I thought Kid Rock still lived out in Romeo, like Eminem still lives out in Rochester.
But if not, him living in Nashville is hardly a loss for Detroit.
I thought Kid Rock still lived out in Romeo, like Eminem still lives out in Rochester.
But if not, him living in Nashville is hardly a loss for Detroit.
To be fair, only Nashville city proper is bigger than Detroit city proper because they annexed all of Davidson County.Nashville is a lovely, thriving city. In the middle of the 20th century it was 1/10 the population of Detroit and is now...more populous! There are many, many ways besides transit that Nashville is more qualified, and a better quality place to live and work than Detroit.
For now, Metro Detroit is still 2 to 3 times the size of Metro Nashville, but I gotta say, I'm seeing similar exponential growth signals in Nashville that Atlanta experienced back in the late 1970s.
5K employee "operations center" is nowhere near being in the same league as a 50K employee headquarters. One is literally 10x more than the other.
How many billions of dollars in tax breaks, grants, and subsidies were you willing to shell out for those high-paying jobs? NYC and NY State shelled out $3 billion for half of a headquarters. Ask the people of Wisconsin if the billions they shelled out for Foxconn was worth it.
Last edited by aj3647; December-18-18 at 03:01 PM.
No one said it was.
And how does that change the fact that transit was obviously never an honest disqualifier if Amazon selected a city with arguably worse transit than even Detroit for a large office?
Low wage warehouse jobs are not equivalent to high paying tech jobs.Ask the people of Wisconsin if the billions they shelled out for Foxconn was worth it.
NYC didn't "shell out" a penny. They have a blanket policy against direct corporate subsidies.
NY State offered billions, but all based on job counts [[they only get the full tax breaks if they hit 40,000 employees).
And most of the "subsidies" are just commercial tax breaks. NYC has, by far, the highest commercial property tax rates in the U.S., so Amazon will still be paying a lot more than in other jurisdictions.
I’m right next to “National Landing” in Northern Virginia and I can tell you all that VERY few people are excited about Amazon’s pending move to the area. Seems like the negatives will outweigh the positives for this region.
Nashville is awesome and has 10x the activity in the downtown core compared to Detroit. Probably more.
It's the state capitol. It is very centrally located, at the interchanges of I-65, I-40 and I-24 and a major river port on the Cumberland River, the only way for river traffic from and to east of there.
Country Music is what put Nashville on the map. Without that so many years ago, it wouldn't be what it is today.
All that said, I'm not too far from there, but i avoid it.
Yeah, I wouldn't hardly call it in the middle of nowhere. In fact, its central location is part of the reason why Amazon picked it.
It's arguably the best day drive city in the country. You're just a several hour car ride from Atlanta, St. Louis, Indianapolis, Birmingham, Lousville, Cincinnati, Memphis, etc.
And it's only a 2 hour flight from most major cities in the country, at most [[not including the west coast).
Of course I have been there. Yes, Metro Detroit has no "closed up malls and things."
Again, I would like to reiterate the point that a place that within living memory once had the population of Warren, and 1/10 that of Detroit, and now outpaces Detroit in population in every other measure. To scream about how terrible it is compared to metro Detroit is like extolling the virtues of the Ebola virus verses the common cold.
Wait, what? Nashville is super-sprawly and has a tiny, largely empty downtown. It has basically no transit usage or urban anything.
Don't think you've ever been to Nashville. It's a typical Sunbelt city. Looks like Commerce Township, but with hills.
Last edited by Bham1982; December-19-18 at 07:59 AM.
Its downtown is larger than Detroit's CBD.
The difference I see, anyway, is that the sprawl in the sunbelt is due to bona fide growth. Metro Detroit's sprawl is due to shuffling people around for 40 years and no growth. I don't care much for sprawl, but I can at least wrap my brain around it when you don't have 100 square miles of abandonment.
Amazing though how this thread has degenerated into "if you like Nashville you've obviously never been there." I bet people would say the same thing about Detroit...
^^^He gets it.Its downtown is larger than Detroit's CBD.
The difference I see, anyway, is that the sprawl in the sunbelt is due to bona fide growth. Metro Detroit's sprawl is due to shuffling people around for 40 years and no growth. I don't care much for sprawl, but I can at least wrap my brain around it when you don't have 100 square miles of abandonment.
Amazing though how this thread has degenerated into "if you like Nashville you've obviously never been there." I bet people would say the same thing about Detroit...
BTW, Detroit has the worst jobs sprawl of any major city in the country according to Brookings. So it's no position to thumb its nose at the sprawl in other cities.
Last edited by 313WX; December-19-18 at 09:54 AM.
What? Nashville has a tiny downtown compared to Detroit.
The relative size of U.S. cores is largely a function of metro size in the prewar era [[which is why, for example, Providence has a bigger core than Phoenix). Detroit was like 20x the size of Nashville, so obviously has a much larger urban core.
I actually find Nashville to be fairly attractive [[hilly, green, and the affluent areas are quite nice), but it's bizarre to see people extoll the alleged urban attributes. Even the core barely has sidewalks. The transit usage is basically zero. You're in postwar sprawl a mile from downtown.
And I can see why Amazon would prefer Nashville over Detroit, but certainly not for urban amenities. Nashville is the same type of city as Charlotte, Raleigh and Atlanta [[basically built for people who hate traditionally urbanity).
About a half dozen times for work. I've probably spent a collective two months there over the last decade. Grand Rapids probably has a better core.
Maybe this helps explain why Detroit is such a mess. If people really think Nashville-type cities are the urban ideal, it would explain a lot re. our "urban" planning over the last few decades. No wonder people are cool with parking lots, stadia and convention centers.
Last edited by Bham1982; December-19-18 at 10:04 AM.
Summer 2018, but don't understand why it matters.
Nashville didn't have a bigger prewar core in Summer 2018 compared to, say, 1950. Unless you invent a time machine it isn't gonna have a sizable urban core, because it was small until the sprawly Sunbelt era.
It's the same reason Atlanta will never have a fraction of the downtown as, say, Philly, even if Atlanta grew to be bigger than Tokyo. You can't build prewar blocks anymore.
Last edited by Bham1982; December-19-18 at 10:22 AM.
Why are you going on this tangent about Nashville's urbanity.What? Nashville has a tiny downtown compared to Detroit.
The relative size of U.S. cores is largely a function of metro size in the prewar era [[which is why, for example, Providence has a bigger core than Phoenix). Detroit was like 20x the size of Nashville, so obviously has a much larger urban core.
I actually find Nashville to be fairly attractive [[hilly, green, and the affluent areas are quite nice), but it's bizarre to see people extoll the alleged urban attributes. Even the core barely has sidewalks. The transit usage is basically zero. You're in postwar sprawl a mile from downtown.
And I can see why Amazon would prefer Nashville over Detroit, but certainly not for urban amenities. Nashville is the same type of city as Charlotte, Raleigh and Atlanta [[basically built for people who hate traditionally urbanity).
Not a single person in this thread said Nashville is "urban ideal" [[whatever the hell that's supposed to mean).
|
Bookmarks