroit - but at the same time he doesn't have a lot of praise for it. Unlike him, most of my time spent in the city has been during a period of improvement. Suppose you grew up with Detroit mostly on the decline (and I know some of you have) - and witnessed firsthand the downfall of the CBD. Banks like his stayed committed to downtown for whatever reason, essentially the only saviors of an otherwise desolate office market. Lunch during the 80's downtown didn't involve a beautiful park with fountains and concerts - it was empty storefronts and panhandling. For example, when I mentioned that the Vinton building was being restored, he spoke of it with great disdain; he had an office for many years overlooking its decay.
My mom has absolutely no interest in Detroit. She'll speak highly of a coworker, that volunteered for the Super Bowl, for instance. I might be able to drag her to a Tigers game. But she'd probably flip out if I were to move downtown. What does Detroit offer her, other than the occasional show at the Fox, that the suburbs don't? I guess I can understand a lack of a draw for a 'mom'.
Look at the local news for a good reason why. How many nights is the leading story about a shooting in Detroit? If you hadn't been downtown in ages, and were constantly subjected to this sort of business, what would you think? I'm really not trying to defend their position, maybe just trying to understand it better. Hell, I don't know.
I guess if I knew the Detroit that my parents and their parents knew at its peak, I'd be pretty depressed to see what happened to it over a lifetime as well. The recent improvements are really great, but from what I can tell, it isn't and won't be what it was for a very long time. For this reason, maybe that's why a lot of people have written off the city, even if it is an ignorant stance. The suburbs are comfortable. Hell, even I'll opt to go out to dinner in the 'burbs some nights, because going out downtown is a hassle, even if it can be more satisfying.
As for Quicken - there are a lot of Quicken employees who aren't thrilled about a move downtown. It's a big upset to the routine - and a move that is more for the "greater good" of the city than of company or its employees on an individual basis. I assume very few live downtown now, and when/if they move, it will almost universally result in longer commutes, parking hassles and increased taxation.
Besides, right now let's just hope Quicken makes it through the mortgage industry storm. |
Alexei289
Member
Username: Alexei289
Post Number: 1320
Registered: 11-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 11:50 am: | |
fuk em... in 20 years their kids will be running the town... and have a different view on everything. These days, 20 somethings go downtown quite frequently and ignore all the bad shit becuase no matter where u look you see progress as well... most people in my generation might say... "ya they need to get thats shit done soon over on that side of the street" but we all know eventually it will get there...
Ive walked cass corridor at 4 am several times going back to wayne state stumbling drunk from the bar... Never had a problem... the bums are usually happy with .50$... does that mean i never will? probably not.. but id feel the same way in the south side of chicago, parts of NY, LA, NO, Baltimore, Miami, Cleveland, or NJ. Most people in my generation dont give a fuk... U gotta get home from the bar somehow...
We go to wings games.... and grab dinner after at cobo joes... then get wasted at st andrews..
where the previous generation might go to a wings game, but leave 10 min early to make it out of dodge.
Have patience... Detroit hasn't hit bottom yet... but the rebound is starting as Detroit is still declining. Maybe in 10 years, there will be an equilibrium where the number of people moving out equal the number of people moving in as developments get bigger and larger all over the city.
Perhaps in the future some drugs will be decriminalized to the point where drug dealers begin to get out of the game and move on to better things instead of keeping entire blocks of the city on lock down preventing any progress. This system id a double edged sword. If the dealers get busted and locked up, who lives in the houses on that block?.. the houses will be forclosed and eventually demolished, and the titles never cleared since the owners are in prison, and unable to cunduct any business to a would be developer.... or dead because the dude 4 blocks away had a bad week. Unfortunatly, in Detroit's economy, drug money usually pays the legit bills owed to the city...
The only way this economy will change, is if it happens voluntarily. People get out of the game because they cant pay their bills with it anymore...
Try explaining that to someone who has lived in livonia their whole life. Its not going to go anywhere... so fuk em... they wont be running the show much longer, and soon the people that are will have a much different view on things. |
Neilr
Member
Username: Neilr
Post Number: 567
Registered: 06-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 12:06 pm: | |
Wazootyman, your parents' opinions of Detroit, while I don't agree with them, are entirely reasonable and you ought not feel obligated to defend them. It's simply how they see the situation.
I'm guessing that I may be in the same cohort as your parents. One of the notable things, regarding downtown, to people in their 50's and older is that when the words "downtown Detroit" come up in conversation, the first words out of their mouths are often, "I remember going downtown to Hudson's..." We all did it. We all remember it. And we all miss it. But Hudson's is gone. It's not coming back. At least, it's not coming back as we remember it. Another layer of these feelings is that we are remembering those times when we were young.
When I see kids skating in Campus Martius, and more recently, running through the new fountain on the Riverwalk, it reenforces for me the idea that life does go on through all sorts of changes. These children will grow older having the remembrance of these experiences rather than those of Hudson's. Today's children, when they are older, will be remembering their downtown visits, not to Santa at Hudson's; but rather to Uncle Merch's or Aunt Naturalsister's loft and walking down Woodward and the absolute wonder of it all. Young adults, today, will remember loft living, bars and clubs, and games at Comerica Park.
To me, clearly, Detroit is not what it used to be and I miss all that; but then, to me, nothing is what it used to be. Detroit, and life in Detroit, is far, far from all that I would like it to be. But still, living in Detroit works for me. I am fortunate, at this point in my life, to have the option to live almost where ever I choose and my choice is to live in Detroit. My living here does not, however, require me to degrade the choices made by others. And life goes on. |
Buzzman0077
Member
Username: Buzzman0077
Post Number: 102
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 12:16 pm: | |
That whole thread just made me kind of sad, and sick inside. When people get so set in there ways that they can't even reason through someone elses side of the argument, you're never going to change there minds. I actually thought they're irrational arguments made it sound like they had a true psychiatric phobia of Detroit and could not accept any other reality.
In my experience, I have been talking about moving Downtown, when I finish school, for sometime . My parents (who have never stopped visiting Detroit, and one is actually a board member of one of the Detroit renaissance business groups) have been adamant about the fact that although that may be fine for my wife and I we could never raise children in the city. They can't believe that it can be done and still produce quality outcomes. They think that there is not one public school that still offers a good education.
What I'm getting at is that the reason it makes me sad is that no matter how far Detroit comes, or how fast it's rebirth starts to pick up momentum, it is still going to be a long hard road to change peoples deeply held beliefs about the city. |
Sstashmoo
Member
Username: Sstashmoo
Post Number: 310
Registered: 02-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 12:22 pm: | |
Quote "Try explaining that to someone who has lived in livonia their whole life. Its not going to go anywhere... so fuk em... they wont be running the show much longer,"
This is the view that I really find interesting. How are people in the suburbs running the show? Especially Livonia? |
Miketoronto
Member
Username: Miketoronto
Post Number: 636
Registered: 07-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 12:26 pm: | |
As far as I am concerned, these suburbanites are the cause for a lot of Detroit's decline in the first place.
The crime and decay only happened, because these people fled, for the most part. Yes some things may have pushed people out. But if more people had not fled, then it would never have gotten as bad as it did.
Second, nothing gets better if you do not commit yourself to making it better.
So fine, they can be scared or whatever. But don't complain that the city is dead and dangerous, when it is those very people who hard a part in making the city what it is by fleeing, and also by not going back to the city now to support the great things that have happened.
I am sorry. These people live in isolated glass boxes, and it must be a sad life to be so scared and not want to expierence life outside the 35 sq miles of suburb X.
I understand people having feelings of being let down by Detroit or whatever, or about the crime issues from before. But they have to realize a lot of the decay happened because of suburbanites. And also that things can change.
If people do not work together, including from the suburbs, then the city will not fully shine again. Everyone has to be proud and want Downtown and the whole city to be the best it can be.
And that means going down there and not acting like you are going to get shot on the highway.
The faster Quicken moves downtown the better. Then it is time to work on other companies and get them downtown. By getting people to work downtown, they see the city can be a great fun place.
(Message edited by miketoronto on August 25, 2007) |
Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc
Post Number: 3087
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 12:27 pm: | |
Neilr, I understand what you're saying. But it seems like you're arguing that a love for city living is rooted in little more than nostalgia and sentimentality. It's been well-documented that flight to the suburbs was heavily subsidized by overinvestment in undeveloped areas, and a corresponding underinvestment in the existing central city. The Baby Boomer generation seems to think that flight to the suburbs is a natural progression--inevitable, if you will--and that the people left behind in the city (often those with few means) should somehow be personally liable and responsible to correct decades of failed policy at the state and federal levels.
It's no secret that thriving regions have thriving core cities. This isn't about nostalgia or wistful memories--this is about economic competitiveness. So the option becomes, do you subsidize business, housing and services in a forested area or farmland, or do you target the investment toward the existing infrastructure in order to help make the entire region more competitive?
Dan Gilbert isn't stupid. If moving to the central city was a bad move for his company, he wouldn't even consider it. |
Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 1932
Registered: 06-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 12:31 pm: | |
stashmoo:
He means that closed-minded older residents of Livonia run their own city, but soon their children who are more open-minded will be running it |
Oakmangirl
Member
Username: Oakmangirl
Post Number: 166
Registered: 08-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 12:46 pm: | |
Thank you, Miketoronto!
"I am sorry. These people live in isolated glass boxes, and it must be a sad life to be so scared and not want to expierence life outside the 35 sq miles of suburb X"
Have you followed the panhandling thread? More of the same tired anti-urban sentiment...in the 60's-70's it was racism, now it's racism plus "psycho-crackhead" panhandlers and homeless people who choose to live on the streets that drive people away. The more things change.... |
Sstashmoo
Member
Username: Sstashmoo
Post Number: 311
Registered: 02-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 12:50 pm: | |
Quote: "no matter how far Detroit comes, or how fast it's rebirth starts to pick up momentum, it is still going to be a long hard road to change peoples deeply held beliefs about the city."
Instead of trying to say its just a bunch of old people out in the burbs set in their ways, why not look at the reasons for their viewpoint? When people can pick up the paper and turn on the news and any one of the standard startling headlines isn't flashed across the screen, thats when their views will change.
When they stop shutting down services in the city including the schools and privatizing them, views will change.
This change is going to have to happen with the attitude of the citizenry. When people begin to care more about the community and they have, burbanites will and are following suit.
I fully understand your parents concern for a quality education. Thats one of the things Detroit lacks most as I see it and is relegating the most of the repopulation with DINK's (double income no kids). Soon as the family starts, they move out. Because the realities and conditions for a child sets in. It's cool to go barhopping and do all the adult things there is to do in the city. It's still not a great place to raise a family. But that is changing slowly. |
Alexei289
Member
Username: Alexei289
Post Number: 1321
Registered: 11-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 1:43 pm: | |
It seems that in Detroit... Its like trying to put out 70 fires at once.. there are so many reasons that make Detroit what it is, its impossible to fix it by doing just one thing. If Detroit had the best schools, would crime be any better? What about maintainance, what about roads, what about titling issues for would be developers.. what about those developers that get turned away because they arent part of the buddy system in the city government. What about the fact that a good portion of the money in the city that is feeding the government especially from the neighborhoods is drug money, as well as these dealers owning many business and houses in the city to run their opperations from. Is good schools going to fix that? What keeps us from schooling all the kids and then them moving out of state because they cant find jobs?
What the city needs is devolpment of all types. Rehabs, housing, new corporate centers, new arenas and venues. Eventually every new development will need future businesses to serve them, and so on, and improvments in all aspects will eventually follow.
The new Detroit will probably be a mix of old and new, not everything will be saved, but not everything forgotton. Its a change thats badly needed. The past is the past, and it wont happen all at once. The old guard is getting old... Id probably suspect that major changes in the development system in the city will be in place 10-15 years from now. Maybe too far down the road for some, but I will be in my mid 30s.. and probably have some part in it.
Detroit could become a development gold mine in the future, as land is cheap, and potential is high. A Neighborhood development project on a large scale (2500-5000 home scale similar to previous developments in the suburbs years ago) could be the tipping point into a major transformation of the city's landscape all the way around town as speculators edge in and begin to profit largly in Detroit. Word will get around quick around the country from large banks and development companies trying to make some loot, and we could see a 5-6 year boom across town before things taper off into a steady development pattern and a gradual improvment in business services and government services.
This is the business model for most boom developments around the country , (phoenix, san antonio, Sacremento, Houston, South Florida, ect.). Most of the large banks that fund these booms plan on 5-6 years of steady returns of 11-25% on their investments, before things get cutthrought, and a few strong banks and investors remain and the weak get out of town.
It will happen here, its just a matter of time. The economic climate in Michigan will have to shape up first and hit bottom before this happens as well. The economic cesspool that michigan has become in the last 5 years probably prevented this from beginning over the last 2 years to 5 years out from now, and may delay that type of boom for the next 10-15 unless a miracle brings this state back to life. Im not going to count on it tho. |
Sstashmoo
Member
Username: Sstashmoo
Post Number: 312
Registered: 02-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 1:51 pm: | |
MikeT,
You're saying the right things but you've got the order mixed up. People left and it got bad, should be: It got bad and people left.
People do things for a reason. "Survival" is way up there on the list. Not every decision a family makes has to be for the good of the community in which they reside. Maybe in a SIMS game, but not in real life.
Blaming folks for going where they could find work and/or not be a continual victim or witness to various criminal activities, is nearsighted.
Even in this day, people are fleeing the Metro area due to lack of employment and conditions. And now even some of the suburbs are falling into a decay in certain areas. Due to unkept rentals, vacant and foreclosed properties. What would you say to them? What advice would you give? Stay until they lose everything and have the constable set them out on the street? Blaming these people for what is happening to their communities and the effects of them leaving is really unfair of you.
Just a hunch but your urgings and warnings would be met with the classic response of anyone with their priorities in order... BFD |
Iheartthed
Member
Username: Iheartthed
Post Number: 1462
Registered: 04-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 2:36 pm: | |
You're saying the right things but you've got the order mixed up. People left and it got bad, should be: It got bad and people left.
Actually, he had it right the first time. Detroit had already lost at least 200,000 residents by the time of the '67 riots.... |
Miketoronto
Member
Username: Miketoronto
Post Number: 637
Registered: 07-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 2:48 pm: | |
It is the people that caused the modern day decline of Detroit. If the white people had not fled their homes the min a black person moved in, then the neighbourhoods would not have devalued, and the neighbourhoods for the most part would have stayed stable.
Some areas will have crime and decay problems. But the large amount of decay in Detroit was caused by people fleeing for no reason other then fear of something that really was not scary.
I have seen documentaries of a street in Detroit(looks pretty suburban to) that was all well kept and crime free. One black family moved in, and all the whites had for sale signs up within the month, the property values declined, and drug dealers bought up the cheap housing from the scared whites. And that is why the hood went down. Not because people were fleeing from crime. But because people fled out of stupid fears, and caused the decline of the neighbourhood themselves.
All those people complaining in Livonia about the big bad city, have to remember they helped cause the decline, by leaving their nice neighbourhoods behind, out of fear and racism.
That is what I am trying to get at. These people abandoning the city in the first place, is what caused crime to filter in, etc.
There are areas of inner city Detroit with very nice homes, lower crime rates, etc. And why? Because the people believe in their neighbourhood and did not just leave.
Does the city need to be run better? Yes it does. But at the same time, the blame lies in not just the city government, but the residents who fled, and everyone in between. Everyone must unite to build a city and region everyone can be proud of.
(Message edited by miketoronto on August 25, 2007) |
Rocket_city
Member
Username: Rocket_city
Post Number: 370
Registered: 04-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 2:51 pm: | |
^ The jobs going down the toilet in the region is reflective heavily on the quality of life of the work environment.
Forgive me if I missed something in my studies, but suburbanization occured first and foremost as a residential oasis where it was guaranteed the grass would always be the perfect shade of green and only allowable to a certain demographic. The commute pattern was thus suburb-to-city. THEN came the employment to the suburbs creating a suburb-to-suburb commute pattern.
The important thing here with Quicken, jobs, the suburbs, etc is attitude. The new economy, based heavily on talent, creativity, knowledge, and innovation is led first and foremost by the newly educated young professional crowd. That IMAGE is not found in your bedroom communities like Livonia, Sterling Heights, Commerce Township, Shelby Township, etc (exceptions are the Royal Oaks, Ferndales, Dearborns).
So, from my point of view, the next generation to be governing and leading Livonia will be middle aged families who have grown past the young professional stage already. Livonia is a family community. Always has been and always will be.
However, Livonia is not exempt from the problems that are most extremely apparent in Detroit. The job growth climate is poor in SE Michigan and foreclosure rates are an indicator that every community is vulnerable.
The importance of the Rock/Quicken decision to move downtown is beyond important. It's the region's next opportunity to collectively say that hey, we DO understand the transition of the global economy and that if we don't offer a quality of life that young professionals DEMAND, then we're not equipt to compete.
Having one of the best, and most atttractive companies in the country sitting idle amidst the freeway interchanges and empty parking lots of Livonia is not illustrative of new economic competition. Yes, it provides jobs, yes it's cheaper than dirt to be located there, but that's not the game anymore, and if that's how we're going to continue to play, then we lose. Google didn't choose to locate in bucolic Scio Twp for a very important reason. They wanted to be in the center of Ann Arbor directly adjacent to the pool of talent being mass produced at UofM. Same for TechTown and similar for GM, Compuware, and Quicken's rumor.
Sorry to be long winded, but Livonia has a role to play in this as well. So many people commute from far away places to their jobs in Livonia, Troy, Southfield, Sterling Heights, etc. People are free to choose to live wherever they want, but with a decentralized, sprawl-driven employment pattern, we're ENCOURAGING people to live further and further out. By Quicken moving downtown, not only does it support our competitive advantages as a region, it also places a lifestyle burdon on the people who will have to commute 2 hours each way to work, when in fact they can find very similar lifestyle accomodations in Livonia, and elsewhere closer to the core.
So, the people who argue that much of the suburbs wealth is at the expense of the city, they are right on many levels. By redirecting the employment patterns back to where the new economy has been proven to want to be (central cities, or at least community-based cities/suburbs) then maybe that trend of "growth at the expense of someone else" will end.
And you can't argue that the exurbs will be the losers because a)residents want the fringe to remain rural and b)massive sprawl will occur there anyway for those who value the 2 hour commute as a trade off to having friendly neighbors.
(my arrow was pointed at s.moo's last post) too long of a reply, I guess.
(Message edited by Rocket City on August 25, 2007) |
Miketoronto
Member
Username: Miketoronto
Post Number: 638
Registered: 07-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 3:06 pm: | |
A stable downtown Detroit is the best gift Livonia could ask for. Livonia is the inner ring, and you can bet that is sprawl continues, Livonia will not be that attractive of a place to live. Because why live there, when you can live in Novi?
But if people want to live near a vibrant and happening Detroit, then Livonia becomes a good choice, due to its proximity to the city.
The city and inner ring burbs must work together and value each other.
Livonia should be happy Quicken is moving downtown. Because downtown Detroit is "Livonia's Downtown". And they should be happy companies want to locate downtown and make their downtown revive.
This constant rival between suburbs and city must stop. |
Digitalvision
Member
Username: Digitalvision
Post Number: 307
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 3:15 pm: | |
Flight started after WWII - I hearthed has it right - and to add, lots of factors, including insurance laws where you could not get the replacement value for what you insured (some topics never die) as well as the government only funding new construction started the move to unpopulated areas for very practical reasons. Of course, if something bad happens and you don't get the money from insurance to replace it but only it's current value, you're going to be a heck of a lot more hesitant to take a chance again after you've had something happen.
Also, let us remember there still is a physical - I'm sure someone can you help with pics - wall out on 8 mile to divide white and black areas that was built to make getting federal funding easier. So our government was complicit in starting all of this. Our government said, "build in a white area, and you'll get money." And good luck trying to convince someone of an opinion that is contrary to what helps their pocketbook.
As to the attitudes of many suburban folks, my dad illuminated me on this point, as he was originally from Montreal and had a different perspective - in some ways, Detroit as a region is a mirror of the deep south. Some of this is apparent in the posts on that forum that started this whole thread.
Thousands of whites and blacks came up from the South for auto jobs (with their predispositions) and when factories would lay people off, things heated up more than normal.
He lived on Dickerson, and would recall how the "stupid alabama white folks" (his words, he's in his mid seventies) would pull the porches off of black people's homes with their trucks or take sledgehammers to their stoops, and the police would do nothing. He would tell me stories of how cops would drive or walk off, even if seeing it on patrol.
He would sit on their black neighbor's porches in with his grandmother in the 50's and 60's so that they wouldn't get vandalized, because if there was a white person, they wouldn't do anything as they knew if a white person was involved the cops would respond.
My tangent is to illustrate that this is a complex issue. I've talked to many anti-Detroiters who their parents or they themselves actively discriminated against black folk and they brush it off with "that's how it was" and won't every realize that they were part of the problem. This, of course, wasn't everyone who fled, but something to think about. |
Rocket_city
Member
Username: Rocket_city
Post Number: 373
Registered: 04-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 3:27 pm: | |
Funny, you brought up the wall. I was going to post that in my last response.
http://detroit1701.org/Black-W hiteWall.htm
The firebombing of homes in urban areas that you occasionally hear about are also associated with inner city problems, when in fact fireboming private property is historically a white-on-black crime that occured when blacks moved into white neighborhoods, threatening the HOLC standard of color coding neighborhoods. (see link) |
Sstashmoo
Member
Username: Sstashmoo
Post Number: 313
Registered: 02-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 3:29 pm: | |
Quote: "Detroit had already lost at least 200,000 residents by the time of the '67 riots."
First of all, that was 40 years ago. The poster is addressing people that currently reside in the suburbs. Blaming them for Detroits' conditions.
Secondly, There are some small teeth to that argument. However, the migration you're referring to started back in the thirties. Almost 80 years ago. Those people have all passed away! Now condemning someone because they have realistic concerns for their safety in certain areas of the city is not reasonable.
Then the question is still why did people leave? And then how did them leaving have an impact on the conditions of the area? Why is it "their fault"? Why did they have some obligation to tough it out? If conditions were degrading to the point where peaceful habitation was becoming increasingly difficult, would that not have been the city governments obligation to correct it? Should they have taken the law into their own hands? Many did and paid the price for it. If blame needs to be put anywhere, thats where it should be placed. Don't blame peoples' reaction to the city's inability to maintain the peace.
Ever hear of the Purple gang or the Black Legion? Detroits' crime problems extend beyond what is being experienced today.
This view is being presented as though, people that left did so just because they had no regard for the city. Thats simply not the case from the many people I've talked to over the last 40 years. They left because they had to. The majority of them loved the city and it broke their hearts to see what had became of it. Thats the truth...
It's sad that many of them can't witness the rebuilding that is taking place. |
Digitalvision
Member
Username: Digitalvision
Post Number: 308
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 3:41 pm: | |
If one doesn't have access to capital, they can't make improvements on their homes. Isn't that a self-prophetic cycle? Don't loan to minorities; then point at them that they "don't take care of anything, look at them" but the truth is they can't get the small loan to fix up their house that a white person can/could. The sad part is, when it comes to insurance and real estate, these practices still exist, just not publicly.
Thanks so much for the link. |
Iheartthed
Member
Username: Iheartthed
Post Number: 1463
Registered: 04-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 3:42 pm: | |
>Sstashmoo
Happy 313 post!
Anyway, he said that people started leaving and then the crime went up. You said it was the reverse. Detroit hit it's peak population in the 1950 census and by the 1960 census was nearly 200,000 residents below the 1950 peak.
I highly doubt crime was a big reason for people leaving in the 1950s. So essentially, the crime got worse after the people started leaving. |
English
Member
Username: English
Post Number: 565
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 4:05 pm: | |
Great thread.
One thing that should be pointed out about young professionals in their 20s and 30s is the effect of "what's hip". What's hip right now is being GREEN and a GLOBAL CITIZEN. The suburban lifestyle is antithetical to a lot of what the environmental movement is pushing (long commutes, no public transport, etc.) -- and our young people are demanding greener choices. They are also demanding healthier choices.
I am 30, ex-Detroiter living in Ann Arbor while I finish this PhD. My friends are of all races, religions, and sexual preferences, split evenly between singles, families, and DINKs, and very well educated and skilled. The lifestyle they are looking for is one where you can walk or bike to work, where municipalities are environmentally conscious, where there is real diversity in good schools (one of my white friends recently criticized her son's school as "too white" and is looking for somewhere else to put him for upper elementary), where diversity is not just black-white, but includes other races, religions, and lifestyles, where there is a variety of activities, and where you can feel as if you're living in the 21st century, not the 20th.
My Michigan students are juniors and seniors. They are NOT finding the lifestyle they want in this state. They're accepting jobs in Colorado, in Florida, in Chicago, in Nevada.
Detroit and Michigan had what young families wanted 50-60-70 years ago. That is why so many people moved here, from all over the world... our ancestors! But different generations want different lifestyles. Cities and states that ignore what all research says that Generation Xers (25-40) and Millennials (25 and under) want will suffer the consequences. Let the Boomer retirees be your tax base if you like... have fun with that.
(Message edited by English on August 25, 2007)
(Message edited by English on August 25, 2007) |
Sstashmoo
Member
Username: Sstashmoo
Post Number: 314
Registered: 02-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 4:18 pm: | |
Quote: "I highly doubt crime was a big reason for people leaving in the 1950s."
We each have a right to our own opinions. Mine is based on actual accurate accounts of happenings in the late 40's and through the 50's. From several different sources. People talking about why they left.
One account in particular from the 50's: A man and his young wife were out in a boat on the river. Another boat with some unruly youths came up on them and boarded their boat and tried to attack his wife, he was able to overpower them and they got away. They moved out immediately. They lived on Scotten. |
Novine
Member
Username: Novine
Post Number: 72
Registered: 07-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 6:43 pm: | |
Let's not forget that not everyone who was trying to leave Detroit was white. Some black Detroiters looked to the suburbs as a place to start a new home. But in the suburbs, deed restrictions, racist real estate agents and discriminatory lending practices conspired to keep blacks out. When a black family was resourceful enough to get around those restrictions, white mobs used threats of violence and violence to keep blacks out of the suburbs. Here in Novi there's a famous case of a mob driving a black family from their home and local officials buying the home from the family, "for their own safety". Even into the 1970s, Novi councilmembers were quoted in local news articles about a proposed development in town that was going to cater to "working class people" that they would do whatever was necessary to keep "those people" out of Novi. The development never did happen and the area where it was proposed is now a series of high-end subdivisions that surround the city and high school complex. Let's not pretend that racism didn't account for a lot of what's happened over the past 50 years between Detroit and the suburbs. |
Oakmangirl
Member
Username: Oakmangirl
Post Number: 173
Registered: 08-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 7:17 pm: | |
Digital and Rocket,
Thank you for the insightful posts; you both gave me a deeper understanding of the racial divide here. It saddens me to know that African-Americans experienced those horrible acts of violence and govt. sanctioned segregation. It's ironic that we didn't see them able to flee for greener pastures although they were targeted for vandalism and violence long before things "got bad" for white residents. |
Miketoronto
Member
Username: Miketoronto
Post Number: 639
Registered: 07-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 7:26 pm: | |
I think racism to be honest was one of the biggest reasons for the decline of American cities if people like to admit it or not.
If you look at cities like Seattle, Portland, SF, Denver, etc which have lower black populations. They never had as much white flight or racism issues. These cities have never fallen as bad as the north eastern and midwestern cities, which were more racist and kept blacks seperate, etc.
One only need to look at downtown Joburg, which has a history similar to many American cities on segregating blacks, to see how that city went into decline.
(Message edited by miketoronto on August 25, 2007) |
Detroitej72
Member
Username: Detroitej72
Post Number: 622
Registered: 05-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 8:10 pm: | |
"One account in particular from the 50's: A man and his young wife were out in a boat on the river. Another boat with some unruly youths came up on them and boarded their boat and tried to attack his wife, he was able to overpower them and they got away. They moved out immediately. They lived on Scotten."
______________________________ ___________________
Wow, kind of harsh actions for an incident that happened on the river. Ever think maybe the thugs were from Canada? |
Citylover
Member
Username: Citylover
Post Number: 2577
Registered: 07-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 8:40 pm: | |
Great posts form english and danindc_ hopefully somehow people might be convinced to come and/or stay here.Michigan, including the southeastern area has a lot to offer.
Oakman girl don't be callow and hang your hat with mike in toronto.To be blunt he has not a damn idea of what he is talking about.To state that crime had little or nothing to do with why people left Detroit is being dumb_ I really can't think of a nicer way to put it_dumb_ people continue to leave detroit for that reason.However signs are indicating that in some areas with concentrated efforts by police and other law agencies that some crime is going down. And reducing crime is going to be the key to detroits contnuiung rebound. |
Oakmangirl
Member
Username: Oakmangirl
Post Number: 175
Registered: 08-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 9:27 pm: | |
Cityl,
I never claimed crime was not a factor; in one of my earlier posts I recognized that neighborhoods differed. My area was racially mixed and peaceful for many years after white-flight had taken hold, so if recognizing that race (see Digital and Rocket's wall post) was a primary reason for the exodus, then I am dumb. However, what's even
more dumb is looking at the hate crimes perpetrated by white city residents and NOT questioning what role that played in the racial divide and city/suburban tensions. Black people were also crime victims but not given financial subsidies to move out of the city. BTW, "ignorant" or "naive" is a nicer way to put it.
I'll agree that reducing crime is a start, but will we ever change racial perceptions? Don't both things have to happen for locals to embrace urban renewal? |
Miketoronto
Member
Username: Miketoronto
Post Number: 640
Registered: 07-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 10:33 pm: | |
Citylover my arugment is that crime got bad, because people left. The city all of a sudden did not just fill up with crime, that magically stops at 8 Mile Road.
So I guess when crime starts happening more often in Livonia, people should just flee? Instead of fixing the problem?
Anyway my point is that crime got bad in Detroit because so many people fled at once, that they depressed otherwise stable and safe neighbourhoods. Of course crime is going to go up when people are all fleeing and the property values are going down, and drug lords buy up the homes and start using them for their trade.
Livonia would go the same way, if everyone decided to flee, and the homes just went to the first person to buy them for the cheapest price.
I am not saying crime did not go up in some areas and that some neighbourhoods do not change.
But a large part with the crime issues in Detroit is because people abandoned otherwise stable neighbourhoods, and basically left an open door for crime.
Crime is worse in Detroit because the metro region was based on keeping all the poor people and people with no options within the borders of Detroit City.
My neighbourhood would crumble to, if half the people on the block put up for sale times tommorow and sold for the lowest price they could.
There are two types of suburbanites. Those that started the flight and left the open door to crime by destablizing their inner city neighbourhoods. And then there are the suburbanites who fled the city, because the people who fled before them left neighbourhoods open for crime, etc. The second set of suburbanites are the victims so to speak. But instead of being upset at the city, they should be upset at all the hundreds of thousands who moved out before them.
I am sorry, but I have driven through all areas of the City of Detroit. Most neighbourhoods have huge homes, with huge lots, etc. Pretty suburban. So to say people needed to flee for open space is an excuse. The first set of people fled out of racism, and that is what caused the crime issues.
So those Livonia people should have a bone to pick with the first set of residents to Livonia. Not the city.
You see the same thing in Joburg South Africa. Hillbrow, the famous downtown area was full of rich white people. Then apartide was removed and some black people started to move into Hillbrow. The white people freaked, all left, and left Hillbrow with low low property values. The area became crime infested, and somehow the suburbanites who fled Hillbrow are blaming the city. When it is those very people who freaked and fled, that caused the decline by leaving a otherwise stable and hip neighbourhood because of fear of people who are different from them.
Atleast Joburg is getting back at those suburbanites who fled, because all the suburbs were merged with downtown Joburg, and now the suburban tax dollars have to go to fix up the inner city areas that were stable untill the white flight.
I am sorry if I sound harsh. But it really irks me when suburbs act like the city is all bad. When infact its all the same city no matter what suburb you are in, and everyone has a vested interest in fixing up what is wrong.
(Message edited by miketoronto on August 25, 2007) |
Digitalvision
Member
Username: Digitalvision
Post Number: 310
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 25, 2007 - 10:46 pm: | |
You forgot another type of suburbanite, Miketoronto, that is overlooked.
Those who lived in an "outlying" area before sprawl and before all of this, whose families lived in areas like Warren when it was corn fields (let us not forget, it wasn't that long ago), and quite frankly don't like the encroachment on their way of life and what they know.
They have been steamrolled by this too, and most are forced to live even farther out to live the life the way they like to. Away from this mess :-)
p.s. - There were racial issues in Detroit that required federal troops to calm things down as early as 1863, when white folks were stoning black folk and burning black houses after an african-american man was convicted of raping a white woman. The kicker - later on, the girls who alleged the crime go back on their story.
Oakmangirl - listen to "Seperate Detroits," a series by WDET. It's been around for awhile, but it's VERY good to give you a primer on racial strife here. I don't know if WDET still has it for sale. If they don't, I'll make you a CD copy, just be sure to send them something next pledge drive to WDET. I don't want to take money from their pockets - but if it's not for sale, it should be shared. It's so valuable, and exemplifies why WDET is so important for our community.
(Message edited by digitalvision on August 25, 2007) |
Oakmangirl
Member
Username: Oakmangirl
Post Number: 194
Registered: 08-2007
| | Posted on Monday, August 27, 2007 - 3:56 pm: | |
Thanks, Digital, for the lead. I'll check the WDET web site. |
|
New threads cannot be started on this page. The threads above are previous posts made to this thread.