Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Question: What Do Cleveland, Detroit, Scranton, Springfield (Mass.), Buffalo, and Five Other Cities Have in Common?
Answer: They are among the most rapidly dying cities in the country, according to Forbes. Using economic and demographic data, the business mag charted where people were fleeing the most and where GDP growth was weakest from 2001 through 2005.
Nearly every city in the country grew during this period (New Orleans, devastated from Hurricane Katrina, was the notable exception), but the struggling cities on our list grew more sluggishly. None of them grew more than 1.9% a year, versus a nationwide average of 2.7%. Canton, Ohio, managed to grow its economy just 0.7% annually. Flint was worse still at 0.4%.
None of these cities now face the huge declines in real estate prices seen by Phoenix, Miami or Las Vegas, where the Case-Shiller Home Price Index shows nearly 30% declines from a year ago. Detroit is off only about 15%, Cleveland only 8%. Don't call it a bright spot. Prices never went up in the first place.
For the full list, depressing pictures, and more, go here.
|8.7.08 @ 12:43PM|#
Question: What Do Cleveland, Detroit, Scranton, Springfield
(Mass.), Buffalo, and Five Other Cities Have in Common?
Rust Belt cities?
Heavily unionized? With local governments in hock to the
unions?
Effing cold?
Warty|8.7.08 @ 12:43PM|#
I was slightly surprised to see that this includes metro areas,
not just cities. From what I can tell, the Cleveland suburbs are
thriving even though the city is a decaying shithole. The city is
so desperate for new residents that you don't have to pay property
tax for 15 years if you build a new house there.
So what solves this? Would simply reducing taxes, especially
business taxes, solve this, or is it more complicated? And is this
even really a problem that need to be solved, or is it just a
natural part of the life cycle of cities?
Dave W.|8.7.08 @ 12:45PM|#
After living in quickly growing cities for many years I moved to
a dying city (Syracuse, NY). As far as its long decline goes, it
now has fewer people than in 1910.
Can I just say -- it is SO GREAT. The old buildings are falling
apart, but they are still beautiful to look at. Cheap housing.
Sidewalks (crumbling, but still there). Light traffic everywhere
and always. Elbow room.
If you can get a decent job in one, dying cities rule.
Nigel Watt|8.7.08 @ 12:46PM|#
The article tries to draw a connection between the housing spike and economic growth, but Houston's unzoned stable housing market easily debunks this.
|8.7.08 @ 12:47PM|#
If you can get a decent job in one
And there's the rub.
You can always telecommute like Nick.
Guy Montag|8.7.08 @ 12:51PM|#
Well, the first two cities made me think "Rock" was the answer.
Not sure if it fits well with any of the others.
I suspect the true culprit in all of this is overly intrusive
government.
Episiarch|8.7.08 @ 12:52PM|#
I'm surprised Hartford didn't make the list, but it is mentioned in the picture of Springfield. Once the insurance capital of the world, Hartford is doing shittier and shittier.
PFJ|8.7.08 @ 12:53PM|#
The problem with Scranton is that the small paper companies there can not compete.
|8.7.08 @ 12:58PM|#
Question: What Do Cleveland, Detroit, Scranton, Springfield
(Mass.), Buffalo, and Five Other Cities Have in Common?
They haven't sunk to the level of Gary, IN ... yet?
|8.7.08 @ 1:00PM|#
RC,
Rust Belt cities? There you go.
Heavily unionized? With local governments in hock to the
unions?
Effing cold?
That describes Boston, New York City, Philadelplhia, Lowell, and
Chicago, and they're all doing quite well.
It's the underlying economic situation, the movement of
manufacturing from the industrial north to the south, and overseas.
Cities in these area that have been able to develop other business
sectors have overcome the rust-belt era, while cities that have
not, have not.
Warty,
There has never been a declining city like this that was
revitalized by lowering taxes, because for a metro area to lose
population like that, there needs to be some underlying economic
problem. You can set taxes at zero in Springfield, it still won't
make economic sense to locate a modern business there.
And is this even really a problem that need to be solved, or is
it just a natural part of the life cycle of cities? When
you're talking about something of such magnitude as the migration
of the metals and instruments industry out of western
Massachusetts, it's not something that can be solved, in terms of
stopping the loss from happening. You can try to build up other
business sectors, but unless the industrial city happens to also
be, or be near, a city/region with a strong presence in a growing
economic sector, that's not going to turn around a trend like this.
The smartest strategy is to aim for a soft landing - a smaller city
that is a nice place to live, with an economy that supports that
smaller population.
|8.7.08 @ 1:04PM|#
I don't know much about Hartford. I imagine that the collapse of
the manufacturing sector along the Connecticut River, inlcuding
that in Massachusetts, has done a job on it, though.
Has it actually lost financial industry jobs?
|8.7.08 @ 1:04PM|#
Duh... what they have in common are successful comedy TV shows
set there.
Detroit: Martin
Cleveland: Drew Carey Show
Buffalo: Mork and Mindy
Scranton: The Office
Springfield: The Simpsons
|8.7.08 @ 1:06PM|#
Can anyone tell me why this is a bad thing?
It seems that what we're dealing with here is the continuing
decrease in migration costs, combined with "best of breed" effect
that causes certain urban areas to have a higher gravitational pull
than others.
Why live in Springfield when you can live in Boston? Why live in
Hartford when you can live in NY? Why live in Detroit when you can
live in Chicago? The larger areas offer more opportunities, both in
terms of jobs and recreation. They'll continue to have a larger
pull over smaller areas.
Smaller areas will remain because they will retain a cost of living
advantage. Thus, the occasional enterprising entrepreneur will
continue to develop in "dying" areas.
Populations will shift. Life will go on.
Jon|8.7.08 @ 1:06PM|#
Actually from what I've read there are plenty of people packing out of Chicago, partly due to douchebag Daley and his cronies. I'm not sure what the actual numbers are but I do remember reading that the growth numbers have been decreasing over the last few years, not sure if they've actually hit negative net growth.
Episiarch|8.7.08 @ 1:08PM|#
Has it actually lost financial industry jobs?
A lot of the insurance companies have left. Crime is bad. There is
only one really cool Japanese restaurant.
Guy Montag|8.7.08 @ 1:11PM|#
MP,
Well, in the sense that crappy government policies, be them
protectionist or whatever, are probably to blame. Some folks got to
make their retirement and more from corrupt government actions and
the people left behind are screwed with a loss in wealth.
In the macro sense, it is a benefit to the places that gaind the
productive people who fled these towns.
|8.7.08 @ 1:11PM|#
Reinmoose | August 7, 2008, 12:47pm | #
previous populations dependent on mostly a single industry for
work?
Ding ding ding!
Cities like NY, Boston, and Chicago all had pre-existing alternate
industries to take up the slack. Notably, those were all major
commercial centers prior to the industrial revolution, while the
cities singled out here grew up as industrial cities.
|8.7.08 @ 1:16PM|#
When Houston begins its decline, hoo boy, watch out, it ain't gonna be as graceful as some of those northern cities. All sorts of things are going to come out of the ground when those refineries shut their doors.
Episiarch|8.7.08 @ 1:16PM|#
Why live in Hartford when you can live in NY?
But this doesn't fly. Why live in Stamford, CT, which is even
closer to NYC, when you can live in NYC? Well, a lot of people
prefer to, since Stamford has been one of the fastest growing
cities in the US for a while now. Stamford has made significant
efforts to attract businesses, and it has worked (I do not know if
this includes subsidies such as partly paying for headquarters,
etc), partly because of the proximity to NYC. If you need to go to
Gotham, it only takes 40 minutes, but you don't have to deal with
the traffic, taxes, and extreme expense otherwise.
Look, if Vince McMahon decides your city is good enough for WWE
headquarters, you have to be doing well.
|8.7.08 @ 1:16PM|#
MP,
Can anyone tell me why this is a bad thing?
Because there are still going to be many thousands of people left
behind.
Why live in Springfield when you can live in Boston? Because you
can't afford Boston, if you're looking for the Rational Economic
Man answer. Those "lowered" migration costs can still be quite a
barrier for a lot of people. Also, because your family and life are
there.
It's not, in an overall sense, a bad thing for some cities to grow
and others to shrink, but the devil is in the details.
|8.7.08 @ 1:19PM|#
Well, in the sense that crappy government policies, be them
protectionist or whatever, are probably to blame.
You see this answer from people who are, let's say, have read a lot
more about political theory than urban and economic history.
When faced with the strong economic growth of other cities in the
region with very similar economic policies, such people generally
don't have an answer.
Cities decline because historical changes cause them to lose their
competitive advantage. It's the market at work.
|8.7.08 @ 1:20PM|#
I'm used to being in dying cities, and while I acknowledge it means not so many people my age, they really aren't that bad of places either. In some ways it's like living in a hybrid big place/small place, where a lot of major chains (whole foods, trader joes) won't touch you, but that means that entrepreneurs will (and do) fill in those gaps - sometimes you get more character out of it.
Alan Vanneman|8.7.08 @ 1:25PM|#
The picture of Springfield, Mass. was hardly depressing, and an
unemployment rate of 5.9% doesn't strike me as a ball-buster. Prior
to the Clinton years, 5% was considered "full employment." If
Springfield is considered a "rapidly dying city," the U.S. must be
in pretty good shape.
Until the "Greater Southwest" (Southern California through Texas)
starts to run out of water, I think the population drain from the
old Great Lakes industrial complex will continue indefinitely. GM,
Ford, and Chrysler are all in big trouble; manufacturing continues
to become more efficient; and, thanks to air conditioning, people
seem to mind the cold more than the heat.
Episiarch|8.7.08 @ 1:26PM|#
I'm actually interested in living for a while in a medium sized or dying city. I've only lived in huge cities (NYC, Baltimore) or small towns. I did live in Stamford for a while but that was just as it was beginning its rise and it was still pretty damn small.
|8.7.08 @ 1:30PM|#
Stamford needs some basic drainage. A recent thunderstorm
resulted in over a foot of floodwater effectively cutting the city
in half. There were wooden planks literally floating and tying up
traffic.
Stamford also has the largest contingent of day laborers I've ever
seen outside LA.
Nigel Watt|8.7.08 @ 1:31PM|#
When Houston begins its decline, hoo boy, watch out, it ain't gonna be as graceful as some of those northern cities. All sorts of things are going to come out of the ground when those refineries shut their doors.
Actually, my job is getting rid of those things before they happen.
Zubon|8.7.08 @ 1:31PM|#
Where's J sub D on this?
Detroit's mayor was taken to county jail this afternoon.
|8.7.08 @ 1:32PM|#
Episiarch -
If you live in a medium-sized dying or struggling city, be wary of
the crazy insecurities of the city. Some marketing attempts and
announcements of a few measly jobs from some company that the
city/state has paid millions of dollars to produce are just plain
depressing.
I had to go to Louisville on business once. In the airport, you
know what their slogan is? "America's 16th Largest City." Now,
anybody who actually believes that is either foreign or really just
in denial. What they did was consolidate their inner suburbs to
create a higher "city" population. It's just so sad...
|8.7.08 @ 1:34PM|#
I'm not saying it's too sad, but it's like the people who REALLY THINK their loser of a sports team is going to do well this year.
Dave W.|8.7.08 @ 1:37PM|#
You forgot to mention Dinosaur BBQ.
This is about the only restaurant in Syracuse that it is difficult
to park near. Fun place and you can get Boylan's there (but not the
cola flavour for reasons that you can probably guess).
I like Ambrosia's, too.
|8.7.08 @ 1:38PM|#
Cities decline because historical changes cause them to lose
their competitive advantage. It's the market at work.
Yep. As they decline costs go down that slows the decline and
eventually a new equilibium is reached. If we can ever get
competent government* (honest is way too much to ask) in Detroit,
we should stabilze at 700 - 800K.
* Kwame Kilpatrick** has often shown flashes of competence but he's
an arragant ass who is infected with the incompetent cover-up
virus. He'll be gone before Bush is.
** His mommy just squeeked out a primary win, largely due the
negatives of being Kwame's mother.
Episiarch|8.7.08 @ 1:38PM|#
Moose, I'm not sure about the dying part, it's more the
medium-sized part. It would be interesting living in a city that
isn't so huge that it takes 2 hours to go from one edge to another.
Even Boston, which is big, seems small to me after NYC. I went from
Back Bay to Harvard one time and my NYC-scaled brain assumed the
bus ride would take 30-40 minutes and it took 10.
I'm thinking something like Miami.
Episiarch|8.7.08 @ 1:39PM|#
You forgot to mention Dinosaur BBQ.
And Dave, they sell their sauce in stores...and it's made with
sugar and not HFCS!
|8.7.08 @ 1:42PM|#
Where's J sub D on this?
Detroit's mayor was taken to county jail this afternoon.
Thank's for the heads up. I was unaware of that when I posted my
previous. Like I said, he's an arrogant ass. It is good to be right
once in awhile.
Dagny T.|8.7.08 @ 1:42PM|#
Off topic:
Interesting article in the NYT
that references dear ol' Reason.
And, amazingly, their Seattle correspondant doesn't have his head
up his ass.
Guy Montag|8.7.08 @ 1:45PM|#
If I ever have my dream hobby as a muscle car builder I would
prefer living in one of the smaller towns.
Problem is finding an acceptable one without much protectionist
crap, lots of junk yards in the area and being able to build a
large private airport would not be met with even more local
resistance.
Guess this one is staying a dream for a while longer.
|8.7.08 @ 1:53PM|#
Why live in Stamford, CT, which is even closer to NYC, when
you can live in NYC?
Stamford is an extension of NYC. Just like White Plains and Jersey
City. It's all part of the same metro area.
Hartford, OTOH, is nowhere.
Because you can't afford Boston, if you're looking for the
Rational Economic Man answer.
But you can afford Lowell. You may want to take credit for your
awesome urban planning at resuscitating Lowell, but the entire 495
loop is an extension of the Boston metro area. Lawrence is alive
and kicking due to the same gravitational pull.
iowan|8.7.08 @ 1:57PM|#
My house sits on a one acre lot, just 15 minutes outside the
gargantuan, 200,000-person, megacity that I work in.
We don't got no whole foods or trader joes or whatever. But we
don't got no traffic jams, violent crime, air pollution, or corrupt
governments either. The unions guys are pretty well behaved and
mostly easy to get along with.
No skin off my nose when those old rust belt cities go under.
|8.7.08 @ 1:57PM|#
J sub D,
As they decline costs go down that slows the decline and
eventually a new equilibium is reached. If we can ever get
competent government* (honest is way too much to ask) in Detroit,
we should stabilze at 700 - 800K. Well, there's a big "if"
there - if the decline doesn't happen in a way that creates a new
condition (blight) which itself, and apart from the underlying loss
of competitive advantage, drives away investment. This is why I'm
big on quality-of-life investments, rather than economic
development per se, as a strategy for such cities.
Myspoonnnotyours|8.7.08 @ 2:00PM|#
After having the pleasure of being a law student in Springfield
for the past 2 years, I'm happy that only one is left. The city
that brought us basketball, Monopoly, S&W, and green eggs is a
shell with no answers. Same demonrats gain power and the only new
influx is either those on assistance or college kids from the
countryside.
While the picture of Springfield isn't depressing, walking a few of
the city streets is. There isn't any real "safe" area inside the
city proper.
EJM|8.7.08 @ 2:01PM|#
[Warty:]I was slightly surprised to see that this includes
metro areas, not just cities.
I get the impression that the list is only about metro areas, not
literal cities; I think that "Forbes" is, unfortunately, conflating
the terms.
[SugarFree:] Duh... what they have in common are successful
comedy TV shows set there.
Detroit: Martin
Cleveland: Drew Carey Show
Buffalo: Mork and Mindy
Scranton: The Office
Springfield: The Simpsons
"Mork and Mindy" was set in Boulder, Colo. If you want to include
cult-classic sitcoms, "Buffalo Bill" was indeed set in Buffalo.
|8.7.08 @ 2:02PM|#
MP,
But you can afford Lowell. Depends - are we talking about
middle class people or poor people? Poor people in Springfield and
Holyoke can't afford even Worcester.
You may want to take credit for your awesome urban planning at
resuscitating Lowell, but the entire 495 loop is an extension of
the Boston metro area. Lawrence is alive and kicking due to the
same gravitational pull. Half true. The expansion of the
Boston metro area was a necessary condition for Lowell's renewal
(rather than denying this, it's the reason I mentioned being "near
a city/region with a strong presence in a growing economic
sector"), but not a sufficient one. Lawrence is way behind Lowell,
and is just now showing signs of life. The major difference between
the two is that Lowell had a much more effective public-sector
effort to promote revitalization.
|8.7.08 @ 2:07PM|#
A metro area losing population is quite a different beast than a
city losing population.
Boston lost population so far this decade, even as it's undergone
and economic boom, mainly because housing units that used to be
rented to a working class family with kids have now been converted
to condos and sold to yuppies without kids.
You can also see cities that declined in population from the
40s-90s, even as their metro area boomed in population and economic
growth, owing to suburbanization.
When a whole metro area is losing population, there's something
serious going on. It's not just a lateral shift, it's a real
decline.
robc|8.7.08 @ 2:16PM|#
SugarFree,
Mork made the Buffalo joke himself. He mentioned Boulder, CO and a
large boulder almost fell on him. His response was "Sure glad I
didnt land in Buffalo".
Why is that stuck in my brain? 30 years, its been there.
|8.7.08 @ 2:22PM|#
Had to get off the Rockstars. They were interfering with what
little sleep I actually get.
robc, uh, maybe because Mork and Mindy was AWESOME?
Although it should have gone off the air before they had the
old-baby.
robc|8.7.08 @ 2:32PM|#
joe,
How do you determine if an MSA is shrinking or growing when they
keep adding new counties to it?
1980 census - Louisville had 5 counties
1990 census - Louisville had 7 counties, it had grown in population
from the 1980 census, but the 5 counties from 1980 had shrunk (and
the growth in the other 2, if you include them in 1980 numbers
arent enough to make up the difference).
2000 census - Louisville had 14 counties, up over 200k in
population but about 140k was from the 7 new counties. So, the city
was growing again anyway, but not as fast as the raw numbers
indicate. But the question was, was it shrinking in the 80s or
growing, because 2 more counties fit the standard for part of the
MSA?
Also, 1 of the counties added in 2000 isnt considered to be part of
the MSA anymore, we are down to 13. Weird.
|8.7.08 @ 2:39PM|#
The Harry Chapin Memorial Choir reminds us, "Yes, we have no bananas, bananas in Scranton, P. A."
|8.7.08 @ 2:54PM|#
You dissin' Jonathan Winters?
Dunno 'bout SugarFree, but I would never dis Jonathon
Winters. He is just not relevant enough to bother.
EJM|8.7.08 @ 3:01PM|#
robc, see both this Wikipedia entry and this one; the "lost" county is the result of how the Census Bureau redefined its metro areas a few years ago (resulting in the new category of Micropolitan Statistical Areas). Of course, there's also the issue of just how big the city of Louisville itself is.
|8.7.08 @ 3:11PM|#
As they decline costs go down that slows the decline and eventually a new equilibium is reached. If we can ever get competent government* (honest is way too much to ask) in Detroit, we should stabilze at 700 - 800K.
Well, there's a big "if" there - if the decline doesn't happen in a way that creates a new condition (blight) which itself, and apart from the underlying loss of competitive advantage, drives away investment. This is why I'm big on quality-of-life investments, rather than economic development per se, as a strategy for such cities.
I can safely assert that libertarian and republican minded folk
have not exactly had much sway in Motown politics for the last 50
or so years. It is extremely hard to believe that what actually has
been accomplished by the forward thinking urban planning embraced
by the local pols has been better than, or even as good as, doing
nothing at all.
That said, honest and competency would be an improvement, even
keeping that misguided mindset about government shepherded
developement.
Damian P.|8.7.08 @ 3:15PM|#
* Kwame Kilpatrick** has often shown flashes of competence
but he's an arragant ass who is infected with the incompetent
cover-up virus. He'll be gone before Bush is.
http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/17120142/detail.html
"Judge Ronald Giles sent Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick to Wayne
County Jail for failing to notify the court of his trip to Canada
and violating the terms of his bond.
Despite Kilpatrick's humble apologies to the court beforehand,
Giles said he needed to treat Kilpatrick as an ordinary citizen and
sent him immediately to jail.
Giles revoked Kilpatrick's bond and suspended all travel."
|8.7.08 @ 3:22PM|#
You dissin' Jonathan Winters?
The show didn't jump the shark at that point, it raped the shark
and then didn't get convicted because a lab mix-up at that
point.
But I have nothing against Mr. Winters personally.
T|8.7.08 @ 4:01PM|#
When Houston begins its decline, hoo boy, watch out, it
ain't gonna be as graceful as some of those northern cities. All
sorts of things are going to come out of the ground when those
refineries shut their doors.
Already happened. Look at what happened in Houston after the oil
crash in the 80s. Houston's economy is much less of a one trick
pony than it used to be.
Of course, I'll still be screwed when oil goes under.
Russ 2000|8.7.08 @ 4:17PM|#
Chicago proper has lost population recently due to CHA
high-rises being torn down. Half of the residents were resettled
into (mostly southern) suburban section 8 apartments. The
apartments were available partly because so many apartment dwellers
suddenly qualified for home loans when the underwriting standards
went to shit.
So we essentially replaced the Robert Taylor Homes with a Fannie
Mae/Freddie Mac bailout.
Kolohe|8.7.08 @ 4:59PM|#
but unless the industrial city happens to also be, or be
near, a city/region with a strong presence in a growing economic
sector, that's not going to turn around a trend like
this.
The converse is sort of true as well; you can be a little too close
to growing metro area so that you have no competetative advantage
as a regional center, but too far for synergistic growth.
I am thinking of the case of Macon, GA, a city that has been in
steady decline for 4 decades. It is 90 miles south of Atl, so it's
too far to be part of the metro area. But it's close enough to Atl,
that if your putting a business in Georgia, you might has well just
locate in the Atl so your close enough to Hartfield. If your flying
to/from Macon, the mid-ga regional airport is 15 miles south of
town, and you wind up flying through Hartsfield anyway - so you
might as well just drive the hour to go to Hartsfeld anyway, or
more likely set up in Griffin or Mcdonough so you're only 1/2 hour
away.
The only thing keeping the region alive with the tobacco industry
(brown&willimson) decimation is the Warner Robbins base, which
has made the adjacent epononymous town nearly half the size of
Macon proper.
|8.7.08 @ 5:39PM|#
Despite Kilpatrick's humble apologies to the court
beforehand, Giles said he needed to treat Kilpatrick as an ordinary
citizen and sent him immediately to jail.
Giles revoked Kilpatrick's bond and suspended all
travel.
Two thoughts:
(1) Doesn't being in jail sort of automatically suspend all
travel?
(2) ROFLMAO.
|8.7.08 @ 6:00PM|#
Non-urban New England has been declining since before the turn
of the 20th Century, hasn't it?
Joe's right--places rise and decline, and the actions of government
are mostly an incidental part of it. I would add that governments
are much more like to accelerate the decline than contribute to the
rise, however. The best thing the city and state govts. in Michigan
could do would be to deregulate and allow the accumulated knowledge
and industrial base there to compete on an even playing field. The
auto industry isn't moving to Tennessee for the high culture, after
all.
|8.7.08 @ 6:11PM|#
I lived and worked in Charleston, West Virgina twice and I can
tell you firsthand it's the saddest, most godawful place I've ever
seen: the smell of battery acid permeates everything (it's home to
Union Carbide), and (please don't think I'm making some sick joke
here - I'm serious) I have never seen such a high number of people
with obvious birth defects.
Aside from one very good barbeque restaurant (Joey's), some scenic
views nearby and a handful of wonderful friends I made while living
there, I can't say much for the town. Sad.
|8.7.08 @ 6:34PM|#
Joe's right--places rise and decline, and the actions of government are mostly an incidental part of it.
Incidental? Hardly. Look at Philadelphia, for example. It has its
own business income tax & wage income tax (on top of the
state's), and its real estate transfer tax is triple what other
cities charge. Not surprisingly, most everybody who can choose not
to live, work, or start a business in Philadelphia does, and the
associated decay is highly visible. Its corrupt government and
obnoxious bureaucracy is a bonus reason to exit. The decline in
Philly's fortunes are not incidental to its policies, they're a
direct result of them. Detroit's bureaucracy is even worse I'm
told. These cities are no mere bystanders to economic events
outside their control, they are active participants in their own
demise.
|8.7.08 @ 7:50PM|#
What Do Cleveland, Detroit, Scranton, Springfield (Mass.),
Buffalo, and Five Other Cities Have in Common?
They each have more fresh water within a 50-mile radius than Los
Angeles and Phoenix combined?
Probably not for long though, once the sun belt states accumulate
enough power in Congress to demand their "fair share" of Great
Lakes water to be siphoned and pumped to the southwest...
|8.7.08 @ 11:27PM|#
Perhaps the national police force can build walls around some of
these cities, and we can drop convicted criminals inside instead of
sending them to prison?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082340/
|8.7.08 @ 11:38PM|#
Weather is a huge reason that the rust belt is rusting. It absolutely sucks for 6 months out of the year in the midwest. Since we now have AC there is no excuse for living north of the mas-dix line. You can always drink more water in the summer and get used to being outside in the heat, but in the winter up here there are things you simply can't do- like golf, BBQ, or taking walks and keeping dry on the sidewalks. It fucking snows for half the year were I live. Unless you have a sweat job there is no reason to put up with yankee weather or taxes to live in the rust belt. Plus the food sucks.
|8.8.08 @ 10:19AM|#
saharvey,
Things you can't do in the Sun Belt:
skiing
snowboarding
snowball fights
snowmobiling
donuts on icy parking lots
street ice hockey
etc.
Things you don't have to put up with in the Rust Belt:
mudslides
wildfires
year-round cockroaches
scorpions
water shortages
hurricanes
|8.8.08 @ 10:19AM|#
Chris O,
Non-urban New England has been declining since before the turn
of the 20th Century, hasn't it?
Yes, it has - as it turns out, there is better soil in Iowa than in
New Hampshire - but that's not really the issue here.
Springfield is a real, urban city. It used to be a major
manufacturing center for firearms - Colt, Springfield, the
Springfield Armory.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245