Bing's response to this makes me more upset. I've heard Bing publicly defend this city multiple times regarding random people in the media. I haven't seen Bing do a single thing in office but order the Coke chips away from the river. What an abysmal Mayor. Shut your trap and don't defend us if you're not doing a single policy related thing.
Well maybe someone should bomb Bost... oh. This has already been mentioned a bunch. Mayor dude is obviously not terribly bright when it comes to public comment and its effects on your future political career.
I wonder if the mayor of Boston would have said that he wanted to "blow up" a city full of white people? I certainly remember white folks in Boston losing their shit in all kinds of crazy and violent ways over the thought of their kids even having to sit in the same classroom as 'colored' kids. Ever since I've always though of Boston as a purportedly liberal city that's actually kind of like Montgomery just below the surface.
http://i.imgur.com/GRQqGUp.jpg
Didn't anyone see the preceding comment that led to his off the cuff statement about the air raid on our beloved city...the dude had just said after being asked what other city he would like to live in.....that besides Baltimore being "nice" he would like to live in Detroit but recognizes the city has some serious issues", then after being asked how to fix Detroit....he stuck his tongue in his cheek, the Mayors nickname is frickin mumbles, not the most articulate man but hey he probably has an affinity for the rough and tumble streets of Detroit, That shit about bombing the D was on the street when I was in High school a few decades ago, the guy was just shootin the shit with a reporter....nothing to see here move it along folks.
Quote
"If you could live in any other major U.S. city other than Boston, where would you live?
I never thought of living anyplace else but Boston. Baltimore’s a nice little city. Detroit is a place I’d love to go."
Pretty innocent comment if you ask me...Also I think from a cost analysis standpoint...1.1D explosives is more efficient than demolition through years of attrition via arson...just sayin
Eastside, you usually have such great posts, but this one was a low blow. Like we didn't have the same racist crap here? It's the whole reason L. Brooks Patterson became a household word. THE GUY IS STILL IN OFFICE HERE, EVEN THOUGH HE IS JUST AN ALCOHOL-SOAKED CORPSE. Hell, it's nearly the whole reason the suburbs exist.Quote:
Originally Posted by EastsideAl
Pretty sad that we're resorting to digging up graves to defend Detroit. Mayor Menino, you're not one to talk, your city was founded by the Puritans and they were mean as hell.
Boston is wildly more diverse than Detroit or its suburbs, for that matter.
I think it's obvious to everyone that the point he was trying to make is that "blowing it up & starting over" i.e. hitting the reset button is farrrrrrrr easier than trying to unravel and fix 60 years of crime, poverty, illiteracy and corruption.
Yeah and I'd love to have a unicorn and $500 million, but that isn't reality. People need to think before they say things like this because they come across as crass, poorly thought out and often times flat out rude.Quote:
Originally Posted by 48009
But that idiot take care of his city. I agree with him 80%. Bing had done little for the residents of this cityQuote:
Originally Posted by JBMcB
Oh, I well remember what happened here - including L. Brook's role in Pontiac in egging things on to the point that several of the buses were torched. But for all of the stupidity and name-calling, we never had here the scenes of actual white mobs attacking black children [[and black adults, as shown above) - like something out of Little Rock in the '50s - that occurred in Boston. Ever since then I've though of Boston as a place even more deeply racist and rife with racial hypocrisy than here [[and that's going a ways...), and a place I was even less likely to go to than, say, Little Rock.Quote:
Originally Posted by poobert
It is true that Detroiters and Michiganders are a lot more "passive -aggressive" with their racism. That's strictly a northern US trait [[I.E. Minnesota nice). However, I would argue that Detroit's and Michigan's "passive-aggressive" racism is even more toxic that the blatant racism that took place in places such as Little Rock or, as you claim, Boston. At least with the blatant racism in Little Rock or Boston, it was much easier to call it out, fight back, and resolve it. With Detroit's and Michigan's racism, given how structured yet subtle the racism is [[see Detroitnerd's Frank Rizzo character), it's been much harder to resolve and address to the detriment of our region/state.Quote:
Originally Posted by EastsideAl
I think the Detroit comeback of which you speak includes the necessary participation of suburban powers that be. The real comeback for Detroit will be one of vast projections into the future, one that insists on inclusive measures like proper transit, and a retrofit of neighborhood infrastructure as commercial business hubs. This means in effect that suburban mayors and other elected officials will test their generosity in giving some weight to city hoods, and therefore contain the competitive forces that lead to more sprawl and revenue in the outliers. This kind of development requires an incredibly complex set of variables to play out but it is possible. Think of German cities that got pounded to hell and came back with a resolute vengeance after the war. I hear you, the homogeneity thing, yes...
There are a lot of reasons for the self destructive tendencies that exist in American ghettoes, not the least are the promotion of self annihilation, ethnic-genocidal via egregious advertizing for tobacco, alcohol in disproportionately experienced in the hoods. A culture of poverty is not only a given, it is entertained to and blossoms from tender care of manipulative media, and advertizers. I think a lot of the culture that breeds around poverty like so many pawnshops and liquor/party stores is the result of opportunism at the basest level, and creates impermanence. The sad thing is that for people who dont have the tools to overcome impermanence, the feeling is one of detachment to their environment. That means family, neighborhood, city at large because individuals are set to believe life has dealt them these cards, that fate is immovable, like the victims of the caste system in India.
I'm not sure I understand the obsession with public transit development in Detroit. All of my friends working in Chicago, Washington & New York find the trains disgusting. The only reason they don't have a car is because they can't afford one. The first thing they do when they make enough cash is pay for a garage space and start driving to work. Just seems like a bridge to nowhere whenever I see people talking about trains in Detroit.
Is the German comeback the best example you could come up with? Because those cities were more or less "blown up" making them a clean slate for engineers to work with. Unless the Chinese bomb Detroit or a Katrina brews up in Lake Huron, I don't think we'll ever have the luxury of a clean slate.
If the mayor of Boston bombs Detroit, he will call it Detroyed. Then he can do what he wills on it, like maybe install a "T", the infamous Boston subway, that predates New York, and people are still using it.
By the way, you are wrong about trains in NYC or Chicago, folks use them and will continue to use them and this eases other transport modes in the city. Of course some people need their cars to go to work and that is fine, but for the nine to five crowd, if they can fiddle on an Ipad or blackberry or what have you, they enjoy time away from driving.
About clean slates being luxuries, I think you shouldnt wait for more calamities; the evidence is already there that some things need to be addressed. No need to pile up more disasters ŕ la Marvel comics to find solutions. By the way, I think that the fact Detroit still eschewed a transit plan for the region is enough of a clean slate for me. Look at the region's GDP and repeat after me; we can afford it. Cities in Brazil where the minimum wage doesnt buy you a Coke are making it happen, come on.
The city does have a clean slate,maybe not as obvious as NOLA and a major storm in mother natures eye,but it is there if you want to see it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard
Well some cities are on a roll and look fine on the surface, but a lot of what makes them tick is delusional.
In any case, whether Detroit or Rome, every day is a new day; the clean slate is as much about not carrying doubt and resentment as it is about stacking bricks.
If it wasn't for Detroit, Boston wouldn't even exist. We churned out the machines that won WWII. East coast cities would have been the first to get bombed had we not. We've been dissed by more impressive people than this guy. I say bring him here for a visit. His input could be helpful and I think he would sing a different tune afterwards. Has he ever even been here?
Bing is nothing more than a figurehead at this point. Kevyn Orr is in charge, at least until Duggan is elected.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumbled_pavement
I am not sufficiently familiar with Chicago to comment, but a large proportion of the people in New York and Washington use public transit because driving is much too annoying. And of course Manhattan as we know it could not exist at all without the subways. Washington could have twenty years ago, but I doubt that it could now.Quote:
Originally Posted by 48009
You didn't mention Boston, but ignoring the expense, you have to be a bit of a masochist to drive in the central city. Tens of thousands of people with cars drive to satellite lots and take the trains and buses every weekday not because they can't afford to drive but because they don't want to. Hundreds of thousands more take public transit without using their cars at all, even though most of them have cars too.
Why is it hard to drive in central Boston? Partly because of the street layout, but mostly because there are so many people. To have a walkable environment, you need to have lots of people in a small area. That is very hard to accomplish without transit, because many people without transit requires many cars requires a lot of space for roads and parking. That space limits density and that is at least one reason why people think transit is important in general.
Whether Detroit is yet in a situation where transit would be important is a separate question, given that there is adequate parking and not terrible congestion downtown. I think the idea is that you already have a lot of public transit riders, but the current transit is not very attractive. If you put in something more attractive, you continue to serve your current riders but potentially attract new ones and signal your intentions to upgrade the urban experience in Detroit. We can only hope that someday that there is so much traffic that good public transit is a necessity.
I'm sorry, but did you not notice that the suburbanite said that trains are gross and that people like their cars? End of discussion on transit in Metro Detroit.Quote:
Originally Posted by mwilbert