  Al_t_publican Member Username: Al_t_publican Post Number: 191 Registered: 06-2004 |
I just made what seems to be my annual visit to Detroit after moving out of state in 2003 and the city looks more empty with each visit. Last week when the accident involving to semi-tractor trailers closed I-94 and W. Grand Blvd. the wife and I took a zig-zag route from Dearborn to get back to the NE side. We took I-96 and then Davison across to Van Dyke to visit my father's grave at Forrest Lawn and then drove around the French Road area where my grandparents used to live on Leander St. None of what I saw was new to me as I had lived in Detroit for over fifty years and worked in the city for over twenty-five. From what I saw I would be surprised if Detroit still has a pop. of over 900K. My take in short is that Detroit will not be capable of making a comeback until a small business class culture is developed. And for that to happen a significant demographic shift would have to occur in the city. Neither the public school system or city government has shown an interest in fostering a small business culture in the city. Taxes and millage is the business of CoD and DPS. I have a few ideas for the city's improvement that I will drop here in the near future. | ||
Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul Post Number: 1068 Registered: 10-2006 |
At last check it is about 860,000, but that number is debateable. | ||
Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul Post Number: 1069 Registered: 10-2006 |
here is a population listed in this article recently posted on another thread: http://www.usatoday.com/news/n ation/2007-05-17-detroit-subur bs_N.htm | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 5967 Registered: 02-2004 |
Al_t_publican, Detroit's population now stands at 836,056 in 2005 Census 82.1% black (686,241) 11.1% white(92,796),0.4% American Indian and Alaska Native(3,223), 1.1% 9,577 Asian, 0.0% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander (271), 3.7% Some other race (31,212)Techincally Arab Muslims and Chaldeans, 1.5% Two or more races(12,736)and 5.6% Mexicans Hispanics or Latinos (of any race 46,993) The population of Detroit is still shrinking. It's the top cities in the U.S. that has very large black community over 60%. Over 40,000 vacant lots, poor school district, poor city politics, poor police force. It's downtown is still stuck in the Great Depression Era, highest murder and crime rate and 14% of Detroiters are unemployed. Detroit was once a dominate white beautiful city 36 years ago. Until segregation, xenophobia, freeways, suburban sprawl, malls, economic flight, the 1967 riots, the election of Coleman A. Young, accelerated white flight, official black takeover of city neighborhoods and its services after 1975 and more political corruption took its toll. The election of Dennis Archer brought Detroit into its early stages of redevelopment through gentrification and property tax breaks. After his reign, Detroit received more housing and businesses development all over Downtown, midtown and its ghettohoods. The election of Kwame Kilpatrick brought Detroit to his knees. During his first reign. He was a Hip Hop move through alleged parties at the Manoogian Mansions, the firing of Detroit Deputy Police Chief Jerry Brown, and he bought a red Lincoln Navigator for his wife with city tax money. During his election against Freeman Hendrix. Kilpatrick was fighting a losing battle, but somehow he won the November election and was re-elected Mayor of Detroit for his second term. It's problably due to quick campaign support from the black slate group while Hendrix sleeps. Today Detroit is in its early redevelopment stages. Gentrification of the inner city areas forces lots of low-incomes families out in the streets or to live with their relatives. Middle Class black Detroiters are quickly moving to the suburbs in which it's called black flight. Fewer hip cool skinny white young adults are quickly moving back to Detroit to live in the lofts and condos in Downtown Detroit and Midtown areas. The Mexicans and Hispanics are quickly redeveloping most of SW Detroit area. The city has 5 small, but growing Arab Muslim and Chaldean communities and two fast growing Bengali/Indian Muslim communities. In the future by 2050. Detroit's black population will not the dominant role in city services or occupying most ghettohoods. Instead they would be either in the NW, SW ot NE outskirts of Detroit inner ring suburbs due to home opportunity deals or other cities. Fewer White families will be moving back to Detroit to fill in the void left behind by black folks. The Mexicans and Hispanics will continue to expand further to the west side and lower Downriver areas. The Arabs both Muslims and Chaldeans will expand their communities through out the SW side west side and parts of NW side diversifying with Mexicans and Latinos. There would be a Hispanic Mayor and with diverse city council with good public and charter schools. And a beautiful Downtown Detroit skyline with glass covered skyscrapers reaching 80 to 100 stories. | ||
Rocket_city Member Username: Rocket_city Post Number: 276 Registered: 04-2006 |
In addition to San Jose, Indianapolis and Columbus, OH will probably pass Detroit in population sometime after the 2010 Census count. As a result, Indy and Columbus will be the second and third largest cities in the Midwest. If Jacksonville keeps adding people, it could be added to the list as well. Austin, TX isn't out of the scope of reality either. The shame is that Detroit will probably always be the second largest metro in the Midwest, which paints a picture of our social struggles which basically says we don't know how to live amongst each other, nor (despite a push) are we willing to try. This also obviously damages the quality of life since the suburbs are not exempt from the troubles of population loss that has plagued the city for so long. Bottom line is this: there is nothing wrong with Detroit but there is everything wrong with the social structure that lives here (SE MI). (Message edited by Rocket City on June 01, 2007) | ||
Detourdetroit Member Username: Detourdetroit Post Number: 308 Registered: 10-2003 |
how does rehabbing an abandoned building count as "gentrification"? what was vacant is now gentrified? i think the traditional idea of what gentrification is doesn't play so well in detroit. to be quite honest, detroit could stand for a hell of a lot more "gentrification"...maybe then the city would begin to skew towards sustainable and healthy... | ||
Rocket_city Member Username: Rocket_city Post Number: 277 Registered: 04-2006 |
Well, there is two ways to think of gentrification. One is the displacement of a population that lived in an area, while the other is just the redevelopment of a vacant area. Both of which can be criticized. I think the gentrification in Detroit is a sour note. Brush Park prime example. Why are people upset about BP's gentrification? Were people displaced? I'm sure there were. But was their presence alone going to revive the neighborhood? No. The past decades of them living there illustrate the fate of future decades of nongentrification. But for the most part, BP was vacant, and compared to mainstream cities, still is largely vacant. I think the bad attitude is from the top down. Though city leadership is responsible for the neighborhood, despite who lives there, they've shown disapproval of the wealthy moving back to the area when the poor have lived there for so long keeping the city afloat. The gentrification argument can go on for a very long time. Another bottom line I feel strongly about is to allow gentrification under acceptable circumstances, but to take extra care of the good citizens who are affected by it. If the responsible party proves it cannot treat the displaced citizens with the same level of respect and humanity as those moving in, gentrification should be questioned. It should be thought of and undertaken as a win-win situation. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 3253 Registered: 10-2004 |
Danny's figures are the same that I came across--836,000 at EOY 2005--according to the interim 2005 Census Bureau figures. That means an annual straight-line drop of some 25K occurred since 2000. But, of course, a linear drop is not that likely. Still, dropping to the 800K point in population could occur sometime during 2007. The DPS attendance figures bear out the significant loss in population for those under thirty-five years of age. | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 5968 Registered: 02-2004 |
That's right Livernoisyard, DPS Student attendance is now at 110,000 and more parents will send their kids to those evil charter schools and other suburban schools where their education tactics are the best. It won't be anytime soon when DPS get back on track. If that school system dissapears, those evil Charter Schools will take over. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 5565 Registered: 10-2003 |
The 836,000 number is from the American Community Survey (ACS), which even the Census Bureau says is more reliable for tracking demographic change than population change, as it only estimates the population living in conventional households. The most reliable numbers are the official Census Bureau Estimate numbers, the next of which is due out in a few days (sometime in June) for 2006. The latest official estimate for 2005 was 886,671. The next best thing is SEMCOG's monthly estimates. Recently, they factored in the county losses and gains and gave Detroit 845,656 for May. The June number should be out any day now. Just to reiterate, the 836,000 is from the American Community Survey that is not meant to be an accurate population counter, rather a survey to show demographic trends in race and ethnicity. Only the Census Bureau Estimates are used, officially in publication. ACS population numbers are never used, officially, for cities as they aren't meant as primary estimates. (Message edited by lmichigan on June 01, 2007) | ||
Bulletmagnet Member Username: Bulletmagnet Post Number: 551 Registered: 01-2007 |
The current population of Detroit is: 3. Oh wait! This is a Friday night! 4. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 3255 Registered: 10-2004 |
Whatever yardsticks are employed, Detroit--once the third or fourth largest US city--will continue to lose population, while other cities near Detroit's size either gain in population (or lose people at a much lower rate) compared to Detroit. As a result, Detroit (the city of) will drop lower and lower in population ranking. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 5566 Registered: 10-2003 |
It's losing, but at least it the metro is still up from 2000, unlike the likes of Cleveland and Pittsburgh that have been losing both city and metro populations going on two decades, now, I believe. Detroit is not alone, if even the loss may be significant. You can add Cincy, Buffalo, Philadelphia, Cleveland ect... | ||
Andylinn Member Username: Andylinn Post Number: 418 Registered: 04-2006 |
compared to other major cities, gentrification in detroit has a less severe negative effect. for example, at the current rate, it could be YEARS before a significant number of persons are displaced or priced out of midtown. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 5567 Registered: 10-2003 |
Very true. Detroit, even the inner-city, doesn't have to worry about gentrification for quite some time. | ||
Professorscott Member Username: Professorscott Post Number: 406 Registered: 12-2006 |
LY is right: the population, once over 2,000,000, is now eight hundred and something thousand, and we're quibbling over the second digit. I don't know of any major city in the history of Earth that went from over 2.0M to under 0.9M. Is there another example? Here are two interesting side questions: 1. Will Detroit at some point become the #2 city in Michigan, and who will overtake it? 2. Converse question: is there a bottom we might hit in the near future, and what will cause a reverse? To say the decrease is slowing down is silly; bottoming out means the decrease has stopped and the population has leveled off or began to increase, so don't misinterpret question 2. The slowing of a decrease is a derivative. As the mathematician Hugo Rossi has pointed out, for the benefit of you calculus junkies (and I know you're out there), "In the fall of 1972 President Nixon announced that the rate of increase of inflation was decreasing. This was the first time a sitting president used the third derivative to advance his case for reelection." Please to avoid such lunacy here  | ||
Mackinaw Member Username: Mackinaw Post Number: 2850 Registered: 02-2005 |
1. Never. 2. Bottom= 750k in 2015. A stabilization/reverse will be created when the Woodward corridor from downtown to New Center fills in at an amazing rate (a solid pace has already been set the last couple years), and mid-density housing on the east riverfront alone accounts for up to 15,000 new residents. After 2015, the new frontier for residential high rises will be the west riverfront. Danny's predications about impressive high rises and a Latino mayor will probably be borne out. Whether or not we get back to a million is the only debate. What we will witness is the re-sprawl and re-densification of Detroit from the core outward. Rehabbing the old buildings we have will only go so far. Eventually all the empty lots (and even empty blocks) will be built upon, and we'll see lots of modern mid-rise structures. This will begin with the filling of the Woodward corridor over the next 15 years, and then large developments going outward toward the boulevard, favoring places like Corktown, E. Riverfront, and more of Woodbridge. Basically we're going to see a modern take of the development Detroit saw 1880-1910. It's just too bad we destroyed so much of what was left from that first boom. I believe the metro-wide population will actually decline for the next 20 years, unless Ann Arbor gets really aggressive in terms of luring employers and building high-density housing, in which case (if you include A2 in metro Detroit), SE Michigan might grow overall. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 5571 Registered: 10-2003 |
Prof, Using the official 886,671 for 2005, Detroit is 52% off its official peak population. Only St. Louis and Pittsburgh have experienced a further drop of the major cities. List of randomly chosen cities off their peak population (using offical 2005 estimates): St. Louis: 58.6% Pittsburgh: 53.2% Detroit: 52% Buffalo: 51.7% Cleveland: 50.5% Cincinnati: 34.2% Baltimore: 33.5% Boston: 30.2% Philadelphia: 29.3% Minneapolis: 28.5% New Orleans: 27.5% Washington: 27.4% Milwaukee: 21.9% Chicago: 20.6% (*I believe that both inner (pre-annexation) Indianapolis and Columbus are down from their peaks) There are countless smaller cities like Gary (-44%) and Flint (-40%) that rank up there, but they aren't major cities. And, again, of the major metropolitan areas of this country, Pittsburgh and Cleveland are the only metros that continue to lose metro-wide. (Message edited by lmichigan on June 02, 2007) | ||
Trainman Member Username: Trainman Post Number: 408 Registered: 04-2006 |
How do you fill up the buses when everyone moves out of the city and into the country destroying the forests and farmlands?????? How do you convince SEMCOG and MDOT to stop spending Billions on new freeways when 99 percent of us clog them up instead of using SMART and/or DDOT????? (Message edited by Trainman on June 02, 2007) | ||
Detroitduo Member Username: Detroitduo Post Number: 834 Registered: 06-2005 |
Didn't Rome go from a population of over a million to a few 100 in a matter of 100 years or so? Granted, it was a LONG time ago, but there's your example. Also, Leipzig, Germany has lost about 50% of it's population in just the last 20 years. The core is still good, but many, many, MANY vacant buildings. Detroit is NOT alone, but for an American city... it's very sad. American Government is doing nothing to help Detroit rebuild or diversify. At least Germany is helping Leipzig... even if it is unpopular. | ||
Pinewood73 Member Username: Pinewood73 Post Number: 44 Registered: 07-2006 |
Detroitduo, I found a link to Rome's population. Biggest drop occurred between 400-450 when the population went from 1.1million to 80,000. Also went from 1,650,000 down to 17,000 and now back to over 3.5 million Numbers are probably estimates, but it proves that cities can decline and come back, although sometimes it takes a long time. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H istory_of_Rome | ||
Kslice Member Username: Kslice Post Number: 50 Registered: 04-2007 |
Wikipedia, great site! The current state of Detroit just makes me want to pound my fists on the ground! | ||
Al_t_publican Member Username: Al_t_publican Post Number: 192 Registered: 06-2004 |
I pasted through Dresden, Germany last month en route from Berlin to Prague. Some of the vacant buildings with broken windows reminded me of Detroit. As far as Rome goes, it might be said today that all potholed roads lead to Washington. | ||
Fareastsider Member Username: Fareastsider Post Number: 414 Registered: 08-2006 |
Danny your interpretation and forecasts about the city/region and its demographics are the best....you lay it out like it is and often are dead on! | ||
Goat Member Username: Goat Post Number: 9464 Registered: 10-2003 |
^^^Is the apocalypse on the horizon?^^^ | ||
El_jimbo Member Username: El_jimbo Post Number: 210 Registered: 12-2006 |
I have also heard that Manchester, England has had similar population loss to Detroit. | ||
Pete Member Username: Pete Post Number: 71 Registered: 10-2003 |
My crackpot idea of the week, which really isn't all that crackpot, is my hope that the Bush administration allows many, many more Iraqi refugees into this country, in the hundreds of thousands. The majority would move to this region, and, in the interest of being near the cultural center of East Dearborn, the development pressure would move into the west side of Detroit. With the Arab population that has already pushed slightly into that side of the city, and the Mexican population having now pushed north of Michigan Avenue, the Michigan Avenue and Warren corridors have one of the best potentials for real growth: immigrants. It was immigrants who originally built this city to what it was, and if the population decline is going to reverse and real economic growth is going to occur, it will be immigrants that are the cause of it. Downtown, Midtown, and the Riverfront may be transformed by singles, DINKs, and empty nesters, but there aren't enough of them to transform the city as a whole. | ||
Terryh Member Username: Terryh Post Number: 340 Registered: 11-2006 |
Where is the Indian-Benagali community you mentioned Danny? | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 6000 Registered: 02-2004 |
Terryh, There are 2 Bengali-Indian communities located at Conant Gardens area in NE Detroit on the corner of Conant and Carpeter St. near the Hamtramck border and at Northern Part of the Cass Corridor from Cass Ave to te WSU Campus. | ||
Cman710 Member Username: Cman710 Post Number: 323 Registered: 07-2006 |
Detroit balks at census tally, fights to be in top 10 DETROIT NEWS Detroit officials intend to fight the U.S. Census Bureau over its latest population figures, saying the perception of a never-ending downward spiral doesn't reflect the reality of new housing and new residents. "We're absolutely going to challenge the census numbers," mayoral spokesman Matt Allen said. "We believe it is significantly off." The Census Bureau estimates, to be released this morning, indicate Detroit lost another 12,000 people between July 2005 and July 2006, putting the city's population around 871,000. The Census Bureau estimates the city has lost nearly 77,000 since 2000. http://www.detnews.com/apps/pb cs.dll/article?AID=/20070628/M ETRO/706280409 | ||
Mayor_sekou Member Username: Mayor_sekou Post Number: 1105 Registered: 09-2006 |
Good I think they should challenge it. We might be surprised by what we find out. | ||
3420 Member Username: 3420 Post Number: 114 Registered: 10-2003 |
They should challenge it. I believe Detroit has a steady population. I see way too many babies and children in this city to think Detroit is below 871,000. I think we are in the 900,000 range still. Yes we have some serious problems that need to be fixed, but I wouldn't be surprised by 2010 Detroit has an increase. | ||
English Member Username: English Post Number: 538 Registered: 10-2003 |
I agree that Detroit's best hope for population growth is Latino and Middle Eastern immigration. Middle-class and educated black American families will never move back, now that the original reason for leaving the South for many (racial segregation) is a thing of the past... and arguably, the Detroit metro is far more segregated than metros in the Sun Belt. This is one black Detroiter, born and raised, who won't be moving to the Sun Belt unless I absolutely have to. Although I don't know if moving back to Detroit is in my future, I think it's a little silly to move to regions where large groups of people originally couldn't live prior to the 20th century. Moving to Las Vegas or the Gulf Coast, if you have a choice to do otherwise, clearly doesn't make a lot of sense in the face of climate change. In the past, there were always people who knew how to live in deserts, subtropical, and tropical places without a lot of modern conveniences. My family's Florida roots are deep and old, but my older relatives don't much care for the post-WWII playground the place has become. When we went to visit my great-grandmother, there was no air conditioning at all, and we were told that we ought to be grateful for fans! Imagine a lot of modern Floridians without fans or AC... 21st century humanity want the sunshine and warm weather of these regions of the globe, without questioning the challenges of living there, and what their presence there is doing to the environment. I've been all over the country, and all over the world, and the Upper Midwest is sadly underrated. If you take away the provincialism and the sometimes Neanderthal views on race, class, culture, and economics, it would be one of the best places to live in the country, if not the planet. With global warming, I think that the problem of cooling the Sun Belt in summer will become far greater the problem of heating the North/Midwest in winter. People lived in cooler climates long before industrialization, and have since the last ice age, and if you believe Jared Diamond, there are some inherent advantages to developing cultures in cooler climates vs. warmer. And finally? We have fresh water. I still don't think most realize what a valuable asset that's going to be this century... A nationwide problem (which is more acute in Detroit) is what to do with a growing, completely disconnected underclass. Something's got to give there, and we've spent far too long wringing our hands about it... | ||
Jjaba Member Username: Jjaba Post Number: 5401 Registered: 11-2003 |
Mackinaw #2850, Ann Arbor is not a suburb. jjaba, Proudly Westside. | ||
Goblue Member Username: Goblue Post Number: 106 Registered: 03-2007 |
Wasn't the population of Detroit about 3M in the '50's?...in other words a population of 800K is living in an area with an infrastructure built for 4 times that many people. It doesn't sound sustainable. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 5724 Registered: 10-2003 |
No, it was officially 1.85 million, though city leaders estimated 2.1 million. | ||
Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul Post Number: 1219 Registered: 10-2006 |
Seems to me that cities rarely keep growing indefinitely. Detroit will find its right size. Every city has its ups and downs. After the closing of many cotton mills here in Charlotte several decades ago, seems to me that many thought Charlotte wouldn't recover. Now it has. Sure every city wants to grow, but aside from an image issue (public relations or status symbol), why does it really matter whether the population is 700,000 or 1,000,000? Hopefully I haven't provoked people too much, but I'm sure I'll get some interesting responses... | ||
Dannaroo Member Username: Dannaroo Post Number: 80 Registered: 05-2006 |
I don't know if Detroit really wants the Census Bureau to look too close at the population in the city. I imagine that 12,000 lost over between July 05 and July 06 is entirely feasible. The city may be leading the region in new home starts, but they also lead the region in homes demolished (1,357 demolished in Detroit in 2006, 554 demolished in the rest of Wayne County and 382 demolished in Oakland County which has the second highest number in the area). Also, the city is touting the new loft projects downtown and around midtown is being developments that are bringing new residents into the city. I would imagine that a good portion of the people moving out of the city right now are those leaving and taking young children with them while those moving into the city are more likely to be living alone or with just one other person. This will probably equate to a net-loss in the short-run; in the long-run, the city needs to focus their energy and efforts on ensuring that these younger residents will remain in the city once they start a family. | ||
Civilprotectionunit4346 Member Username: Civilprotectionunit4346 Post Number: 148 Registered: 06-2007 |
As more & more of the population either flee's Detroit or the State, as has been seen and continue's to this date. I doubt we will see any major population spike's at all. As the city & this state continue on it's downward spiral. Ive said it before....what happened is the Big 3 had there free ride and when the Unions & the Autoworkers & Etc' got to greedy they jumped ship. And what really just flip's my mind is this has been going on for year's and mostly no one in power in state & local has done much to improve this dreary situation....You know you can paint a turd, but guess what....it's still a turd. The whole downtown (sorta) revitalization was nice...but has anyone seen a real spike in any way shape or form of increased economic growth or population growth...none...zip zero. I am sick of people saying..."Don't blame the Big 3"...they are part of the problem...Yes I understand companies need to change and move to diffrent paths...but what has gone on here is most of the population kept their hopes & dreams that thw auto industry here would make a great comeback...Yeah look who's #1 now. If you want change...ive said it before...cut those ties with the unions...cut the ties with the Big 3....focus on bringing other industry/job's here. Big cities that faced the same problems that Detroit has, have turned themselves around....This state & city have had along time to do so....I am guessing over 20yrs...since the 80's is when it really got bad. Everyone keep's saying.."Ohhh look riverfront revival", people liked it and came from diffrent areas to see what has happened...I don't think that's move in the right direction....I think the city & state can do better, if they took off the blinders and took the path I mentioned to take....Take it with a grain of salt everyone...this is just thought of mine..... I wish everyone has a great 4th of July.... | ||
Jjaba Member Username: Jjaba Post Number: 5403 Registered: 11-2003 |
So which Detroit neighborhoods are the most emptied? I am surprised that Chicago has a net loss of 700,000 (20%) since its heydays of 3.7 million as Second City. Looking around Chicago, you see tremendous growth. Any clues there? jjaba. | ||
Civilprotectionunit4346 Member Username: Civilprotectionunit4346 Post Number: 150 Registered: 06-2007 |
Hey Chicago's economy and population is doin great. | ||
Goblue Member Username: Goblue Post Number: 107 Registered: 03-2007 |
The challenges are great...as a city downsizes in population the entire infrastructure needs to be significantly reconfigured...to say nothing of other services such as police, schools, fire protection...federal funds distributions are determined by population numbers to a large degree...the city faces ever greater challenges with ever decreasing revenue...but...as has been pointed out...it can be done...Chicago is a good example...along with Pittsburg and others. | ||
Jjaba Member Username: Jjaba Post Number: 5405 Registered: 11-2003 |
Goblue, you mean Pittsburgh? It is cited as one of the worst, loss of 50%. How's that so good? jjaba. | ||
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 1053 Registered: 04-2006 |
I think P'burgh was fairly successful in reinventing their CBD as a tech friendly hub after the US steel industry fell through. It didn't do much for the population, but the downtown is still pumping somewhat. | ||
Civilprotectionunit4346 Member Username: Civilprotectionunit4346 Post Number: 151 Registered: 06-2007 |
Didn't Seattle, WA go thru some bad times as well? From what ive heard from some friend's who lived out there, they said it was bad years ago out there and now has improved. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 2792 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: What is this going to change? Is it really worth the effort? Shouldn't the city be focusing on solving the problem, instead of the reporting of it? And do they not think that other cities are building new housing right now? quote: As well as tremendous abandonment and decay, especially on the South and West sides. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 5730 Registered: 10-2003 |
Huh? Some cities have made a near science out of challenging the census (D.C., St. Louis come to mind). It certainly couldn't hurt, and this idea that you can't both tackle the deeper problems and challenge the census is a false choice. You can do both. Let us not forget how serious these numbers are come 2010. This is about money appropriations. If Detroit thinks it can get back 7%, it is incumbent upon them to do so. Jeeze, some people act as if Detroit is the first and only city to ever challenge the census. In fact, this seems to be Detroit's first challenge that I can remember, and IMO, it should have been challenging the obviously flawed methodology long ago. |
