6 ms·

Detroit is the perfect microcosm of the US wealth polarity trend. Only a few miles from the "ruin porn" live suburbs like Bloomfield Hills - which has the fourt

by l33tbro 12y ago

Detroit is the perfect microcosm of the US wealth polarity trend. Only a few miles from the "ruin porn" live suburbs like Bloomfield Hills - which has the fourth highest income out of any suburb in the US (1). I'm hopeful that the Retroit movement (2) finds traction with young entrepeneurs. There's certainly a cachet that the city has within the popular imagination. Just look at what foreign vodka companies are doing to cash in on Detroit's "authenticity" (3). (1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-income_places_i.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-income_places_i.... (2) https://re-urbanization.squarespace.com/ https://re-urbanization.squarespace.com/ (3) http://www.mlive.com/business/detroit/index.ssf/2014/08/ourv.. http://www.mlive.com/business/detroit/index.ssf/2014/08/ourv....

nols 12y ago
I think every major city has the wealthy suburbs nearby like that, industries grow and the wealthy owners leave the cities for more space. Bloomfield Hills is ~20 miles away from Detroit. LA's rich and poor cities are much closer than that, and in NYC it's practically neighborhood by neighborhood with the absurdly wealthy cities farther out.
- mikeyouse 12y ago
  Substitute Grosse Pointe for Bloomfield if you want an extraordinarily wealthy suburb within single-digit miles of deeply poor neighborhoods.
wtbob 12y ago
> Detroit is the perfect microcosm of the US wealth polarity trend. Au contraire, Detroit is a perfect microcosm of absolutely abominable government and culture. Sure, this has led to wealth disparity, as anyone with the means to get out, has. But the root cause is awful governance.
- jrochkind1 12y ago
  So you realize that "anyone with the means to get out" of Detroit started doing so 1968ish after the riots, and it in fact is what caused the population and economic decline of Detroit? One really did come before the other, and it was the exodus of white people (followed by the auto companies) before it was the collapse of the city or any accusations of 'abominable government' (and 'culture', what?). It's kind of just what happened.
  - Shivetya 12y ago
    They only left when the politicians forgot their job and instead served to stir up resentment and worse. They served themselves instead of the people, Detroit like many similar cities is an example of where politicians and government employee unions put themselves first before the citizens. However unlike cities like New York the money ran out. Politicians have learned to use diversity to drive a wedge to keep and gain more political power. The divide us, hyphenate us, and make victims, all so they can keep their power.
    - melling 12y ago
      I'm not from Detroit so would it be possible for someone to provide references to any claims? People are just offering opinions. Having watched the news all my life, all I saw was that Detroit followed the auto industry, which did well when big cars did well.
      - jrochkind1 12y ago
        There were riots in Detroit in 1967, as in many American cities in the late 60s (Detroit's was actually one of the first of that trend). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1967_Detroit_riot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1967_Detroit_riot A white exodus from Detroit immediately followed. You can see in the wikipedia decade-by-decade population statistics that Detroit's population loss began between 1960 and 1970, and continued -- and further, with the racial breakdown, that the population loss was almost exclusively white people, with the black population actually continuing to rise through 1990. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Detroit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Detroit Although, in fact, you can see in the figures above that white (but not black) population of Detroit had actually already started to drop between 1950 and 1960, it accelerated significantly, and amazingly quickly, after 1967. Here's a good popular article on the history of race relations -- and white disinvestment and abandonment -- in Detroit, blaming white abandonment for Detroit's current distress. http://www.epi.org/blog/detroits-bankruptcy-reflects-history-racism/ http://www.epi.org/blog/detroits-bankruptcy-reflects-history... I strongly recommend this short readable article. Coleman Young, the first African-American mayor of Detroit, served as mayor from 1974 to 1994. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coleman_Young https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coleman_Young As that wikipedia article says, "Young's tenure as mayor has been blamed in part for the city's ills, especially the exodus of middle class taxpayers to the suburbs, the emergence of powerful drug-dealing gangs, and the rising crime rate." The accusations you see in this thread of 'government mismanagement' began with Young's long tenure. Whether they are right or wrong (I'm not a huge fan of Young myself), in fact white flight (which is the entire nature of Detroit's population decline, as the wikipedia demographic statistics show -- black population continued to rise for decades as Detroit's overall population plummeted) began long before Young's election, so can't be a response to any mismanagement from Young's administration. Shivetya's claim that "They only left when the politicians forgot their job and instead served to stir up resentment and worse," is typical (and is typical in being about race while avoiding using racial words; 'abominable culture', oh? Sadly, I don't think he means an abominable culture of white supremacy. 'stir up resentment', eh? Gee, what could black people in Detroit have had to be resentful about, unless it was artificially 'stirred up'? I suspect people saying such things feel similarly about Ferguson) -- but gets the order of history of wrong. I suppose you could blame Young (or subsequent black mayors) for not managing to reverse the disinvestment trend (although, then, the U.S. auto industry started shrinking and what was left leaving municipal Detroit, which was going to be a problem no matter what; although the fact that the auto industry too increasingly moved to the suburbs is actually part of the 'white flight' story) -- but it's simply a historical fact that the disinvestment trend pre-dated black control. If the people in this thread blaming bad municipal government really mean pre-1967 white municipal government they should say so and explain what they mean -- but generally the people making these arguments (with barely coded racial terms) mean the post-1974 Coleman Young administration -- but by the time Young took power, the white exodus was already massive, which is what led to his election in fact. Nobody's gonna read this tldr post in deeply nested not highly rated part of this comment thread, but you asked, so I give you what you ask for, cause this shit pisses me off.
thrownaway2424 12y ago
Similar to Oakland. Everyone knows Oakland is full of riots and crime and whatnot. Not everybody knows it completely encircles Piedmont, one of the richest cities in the country. It's all a matter of drawing lines.
Igglyboo 12y ago
Grosse Pointe is extremely wealthy and literally a stones throw from some very rough neighbor hoods of Detroit. I live in a middle class suburb of Detroit and my family and I will drive up and down lakeshore drive every christmas admiring the extravagant light displays that the rich folk put on. You can immediately tell when you have left Grosse Pointe.

by l33tbro 12y ago

nols 12y ago

I think every major city has the wealthy suburbs nearby like that, industries grow and the wealthy owners leave the cities for more space. Bloomfield Hills is ~20 miles away from Detroit. LA's rich and poor cities are much closer than that, and in NYC it's practically neighborhood by neighborhood with the absurdly wealthy cities farther out.

mikeyouse 12y ago
Substitute Grosse Pointe for Bloomfield if you want an extraordinarily wealthy suburb within single-digit miles of deeply poor neighborhoods.

wtbob 12y ago

> Detroit is the perfect microcosm of the US wealth polarity trend. Au contraire, Detroit is a perfect microcosm of absolutely abominable government and culture. Sure, this has led to wealth disparity, as anyone with the means to get out, has. But the root cause is awful governance.

jrochkind1 12y ago
So you realize that "anyone with the means to get out" of Detroit started doing so 1968ish after the riots, and it in fact is what caused the population and economic decline of Detroit? One really did come before the other, and it was the exodus of white people (followed by the auto companies) before it was the collapse of the city or any accusations of 'abominable government' (and 'culture', what?). It's kind of just what happened.
- Shivetya 12y ago
  They only left when the politicians forgot their job and instead served to stir up resentment and worse. They served themselves instead of the people, Detroit like many similar cities is an example of where politicians and government employee unions put themselves first before the citizens. However unlike cities like New York the money ran out. Politicians have learned to use diversity to drive a wedge to keep and gain more political power. The divide us, hyphenate us, and make victims, all so they can keep their power.
  - melling 12y ago
    I'm not from Detroit so would it be possible for someone to provide references to any claims? People are just offering opinions. Having watched the news all my life, all I saw was that Detroit followed the auto industry, which did well when big cars did well.
    - jrochkind1 12y ago
      There were riots in Detroit in 1967, as in many American cities in the late 60s (Detroit's was actually one of the first of that trend). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1967_Detroit_riot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1967_Detroit_riot A white exodus from Detroit immediately followed. You can see in the wikipedia decade-by-decade population statistics that Detroit's population loss began between 1960 and 1970, and continued -- and further, with the racial breakdown, that the population loss was almost exclusively white people, with the black population actually continuing to rise through 1990. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Detroit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Detroit Although, in fact, you can see in the figures above that white (but not black) population of Detroit had actually already started to drop between 1950 and 1960, it accelerated significantly, and amazingly quickly, after 1967. Here's a good popular article on the history of race relations -- and white disinvestment and abandonment -- in Detroit, blaming white abandonment for Detroit's current distress. http://www.epi.org/blog/detroits-bankruptcy-reflects-history-racism/ http://www.epi.org/blog/detroits-bankruptcy-reflects-history... I strongly recommend this short readable article. Coleman Young, the first African-American mayor of Detroit, served as mayor from 1974 to 1994. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coleman_Young https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coleman_Young As that wikipedia article says, "Young's tenure as mayor has been blamed in part for the city's ills, especially the exodus of middle class taxpayers to the suburbs, the emergence of powerful drug-dealing gangs, and the rising crime rate." The accusations you see in this thread of 'government mismanagement' began with Young's long tenure. Whether they are right or wrong (I'm not a huge fan of Young myself), in fact white flight (which is the entire nature of Detroit's population decline, as the wikipedia demographic statistics show -- black population continued to rise for decades as Detroit's overall population plummeted) began long before Young's election, so can't be a response to any mismanagement from Young's administration. Shivetya's claim that "They only left when the politicians forgot their job and instead served to stir up resentment and worse," is typical (and is typical in being about race while avoiding using racial words; 'abominable culture', oh? Sadly, I don't think he means an abominable culture of white supremacy. 'stir up resentment', eh? Gee, what could black people in Detroit have had to be resentful about, unless it was artificially 'stirred up'? I suspect people saying such things feel similarly about Ferguson) -- but gets the order of history of wrong. I suppose you could blame Young (or subsequent black mayors) for not managing to reverse the disinvestment trend (although, then, the U.S. auto industry started shrinking and what was left leaving municipal Detroit, which was going to be a problem no matter what; although the fact that the auto industry too increasingly moved to the suburbs is actually part of the 'white flight' story) -- but it's simply a historical fact that the disinvestment trend pre-dated black control. If the people in this thread blaming bad municipal government really mean pre-1967 white municipal government they should say so and explain what they mean -- but generally the people making these arguments (with barely coded racial terms) mean the post-1974 Coleman Young administration -- but by the time Young took power, the white exodus was already massive, which is what led to his election in fact. Nobody's gonna read this tldr post in deeply nested not highly rated part of this comment thread, but you asked, so I give you what you ask for, cause this shit pisses me off.

thrownaway2424 12y ago

Similar to Oakland. Everyone knows Oakland is full of riots and crime and whatnot. Not everybody knows it completely encircles Piedmont, one of the richest cities in the country. It's all a matter of drawing lines.

Igglyboo 12y ago

Grosse Pointe is extremely wealthy and literally a stones throw from some very rough neighbor hoods of Detroit. I live in a middle class suburb of Detroit and my family and I will drive up and down lakeshore drive every christmas admiring the extravagant light displays that the rich folk put on. You can immediately tell when you have left Grosse Pointe.