Quote Originally Posted by rooms222 View Post
The decline from the 60's to the 90's is very analogous to Detroit. The difference is that Quebec is allowed to give extra visas to attract about 45,000 immigrants per year to Quebec, mainly from the Francophone world, through special immigration quotas given to Quebec. About 3/4 of these immigrants settle in Montreal.

http://www.micc.gouv.qc.ca/publicati...syn_an2010.pdf

This program is not ideal [[many immigrants are from tertiary areas of francophony and about 20% leave for other parts of Canada as soon as they can), but it has helped stanch the deep population drop of Detroit and the stagnation of Metro Detroit as a whole.
The immigration reminds me of Hamtramck. It is virtually the only thing that sustains that small city. It used to be 2nd World immigration [[eastern bloc) and now is largely from developing nations.[[Bangladesh and Yemen, two of the world's poorest nations). Yet the city still plods along.

I think the comparisons are as fair and useful as any comparison could be. Detroit used to be a great city, but the Metro leadership did nearly everything wrong they could possibly do for the past 60 years. If you want a recipe for a thriving, vibrant region, city planners, do the opposite of everything that has been done in Metro Detroit.

Hell, people talk about Montreal like it's bad. Compared to Detroit, it is Nirvana. And they had a separtist movement to contend with!!!

But hey, Livonia has Trinity Health now and there is even a bowling alley you can drive to.